CHRONICLES, BOOKS OF (דִּברֵי הַיָּמִים, chronicles of events or happenings of the days; LXX, παραλειπόμενα). This Heb. expression occurs some thirty-two times in the Book of Kings, twice in Esther (6:1; 10:2), once in 1 Chronicles (27:24), and once in Nehemiah (12:23).
Paraleipomena, the name used in the present Gr. and Lat. VSS of Chronicles, reflects the meaning that these are the things omitted in the accounts of Samuel and Kings, esp. concerning the kingdom of Judah. Luther, in using the title Chronicles, followed Jerome in designating these as 1 and 2 Chronicles.
In the modern Heb. Bible the Books of Chronicles stand last in order in the third division usually identified as the Kethubim, or writings. In the Eng. Bible these books follow 1 and 2 Kings in order.
1. Unity. In the transmission of the Heb. text of Chronicles it was regarded as a single unit until a.d. 1448 when the division into two books was introduced in the Heb. MS (cf. Bentzen, vol. II, p. 211). A Masoretic notation at the end of Chronicles indicating that 1 Chronicles 27:25 is the middle v. provides evidence that it was considered a single volume. Josephus, Origen, Jerome, and the Talmud likewise reckoned Chronicles as a single literary unit. The Peshitta implies its unity by giving the total number of vv. as 5603.
In the course of the transmission of the Gr. text of the OT, this book was divided into two. Evidence is insufficient to date this division which may have been made by the translators at the time of tr. or at some subsequent period. By a.d. 400 the Gr. VS used by Jerome had Chronicles identified as two books.
Examination of the content of Chronicles likewise points to its unity. From beginning to end there does not seem to be any indication of differences in style or interest that would suggest more than one author. This account beginning with Adam and continuing to the return of the exiles from Babylon in 539 b.c. reflects the work of one author who used numerous sources in his composition.
OT scholarship has generally recognized the similarity between the account in Chronicles and the Ezra-Nehemiah vol. which in the Heb. Bible likewise was a single unit. The latter seems to be a continuation of the history of the Jews beginning with the decree of Cyrus in 539 b.c. which concluded the account in Chronicles. The style, content, and interest of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah are so similar that it is commonly acknowledged that one author was responsible for both.
2. Authorship. Although the evidence may not be conclusive, there is no one known from OT times who is more likely to have been the author of Chronicles than Ezra who is identified as a scribe in the Ezra-Nehemiah vol. (Ezra 7:6). The Talmudic tradition (Baba Bathra 15a) ascribes the authorship to Ezra. Nehemiah collected an extensive library (2 Macc 2:13-15) which likely was available to Ezra for his research in compiling such a vol. concerning the establishment of the history of Israel under David.
Since the Ezra-Nehemiah volume accounts for approximately the 1st cent. of the restored Jewish state after the return from exile in 539 b.c. and reports primarily on the activities of Ezra and Nehemiah after a brief account of the return and rebuilding of the Temple, it is quite likely that Ezra wrote this book. In order to provide the proper background for the restored Jewish state, Ezra may have felt the need for an up-to-date account of the history of Israel that made his generation conscious of the importance of the Temple, and the priests who were responsible for leading in the religious observances according to the prescriptions in the Mosaic law and the organization begun by David, the first great king of Israel. The Book of Chronicles would have provided such a historical background.
3. Date. Ezra returned to Jerusalem in 457 b.c. Although the Temple had been rebuilt in 520-515 b.c. the laxity prevailing in Judah when Ezra arrived seemed to provide the opportune time for him to remind the people of the Mosaic law. Nehemiah returned in 444 b.c. and again in 432 b.c. as governor of the Jewish state providing leadership in rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem and with Ezra promoting many needed reforms. It may well have been during these decades of Nehemiah’s leadership that Ezra may have felt the need of writing the account of Israel’s religious past as recorded in the books presently known as 1 and 2 Chronicles.
