Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadMcClintock Biblical Encyclopedia: Kings, First And Second Books Of
Subjects in this Topic:
the second of the series of Hebrew royal annals, the books of Samuel forming the introductory series, and the books of Chronicles being a parallel series. In the Hebrew Bible the first two series alone form part of " the Former Prophets," like Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. SEE BIBLE. In the Authorized English Version it is added to their titles: "commonly called the Third [and the Fourth] Book of the Kings." SEE SAMUEL, BOOKS OF.
I. Number and Title. — The two books of Kings formed anciently but one book in the Jewish Scriptures, as is affirmed by Origen (apud Euseb. Prep. Evang. 6:25, Âáóéëåßùí ôñßôç , ôåôÜñôç , ἐí ἑíὶ ÏὐáììÝëå÷ Äáâßä ), Jerome (Proloy. Gal.), Josephus (Cont. Apion. i, 8), and others. The present division, following the Septuagint and Latin versions, has been common in the Hebrew Bibles since the Venetian editions of Bomberg.
The old Jewish name was borrowed, as usual, from the commencing words of the book ( åְäִîֶּìֶêְ ãָּåַã ), Graecized as in the above quotation from Eusebius. The Septuagint and Vulgate now number them as the third and fourth books of Kings, reckoning the two books of Samuel the first and second. Their present title, îְìָëַéí , ÂáóéëÝùí , Regum, in the opinion of Havernick, has respect more to the formal than essential character of the composition (Einleitung, § 168); yet under such forms of government as those of Judah and Israel the royal person and name are intimately associated with all national acts and movements, legal decisions, warlike preparations, domestic legislation, and foreign policy. The reign of an Oriental prince is identified with the history of his nation during the period of his sovereignty. More especially in the theocratic constitution of the Jewish realm the character of the monarch was an important element of national history, and, of necessity, it had considerable influence on the fate and fortunes of the people.
II. Independent Form.-The question has been raised and minutely discussed whether the books of Kings (1 and 2) constitute an entire work of themselves, or whether they originally formed part of a larger historical work embracing the principal parts of the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, out of which these several books, as we now have them, have been formed. Ewald regards the books of Judges (with Ruth), 1 and 2 Samuel, and I and 2 Kings, as forming parts of one whole work, which he calls " The great book of the Kings." The grounds on which this supposition has been built are partly the following:
(1.) These books together contain one unbroken narrative, both in form and matter, each portion being connected with the preceding by the conjunctive 5, or the continuative ( åִéְäַé . The book of Judges shows itself to be a separate work from Joshua by opening with a narration of events with which that book closes; the work then proceeds through the times of the Judges, and goes on to give, in Ruth, the family history and genealogy of David, and in Samuel and Kings the events which transpired down to the captivity.
(2.) The recurrence in Judges of the phrases, "And in those days there was no king in Israel" (Jdg_17:6; Jdg_18:1; Jdg_21:25); " It came to pass in those days when there was no king" (Jdg_19:1); and in Ruth (Rth_1:1), "Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled," shows that this portion of the work was written in the times when there were kings in Israel. The writer therefore was in a position to pass under review the whole period of the times of the judges, and we find that he estimates the conduct of the people according to the degree of their conformity to the law of the Lord, after the manner of the writer of Kings (Jdg_2:11-19; 2Ki_17:7-23).
Again, in Jdg_1:21, it is said that the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day; and in 2Sa_24:16, mention is made of Araunah the Jebusite as an inhabitant of Jerusalem, from which it is inferred that the writer intended these facts to explain each other. (But see Jos_15:63.) So there is a reference in Jdg_20:27 to the removal of the ark of the covenant from Shiloh to Jerusalem; and the expression "in those days" points, as in 17:6, etc., to remote times. There is thought to be a reference in Jdg_18:30 to the captivity of Israel in the days of Hoshea, in which case that book must have been written subsequently to that time, as well as the books of Kings.
