v. 1)a connects with iv. 1, which is parallel with 2 Ch. ix. 26. The time spent in building his palace and temple, in 1 Kings ix. 10, (2 Ch. viii. 1,) corresponds with 1 Kings vii. 1-12, where the same number of years is mentioned. The fulfilment of the prediction of Ahijah (1 Kings xii. 15, 2 Ch. x. 15) connects with xi. 29, sqq., where the prediction itself is made, which is omitted by the Chronicler."

2. From the original character of these accounts, compared with those in Chronicles.

3. From the certain fact that the Chronicler must have been acquainted with the previous books.

words. But this is incorrect; for i. 14-17, is parallel with 1 Kings x. 26— 29; and, on the other hand, ix. 25-28, is an abbreviation of it. The Chronicler wished to avoid repeating the whole, and therefore abbreviated it. Movers contradicts himself, (p. 254,) and admits this.

See Movers, p. 100, 101. The relation between 2 Ch. xxxii. and 2 Kings xviii.-xx. is a matter of controversy. In Chronicles, the earlier account is sometimes condensed, sometimes enlarged. In some verses we discern the original narrative. Compare, for example, verse 14 with 2 Kings xviii. 35; verse 15 with xviii. 29; verse 17 with xviii. 12; verse 18 with xviii. 28; verse 21 with xix. 35-37; verse 24 with xx. 1.

The account of Hezekiah's defence against Sennacherib, by cutting off the supplies of water, (2 Ch. xxxii. 3, sqq.,) — which differs from 2 Kings xviii. 14, where he asks for mercy, - is derived from a different source, according to Keil, Movers, and Gesenius, (Jes. vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 936,) and is confirmed by Isa. xxii. 9. Reference is made to the same circumstance in 2 Kings xxii. 20, which, however, refers to a permanent alteration, that is also mentioned in 2 Ch. xxxii. 4. [It seems to me doubtful that 2 Kings xx. 22, relates at all to the attempt to deprive Sennacherib of water, or that 2 Ch. xxxii. 4, refers to the supply of water which Hezekiah brought into the city.]

Movers, though without good reason, thinks 2 Ch. xxxii. 8-31, is an extract, but not from the second book of Kings, though he refers the citation in verse 32 to this book. Verses 7 and 8 are written in the admonitory style of the Chronicler, and the account of Hezekiah's defence, which is inserted to avoid the discreditable statement in 2 Kings xviii. 14, sqq., may have been derived from tradition, or from Isa. xxii.

§ 192, b.

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.

The above statement is apparently confirmed by the fact that the Chronicler seems to refer to the earlier books. The reference, in 1 Ch. xxix. 29, to "the discourses (histories) of Samuel, Nathan, and Gad," applies to our books of Samuel." "The discourses of Nathan and the prophecy of Ahijah," cited in 2 Ch. ix. 29, are found in 1 Kings i.-xi. The discourses of Shemaiah, (2 Ch. xii. 15,) perhaps, refer to 1 Kings xii. 22. "The book of the kings of Judah and Israel," (2 Ch. xvi. 11, xxv. 26, xxviii. 26, xxxii. 32,) or "the book of the kings of Israel and Judah," (2 Ch. xxvii. 7, xxxv. 27, xxxvi. 8,) and likewise "the history of the kings of Israel," (2 Ch. xxxiii. 18,)' might be understood as relating to our present books of Kings. "The prophecy of Isaiah" (2 Ch. xxx. 32) is found in 2 Kings xviii. 13-20, and xix.

But, on the other hand, it seems, this conclusion will not stand, because, in company with the discourses of Nathan and Ahijah, (2 Ch. ix. 29,) we find "the vision of Iddo," which does not appear in the parallel, 1 Kings i.-xi. With the discourses of Shemaiah, we have also, (2 Ch. xii. 15,) "the discourses of the prophet Iddo," which do not occur in the parallel, 1 Kings xii. "The book of the kings of Israel and Judah" (2 Ch. xxvii. 7,) contained something not found in 2 Kings xv. 32—38; "a book of the kings of Israel" is cited in 1 Ch. ix. 1,