4. Place of origin and destination. If Ezra wrote the Chronicles it is quite probable that this task was accomplished after he returned to Jerusalem in 457 b.c. Being under Pers. rule the Jewish state enjoyed relatively peaceful times. Nehemiah came to Jerusalem with authority from the king of Persia to serve as governor. Since Ezra was so intensely interested in the religious life of his people he may have found the political leadership of Nehemiah providing a favorable climate in which to do his research and writing. It’s likely this literary account of Judah’s religious history was designed to offer a better understanding for the Jews in their relationship with God and the promotion of Temple worship in Jerusalem.
5. Literary sources. More literary sources are referred to throughout Chronicles than in any other book in the OT. Great care is shown in noting the various sources the author uses in compiling this unified religious history of Judah. Although many of these sources may have been lost and are not identifiable they likely were known to the generation in which the author lived.
The literary sources used in the Book of Chronicles may be divided into two classes:
1. Official records
a. The record of the Chronicles of King David (1 Chron 27:24).
b. The Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah (2 Chron 27:7; 35:27; 36:8).
c. The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel (2 Chron 16:11; 25:26; 28:26; 32:32).
d. The Book of the Kings of Israel (1 Chron 9:1; 2 Chron 20:34).
e. The words (affairs or records) of the kings of Israel (2 Chron 23:18).
f. The Commentary [Midrash] on the Book of the Kings (2 Chron 24:27).
g. The decree of David the king of Israel and the decree of Solomon his son (2 Chron 35:4).
2. References to prophetic writings and records.
a. Samuel the seer (1 Chron 29:29).
b. Nathan the prophet (1 Chron 29:29; 2 Chron 9:29).
c. Gad the seer (1 Chron 21:9).
d. Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chron 9:29).
e. Iddo the seer (2 Chron 9:29; 12:15; 13:22).
f. Shemaiah the prophet (2 Chron 12:15).
g. Jehu, the son of Hanani (2 Chron 20:34).
h. Isaiah the prophet (2 Chron 26:22; 32:32).
i. “The Chronicles of the Seers” (2 Chron 33:19).
In addition to the above mentioned sources the author also had genealogical lists, official documents such as the message (2 Chron 32:10-15) and letters (32:17) of Sennacherib, the words of Asaph and David (29:30), and the document with plans for the Temple (1 Chron 28:19).
The official records listed above should not necessarily be interpreted as always identifying different documents. Sometimes the same document may have been referred to by a variable designation. In some cases the material ascribed to Israel also includes Judah (cf. 2 Chron 20:34; 33:18). Since there are some forty or more passages in Chronicles which are parallel to the record in Samuel and Kings, it seems to be apparent that the latter sources were available to this author. How many of the official records mentioned in Chronicles refer to Samuel and Kings may be impossible to determine.
Most of the prophets listed above are more fully identified in the Books of Samuel and Kings. Usually they were closely associated with their respective rulers and consequently constituted reliable sources concerning the ruling king. Interestingly enough the author of Chronicles normally quoted either an official record or a prophet, but not both.
How the prophetic sources the author of Chronicles quoted were related to the Books of Samuel and Kings is difficult to ascertain. It is quite likely that schools of the prophets existed during the divided kingdom period, c. 931-586 b.c., which kept record of the events taking place in both kingdoms. Likely they were located in various cities—not the capitals of either kingdom—where they were free from the direct influence of the kings so that they could record the deeds of the kings even though they were uncomplimentary. (Cf. Thiele, pp. 174-191.) Prophets who encountered their respective kings may have reported their experiences and observations to these centers of prophetic activity where the records were kept. The Books of Samuel and Kings likely were considered the writings of the prophets. Beyond that there may have been many records by prophets available to the author of Chronicles which have been lost to subsequent generations.
The author of Chronicles may also have been familiar with the prophetic books from Isaiah to Malachi according to Eissfeldt (p. 534). Quotations in 2 Chronicles 20:20 from Isaiah 7:9 and 2 Chronicles 16:9 from Zechariah 4:10 are cited as the basis for this assertion. Evidence is lacking to date any of the prophets whose books are in the OT later than the time of Ezra.