(3.) The books of Kings take up the narrative where 2 Samuel breaks off, and proceed in the same spirit and manner to continue the history, with the earlier parts of which the writer gives proof of being well acquainted (comp. 1Ki_2:11 with 2Sa_5:4-5; so also 2Ki_17:41 with Jdg_2:11-19, etc.; 1Sa_2:27 with Jdg_13:6; 2Sa_14:17-20; 2Sa_19:27, with Jdg_13:6; 1Sa_9:21 with Jdg_6:15, and Judges 20; 1Ki_8:1 with 2Sa_6:17; 2Sa_5:7; 2Sa_5:9; 1Sa_17:12 with Rth_4:17; Rth_1:1 with Jdg_17:7-9; Jdg_19:1-2 [Bethlehem-Judah]). Other links connecting the books of Kings with the preceding may be found in the comparison, suggested by De Wette, of 1Ki_2:26 with 1Sa_2:35; 1Ki_2:3-4; 1Ki_5:17-18; 1Ki_8:18-19; 1Ki_8:25, with 2Sa_7:12-16; and 1Ki_4:1-6 with 2Sa_8:15-18.
(4.) Similarity of diction has been observed throughout, indicating identity of authorship. The phrase "Spirit of Jehovah" occurs first in Judges, and frequently afterwards in Samuel and Kings (Jdg_3:10; Jdg_6:34, etc.; 1Sa_10:6, etc.; 1Ki_22:24; 2Ki_2:16, etc.). So " Man of God," to designate a prophet, and "God do so to me and more also," are common to them; and "till they were ashamed" to Judges and Kings (Jdg_3:25; 2Ki_2:17; 2Ki_8:11).
(5.) Generally the style of the narrative, ordinarily quiet and simple, but rising to great vigor and spirit when stirring deeds are described (as in Judges 4, 7, 11, etc.; 1 Samuel 4, 17, 31, etc.; 1 Kings 8, 18, 19, etc.), and the introduction of poetry or poetic style in the midst of the narrative (as in Judges 5 :1 Samuel 2, 2Sa_1:17, etc., 1Ki_22:17, etc.), constitute such strong features of resemblance as lead to the conclusion that these several books form but one work.
But these reasons are not conclusive. Many of the resemblances may be accounted for in other ways, while there are important and wide differences.
(1.) If the arguments were sufficient to join Judges, Samuel, and Kings together in one work, for the same reasons Joshua must be added (Joshua i, 1; 15:63; xxiii and xxiv; Jdg_1:1).
(2.) The writer of Kings might be well acquainted with the previous history of his people, and even with the contents of Judges and Samuel, without being himself the author of those books.
(3.) Such similarity of diction as exists may be ascribed to the use by the writer of Kings of earlier documents, to which also the writer of Samuel had access.
(4.) There are good reasons for regarding the Kings as together forming an entire and independent work, such as the similarity of style and language, both vocabulary and grammar, which pervades the two books, but distinguishes them from others-the uniform system of quotation observed in them, but not in the books which precede them -the same careful attention to chronology-the recurrence of certain phrases and forms of speech peculiar to them. A great number of words occur in Kings, which are found in them only; such are chiefly names of materials and utensils, and architectural terms. Words, and unusual forms of words, occur, which are only found here and in writers of the same period, as Isaiah and Jeremiah, but not in Samuel or Judges. See § 5, below.III. Contents, Character, and Design.-The books of Kings contain the brief annals of a long period, from the accession of Solomon till the dissolution of the commonwealth. The first chapters describe the reign of Solomon over the united kingdom, and the revolt under Rehoboam. The history of the rival states is next narrated in parallel sections till the period of Israel's downfall on the invasion of Shalmanezer. Then the remaining years of the principality of Judah are recorded till the conquest of Nebuchadnezzar and the commencement of the Babylonian captivity. SEE ISRAEL; SEE JUDAH. For an adjustment of the years of the respective reigns in each line, SEE CHRONOLOGY.