"The discourses of the seer" are found in 2 Kings xxi. 11, sqq. The "prayer" is not found there, but, without violence, this expression may refer to the following work, in verse 19.

a

and 2 Ch. xx. 34, which contained the genealogies and discourses of the prophet Jehu, and neither appears in our books of Kings. "The explanation of the books of the Kings" (2 Ch. xxiv. 27) is different from our books of the Kings. "The explanation [Midrash] of Iddo the seer," (2 Ch. xiii. 22,) — which, however, may be regarded as a citation of part of the former work, — and "the history of Uzziah, by Isaiah the son of Amoz,' (2 Ch. xxvi. 22,) are referred to, as well as "the discourses of Hosai," (2 Ch. xxxiii. 19,) and do not appear in the former books. Hence some critics have concluded that these were the sources of the peculiar accounts of the Chronicler.

§ 192, c.

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.

996

There are several hypotheses which rest on the supposition that the Chronicler did not use or refer to the earlier books. According to Eichhorn, the Chronicler did not use our books of Samuel and Kings; but in both accounts of the history of David and Solomon, he thinks a short life of these kings lies at the foundation, which has passed through different hands, and has been wrought over in different ways. In the history of the two kingdoms, there were two different imperial histories of the two states, which were compiled from various works. Now, the author of the books of Kings, Eichhorn thinks, adhered closely to these imperial histories,

.מדרש •

.דברי החזים instead of,דברי הזי - Perhaps here is an error of the text *

Movers, p. 174, 176. [Our English version follows the conjectural reading in the text, and the other in the margin. The Vulgate reads Hosai; the LXX. the Seers; the Syriac has Hunan; and the Arabic Saphan.]

while the Chronicler often himself went behind them, back to the original sources, and followed them, and not the historical work compiled from them. How ever, he used only the history of the kingdom of Judah; and with him the "book of the kings of Israel and Judah" is the same as the "book of the kings of Judah." When both authors follow the larger historical work, they agree; but when the Chronicler goes back to the sources, there is a difference between them.

According to Bertholdt, both authors used merely different extracts from these imperial histories. The Chronicler did not use the particular words, but merely the citations made from them in the compilation.

According to Keil,' the Chronicler did not use the books of Samuel and Kings, but, in the history of David, referred to the work cited in 1 Ch. xxix. 29, and in the history of Solomon, to that quoted in 2 Ch. ix. 29, from which latter the history of Solomon, referred to in 1 Kings xi. 41, was compiled. In the history of Judah, he thinks he used the histories of the kingdom of Judah and Israel, — which are quoted under different names, and the particular sources, such as the discourses of different prophets, which constituted the materials of the larger historical work.

Hävernik assumes the following sources of the Chronicles; namely, in the history of Samuel, the prophetic works cited in 1 Ch. xxix. 29, and the "book of the kings of Israel," mentioned 1 Ch. ix. 1, which was compiled out of the annals of the realm; in the history of Solomon, the prophetic works referred to in 2 Ch. ix. 29, and the same "book of kings;" in the history of

the kingdom of Judah, the "book of kings," which was one and the same with the Midrash, and contained, likewise, the single prophetic discourses that are cited. Besides these, he merely used two separate works, "the discourses of Hosai," (2 Ch. xxxiii. 19,) and "the history of Uzziah by Isaiah," (2 Ch. xxvi. 22.)

But all these hypotheses are so strongly at variance with the obvious character of the Chronicles, that they fail to convince us.

But, on the other hand, the hypothesis of Movers" deserves consideration. According to this, besides our books of Samuel and Kings, the Chronicler made use of the Midrash of the "books of kings," which is quoted, and is identical with the "book of the kings of Judah and Israel," otherwise called "book of the kingdom of Israel and Judah," or "of Israel;" and likewise he cites particular parts of this book, as the "Midrash of the prophet Iddo," or as the "discourses" of different prophets, because the latter occurred in it. However, "the history of Uzziah by Isaiah" was a monograph, which he did not use.

This Midrash, or "book of the kings," contains the edifying discourses by which the Chronicles are distinguished from the earlier canonical books," and also the genealogies and registers of names.

a P. 160, sqq.

с

• For example, 2 Ch. xiii. 4—12. Compare the citation of the Midrash, verse 22.