6. Occasion. Although Ezra was active in Jerusalem teaching the law for more than a decade before Nehemiah came as governor in 444 b.c., the completion of the walls of Jerusalem seemed to be the occasion for a renewed emphasis of genuine religious involvement for the Jews who were citizens of the restored postexilic State. Gathered in a public assembly the people listened to the reading of the Mosaic revelation concerning their responsibilities in the covenant relationship with God. The Feast of Tabernacles was observed in an unprecedented manner, and the covenant was renewed (Neh 8-10). Nehemiah as the governor was the first to set his seal to the covenant. The people committed themselves to a practical involvement in separation from pagans, Sabbath observance, providing donations for the rituals of worship and manual labor to supply fuel. They also accepted responsibility to support those who ministered in the holy things (Neh 10:28-39).
This extensive community-wide involvement under the leadership of Ezra and Nehemiah may have been the occasion for Ezra to provide for his people an account of their past which gave them the religious and political background for the re-established state. As noted above, numerous literary sources were available so that Ezra may have compared Nehemiah’s activities with those of David. Although the former was not king he was the governor appointed by the king of Persia. Since David had taken leadership in reforms, organization of the priests and Levites, and was subject to the Mosaic law so did Nehemiah in establishing the religion of the Jewish State. The religious involvements of the Davidic kings in Judah’s past may have been referred to repeatedly by Ezra and Nehemiah as precedents that it would have been quite probable that Ezra compiled the account in the present Books of Chronicles as a point of reference for his people and future generations.
7. Purpose. The purpose of the author is nowhere explicitly stated in the Book of Chronicles. However, when the content is examined and compared with other lit. available concerning this same period, it is in order to make certain observations as to the plan and aim the author possibly had in mind in compiling this particular volume.
The kingship of David and his successors seems to be a focal point throughout as he outlined the history of Israel. Although he reported the rebellion of the northern tribes when Rehoboam became king he did not give an account of the establishment of the northern kingdom under Jeroboam. Seldom does he provide any extended information concerning the kings of this seceded kingdom unless it is definitely related to developments in the southern kingdom of Judah.
The fact that Chronicles is not merely a supplement nor a parallel account to the Books of Samuel-Kings history of Israel is also significant. It is true that the former does supplement and parallel the latter frequently, but a careful evaluation of these seems to indicate that the author had a definite purpose for doing so. He omitted much that is recorded in Samuel-Kings but he also provided a considerable number of facts and events which add to the total knowledge of the Davidic dynasty.
The reign of David was given the most extensive consideration (1 Chron 10-29). Comparing this account with that given in 2 Samuel, which was given entirely to the reign of David, certain aims of the author seem to emerge. The Chronicler gives a genealogy tracing the line of David beginning with Adam to the patriarchs and the twelve tribes of Israel over whom David emerged as king. He omitted David’s reign at Hebron over the tribe of Judah and offered only a brief account of the tragic end of Saul’s reign. David’s reign began with the anointing at Hebron as he was recognized by all Israel and the conquest of the citadel of Zion, the “City of David,” as the capital of the nation of Israel, so that Jerusalem became the focal political and religious center of Israel throughout Chronicles. The author also omitted the family affairs of David which are so extensively narrated in the Books of Samuel. David’s great sin, immorality in the family, crime and rebellion—these are exclusively related in 2 Samuel 12-20.
David’s reign is portrayed in Chronicles with emphasis upon his military supremacy and religious interest. His military heroes and victories over surrounding nations are listed. The Levites and priests were organized and involved in bringing the Ark to Jerusalem and in the worship of God. Although David could not build the Temple he was assured of an eternal throne and made arrangements for the building of the Temple. The extensive account in Chronicles of the leadership David exerted in matters of religion must have been of intensive interest to Ezra and Nehemiah as they stimulated the reforms and renewed the covenant.