There are some peculiarities in this succinct history worthy of attention. It is summary, but very suggestive. It is not a biography of the sovereigns, nor a mere record of political occurrences, nor yet an ecclesiastical register. King, Church, and State are all comprised in their sacred relations. It is a theocratic history, a retrospective survey of the kingdom as existing under a theocratic government. The character of the sovereign is tested by his fidelity to the religious obligations of his office, and this decision in reference to his conduct is generally added to the notice of his accession. The new king's religious character is generally portrayed by its similarity or opposition to the way of David, of his father, or of Jeroboam, son of Nebat, " who made Israel to sin." Ecclesiastical affairs are noticed with a similar purpose, and in contrast with past or prevalent apostasy, especially as manifested in the popular superstitions, whose shrines were on the " high places." Political or national incidents are introduced in general for the sake of illustrating the influence of religion on civic prosperity; of showing how the theocracy maintained a vigilant and vengeful guardianship over its rights and privileges-adherence to its principles securing peace and plenty, disobedience to them bringing along with it sudden and severe retribution. The books of Kings are a verification of the Mosaic warnings, and the author of them has kept this steadily in view. He has given a brief history of his people, arranged under the various political chiefs in such a manner as to show that the government was essentially theocratic; that its spirit, as developed in the Mosaic writings, was never extinct, however modified or inactive it might sometimes appear. Thus the books of Kings appear in a religious costume, quite different from the form they would have assumed either as a political or ecclesiastical narrative.
In the one case legislative enactments, royal edicts, popular movements, would have occupied a prominent place; in the other, sacerdotal arrangements, Levitical service, music, and pageantry, would have filled the leading sections of the treatise. In either view the points adduced would have had a restricted reference to the palace or the temple, the sovereign or the pontiff, the court or the priesthood, the throne or the altar, the tribute or tithes, the nation on its farms, or the tribes in the courts of the sacred edifice. But the theocracy conjoined both the political and religious elements, and the inspired annalist unites them as essential to his design. The agency of divinity is constantly recognised, the hand of Jehovah is continually acknowledged. The chief organ of theocratic influence enjoys peculiar prominence. We refer to the incessant agency of the prophets, their great power and peculiar modes of action as detailed by the composer of the books of Kings. They interfered with the succession, and their instrumentality was apparent il the schism. They roused the people, and they braved the sovereign. The balance of power was in their hands; the regal dignity seemed to be sometimes at their disposal. In times of emergency they dispensed with usual modes of procedure, and assumed an authority with which no subject in an ordinary state can safely be intrusted. executing the law with a summary promptness which rendered opposition impossible, or at least unavailing. They felt their divine commission, and that they were the custodians of the rights of Jehovah. At the same time they protected the interests of the nation, and, could we divest the term of its association with unprincipled turbulence and sedition, we would, like Winer (Real Vortearb . s.v. Prophet), style them the demagogues of Israel. The divine prerogative was to them a vested right, guarded with a sacred jealousy from royal usurpation or popular invasion; and the interests of the people were as religiously protected against encroachments, too easily made under a form of government which had not the safeguard of popular representation or aristocratic privilege. The priesthood were in many instances, though there are some illustrious exceptions, merely the creatures of the crown, and therefore it became the prophetical office to assert its dignity and stand forth in the majestic insignia of an embassy from heaven. The truth of these sentiments, as to the method, design, and composition of the books of Kings, is confirmed by ample evidence.
(1.) Large space is occupied with the building of the Temple-the palace of the divine Protector-his throne in it being above the mercy-seat and between the cherubim (ch. v-viii). Care is taken to record the miraculous phenomenon of the descent of the Shekinah (viii. 10). The prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the house is full of theocratic views and aspirations.
(2.) Reference is often made to the Mosaic law, with its provisions, and allusions to the earlier history of the people frequently occur (1Ki_2:3; 1Ki_3:14; 1Ki_6:11-12; 1Ki_8:58, etc.; 2Ki_10:31; 2Ki_14:6; 2Ki_17:13; 2Ki_17:15; 2Ki_17:37; 2Ki_18:4-6; 2Ki_21:1-8). Allusions to the Mosaic code are found more frequently towards the end of the second book when the kingdom was drawing near its termination, as if to account for its decay and approaching fate.
(3.) Phrases expressive of divine interference are frequently introduced (1Ki_11:31; 1Ki_12:15; 1Ki_13:1-2; 1Ki_13:9; and 1Ki_20:13, etc.).