This positive religious interest of the Chronicler seems to emerge throughout the rest of his account. He portrayed Solomon in all his glory as the one who built and dedicated the Temple in Jerusalem. His apostasy and idolatry so extensively delineated in 1 Kings 11 are omitted. During the period of the divided kingdom extensive reports were given concerning the kings in the Davidic line who were God-fearing leaders and promoted the teaching and observance of the law of Moses. The ministry of the prophets was frequently emphasized as they came with God’s messages to encourage and warn the rulers on the throne of David. Special note is made of the efforts exerted by various kings in fortifying Judah and attempting to purify the worship in Jerusalem. The influence of the Levites and priests was also significant. They were active in supporting and promoting the true religion of Israel according to the Mosaic instructions. Jehoiada as a priest even led in directing the affairs of state in order to remove idolatry as it prevailed under Athaliah. The observances of religious festivities under the leadership of kings who led in some of the outstanding reformations supported by prophets, priests, and Levites are much more extensively reported than the deeds of the wicked and idolatrous kings who at times occupied the throne of David.
A purpose that seems to emerge from a consideration of his entire account is that the author wanted to impress the readers with the fact that people who really feared God could expect divine favor and blessing. As God’s people they had a covenant relationship with Him. Defection from their commitment as God’s people and disobedience to the prophets who were God’s spokesmen often brought God’s judgment which is indicated concerning several kings.
Although the exiles, who had returned after the exile and the great judgment upon Judah and Jerusalem had taken its course, were unable to establish the kingdom as it had existed under David, they were permitted under the governorship of Nehemiah and the leadership of Ezra to achieve the purpose of wholehearted religious devotion to God as explained by the emphasis of the Book of Chronicles. They had the liberty to adjust their pattern in living to that which had been prescribed for them in the Mosaic revelation and exemplified by numerous leaders who had followed the example of David.
8. Canonicity. Ever since the Heb. Bible or OT canon has been completed, the Book of Chronicles has never been subject to question as to its canonicity. It was included in the count of twenty-two books by Josephus who held that the canon was completed by 400 b.c.
In the arrangement of the books in the Heb. canon the Book of Chronicles is classified in the third division—Kethubim (writings)—and is the last book in that division. In the Eng. Bibles the Books of Chronicles normally follow 1 and 2 Kings. It is difficult to attach any significance to the place Chronicles has in either order as seems to be indicated by some scholars (cf. Myers, I Chronicles, pp. XVI and XVII).
The order or arrangement of the books in the OT canon likely was a matter of historical development and convenience during the 1st millennium of the Christian era. In the Jewish tradition of the transmission of the Heb. text the first specific indication of any division within the twenty-two scroll canon is that of Josephus. He listed five as law, thirteen by the prophets, and four as “Hymns to God and counsels for men for the conduct of life.” It is unlikely that Chronicles could have been classed in either the first or third group in this classification. Since the Jews continued to transmit their OT text on scrolls, they eventually developed an order in which the twenty-two books were arranged as twenty-four—listing Ruth and Lamentations separately instead of being on the scrolls of Judges and Jeremiah respectively. In this arrangement Chronicles was listed in the third division.
In the transmission of the Gr. text of the OT under Christian auspices the order of the books varies. The NT in its reference to the OT does not reflect any definite arrangement. Frequently it refers to the OT as the “law and the prophets,” indicating a possible twofold division. When the codex or book form replaced the scroll and the books were bound in one vol. a definite order had to be followed. Although the arrangements by various church leaders differed, the order which is commonly used in the Eng. Bibles is more closely related to the Gr. text than to the Heb. Consequently the particular place Chronicles has in either arrangement does not have any bearing on its canonicity in OT times nor since then.
9. The text. Examination of the text of the Book of Chronicles seems to indicate that less care was exercised in the transmission of this book than in some of the others. The charge of excessive transcriptural errors in Chronicles, however, has often been exaggerated.
The spelling of names varies in numerous cases when compared with the Genesis-Kings account. The similarities between some of the Heb. consonants and the introduction of vowel points by the Masoretic scribes in the Heb. text after a.d. 500 may account for some of the variants in spelling.
The transmission of numerals in the Heb. text of Chronicles accounts for a number of difficulties. Although some scholars have charged the author of Chronicles with exaggeration a comparison of his figures with those of Samuel-Kings indicates that in the vast number of instances the numerical values are in agreement (cf. Archer, p. 394). Out of approximately twenty discrepancies, one-third have larger numbers in Samuel-Kings than in Chronicles. Some discrepancies can also be explained on the basis of a slightly different context. It should also be noted that frequently numbers are given in thousands indicating an approximation rather than exact figures. It is quite likely that in OT times alphabetic letters were used to represent numbers and consequently were more liable to corruption by scribes in transmitting the text (cf. Keil, pp. 43, 44).
On the basis of Elephantine Papyri usage, it seems probable that the Hebrews used vertical and horizontal strokes for digits up to ten with special signs for hundreds and thousands. This kind of system would multiply the difficulties in transmitting the text from generation to generation by scribes.
The original records concerning the kings of Judah were contemporary productions by men who recorded in full accord with the facts of the times in which they lived. Many of these accounts were available to the author of Chronicles. Copies usually were transmitted with utmost fidelity. Consequently to assert that the scribes deliberately altered the facts is without foundation. Difficulties encountered in the present text need to be examined carefully in the light of all the evidence available with high regard for the original text which may have been subject to errors in transmission throughout the centuries of time.
10. Special problems. A number of scholars have dated the composition of Chronicles considerably later than the time of Ezra. Some consider it to have been written several generations after Ezra, c. 350 b.c., and then altered and changed by various editors in subsequent generations (cf. Eissfeldt, p. 540). Others date the compilation of Chronicles as late as 250-200 b.c. (cf. Pfeiffer and others). The argument most frequently advanced is the problem concerning the interpretation of the passage in 1 Chronicles 3:19-24. If this refers to six generations after Zerubbabel then the genealogy projects into a period beyond the time of Ezra. A variant reading in the LXX, Vul., and Syr. allows for interpreting this passage as eleven generations after the time of Zerubbabel.
A careful analysis of the numerous lists given in the Book of Chronicles indicates that the author did not always list successive generations. Frequently he listed several sons born to an individual named. It is reasonable to interpret this passage as extending only to the second generation after Zerubbabel (cf. Young, p. 383).
The date of Ezra, who may have been the author of the Book of Chronicles, is also subject to various interpretations. The “seventh year of Artaxerxes” was equated with the year 398 b.c. in the Journal of Biblical Literature (1921), pp. 104-124, assuming that this referred to Artaxerxes II. W. F. Albright in his second ed. of From Stone Age to Christianity (1946, p. 366) dated Ezra in the thirty-seventh year of Artaxerxes or about 428 b.c. This was based on the assumption that Ezra 7:7 should read the “thirty-seventh” instead of the “seventh” year of Artaxerxes. However, when all the facts given in the Ezra-Nehemiah vol. are taken into account as given in the text, the most reasonable interpretation is to date Ezra’s return in the year 457 b.c. (cf. Schultz, pp. 265-277).
Another problem cited in the text is the reference to a sum of money in darics (adarkonim). This name for money likely was derived from Darius I who ruled Persia from 520 to 486 b.c. In the text it is mentioned in connection with King David. Since the daric had been in circulation for some time when Ezra lived, it is reasonable to assume that Ezra converted the figure he found in the text before him from gold to darics, so that he would communicate more intelligently to his generation how much each of the princes in David’s time contributed to the service of the Temple.
Some critics have made the charge that the author of Chronicles was in error in tracing the musical guilds serving in the Temple back to the time of David. Concerning this W. F. Albright made the following observation in his article entitled “The Old Testament and Archaeology” (p. 63 in Alleman and Flack, Old Testament Commentary): “We can now say with entire confidence that the principal musical guilds traced their origin back to Canaanite times long before David.” He points out that in Egyp. sources reference is frequently made to Canaanite musicians during the 2nd millennium b.c., and that the names of the founders of these guilds in the Biblical records are demonstrably of Canaanite type. The name Calcol (1 Kings 4:31) is in the list discovered at Megiddo identified as a great Canaanite musician in service at Ashkelon. (Cf. also Arch., p. 395.)
11. Content. The Book of Chronicles begins with Adam and concludes with the decree of Cyrus in 539 b.c. In this extensive sweep of history from the beginning of the human race to the 5th cent. b.c., it parallels the historical account in the OT as given in Genesis through Kings.
The history of David and his dynasty is of primary importance throughout this account. More space is allotted to David and the establishment of his kingdom than any other individual. In a total of approximately fifty pages given to Chronicles in an ordinary Eng. Bible, about fifteen account for David’s reign, nine for the introduction tracing the genealogical background, six to Solomon, and about twenty to the kings of Judah ruling on the Davidic throne from Rehoboam to Zedekiah (931-586 b.c.).
For an analysis of the content of Chronicles the following outline may be helpful:
Outline
From a critical analysis of the material included in the Book of Chronicles there emerge certain emphases which the author must have wanted to impress upon his readers. The following may be noteworthy of consideration.
The genealogy is definitely selective. Since the list of families residing in Jerusalem after the Exile is given in 1 Chronicles 9:1-34, it is reasonable to conclude that this genealogy had some particular significance for them. The lists given point to the fact that they had been selected through the patriarchs and the tribes of Israel from among all the people who had descended from Adam. In this selection the dynasty of David had been in a particular sense chosen to accomplish God’s plan concerning the human race (1 Chron 3:1-24). Although Saul’s genealogy is given, only the tragic conclusion of his reign is included.
Except for the lineage of David, the author offers nothing about the background or early life of David. Even the reign over Judah is omitted. Crowned as king of all Israel, David was established as king, with Jerusalem as the capital and the support of mighty men from all the tribes of Israel. Special emphasis was given to the Ark and the extensive organization of the Levites to officiate and serve in the worship of God. Although David was not permitted to build the Temple, he was promised that his dynasty would be established forever. Extensive delineation is also given to David’s arrangements for building the Temple and the elaborate organization for service in the Temple after it was completed.
The account of Solomon’s reign is comparatively brief. The Temple continued to be the focal point of interest with extensive coverage of the dedicatory address and prayer by Solomon.
Throughout the three and a half centuries surveyed in the rest of Chronicles, the importance of the Temple and the maintenance of true worship in harmony with the law of Moses and the practice of David is primarily important. The observance of the feasts and seasons are elaborately described. Emphasis repeatedly is given to the importance of periods of revival after there had been a period of apostasy.
12. Theology. The theological perspective of the author seems to be indicated in 1 Chronicles 10:13, 14. Although Saul’s reign is omitted, the observation is made that Saul’s reign ended tragically because he was unfaithful, he did not conform to God’s commandments or requirements, and consulted a medium instead of seeking guidance from God.
Beginning with David the kings who heeded the prophets and sought to observe the law and maintain worship in the Temple are commended. Kings who made ungodly alliances and turned to idolatry were severely rebuked and judged. God-fearing people were the recipients of God’s favors.
Captivity and exile were a manifestation of God’s wrath upon the people who had spurned the prophets (2 Chron 36:15, 16). With the Temple and Jerusalem reduced to ruins, the rule of the Davidic dynasty was temporarily suspended in accordance with the prediction of Jeremiah. With the decree by Cyrus the Israelites were permitted to re-establish the Temple worship even though they were under the domination of the Pers. rulers. In this the prophetic word of Jeremiah likewise was fulfilled.
Bibliography H. L. Allrik, “The Lists of Zerubbabel and the Hebrew Numeral Notation” in BASOR 136 (Dec. 1954), 21-27; W. Rudolph, Chronikbucher (Handbuch zum Alten Testament v. 21) (1955); A. Bentzen, Introduction to the Old Testament (1957), vol. II, 211-217; S. J. Schultz, The Old Testament Speaks (1960); G. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (1964), 389-395; J. M. Myers, I Chronicles (The Anchor Bible) (1965); E. R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, rev. ed. (1965); O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament (1965), 529-540; C. F. Keil, The Books of the Chronicles, reprint (1966).