(4.) Prophetic interposition is a very prominent theme of record. It fills the vivid foreground of the historical picture. Nathan was occupied in the succession of Solomon (1Ki_1:45); Ahijah was concerned in the revolt (1Ki_11:29-40). Shemaiah disbanded the troops which Rehoboam had mustered (1Ki_12:21). Ahijah predicted the ruin of Jeroboam, whose elevation he had promoted (1Ki_14:7). Jehu, the prophet, doomed the house of Baasha (1Ki_16:1). The reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah are marked by the bold, rapid, mysterious movements of Elijah. Under Ahab occurs the prediction of Micaiah (1Ki_22:8). The actions and oracles of Elisha form the marvellous topics of narration under several reigns. The agency of Isaiah is also recognised (2Ki_19:20; 2Ki_20:16). Besides, 1 Kings 13 presents another instance of prophetic operation; and in 20:35, the oracle of an unknown prophet is also rehearsed. Huldah the prophetess was an important personage under the government of Josiah (2Ki_22:14). Care is also taken to report the fulfilment of striking prophecies, in the usual phrase, "according to the word of the Lord" (1Ki_12:15; 1Ki_15:29; 1Ki_16:12; 2Ki_23:15-18; 2Ki_9:36; 2Ki_24:2). So, too, the old Syriac version prefixes, "Here follows the book of the kings who flourished among the ancient people; and in this is also exhibited the history of the prophets who flourished during their times."
(5.) Theocratic influence is recognised both in the deposition and succession of kings (1Ki_13:33; 1Ki_15:4-5; 1Ki_15:29-30 2Ki_11:17, etc.). Compare, on the whole of this view, Huvernick, Einleit. § 168; Jahn, Introduct. § 46; Gesenius, Ueber Jes. i, 934. It is thus apparent that the object of the author of the Books of Kings was to describe the history of the kingdoms, especially in connection with the theocratic element. This design accounts for what De Wette (Einleit. § 185) terms the mythical character of these books.
As to what has been termed the anti-Israelitish spirit of the work (Bertholdt, Einleit. p. 949), we do not perceive it. Truth required that the kingdom of Israel should be described in its real character. Idol-worship was connected with its foundation; moscholatry was a state provision; fidelity obliged the annalist to state that all its kings patronized the institutions of Bethel and Dan, while eight, at least, of the Jewish sovereigns adhered to the true religion, and that the majority of its kings perished in insurrection, while those of Judah in general were exempted from seditious tumults and assassination.
IV. Relation of Kings to Chronicles. — The more obvious differences between the books of Kings and of Chronicles are,
(1.) In respect of language, by which the former are shown to be of earlier date than the latter.
(2.) Of periods embraced in each work. The Chronicles are much more comprehensive than Kings, containing genealogical lists from Adam downwards, and a full account of the reign of David. The portions of the Chronicles synchronistic with Kings are 1 Chronicles 28, 2Ch_36:22.
(3.) In the Kings greater prominence is given to the prophetical office; in Chronicles, to the priestly or Levitical. In the books of the Kings we have the active influence of Nathan in regard to the succession to the throne; and the remarkable lives of Elijah and Elisha, of whom numerous and extraordinary miracles are related, of which scarcely the slightest mention is made in Chronicles, although in Kings about fourteen chapters are taken up with them. Besides these, other prophets are mentioned, and their acts and sayings are recorded; as, 1 Kings 13, the prophet who came to Bethel from Judah in the reign of Jeroboam, and his predictions; and in 2 Kings 23, the fulfilment of them in the days of Josiah; 1 Kings 13, the old prophet who lived at Bethel with his sons. Ahijah the prophet, also, in the days of Jeroboam, 1 Kings 14; Jehu, the son of Hanani, 1 Kings 16; Jonah, in the time of Jeroboam, 2Ki_14:25; and Isaiah in relation to the sickness of Hezekiah, 2 Kings 20. Of these there is either no mention, or much slighter in Chronicles,. where the priestly or Levitical element is more observable; as, for example, the full account, in 2 Chronicles 29-31, of the purification of the Temple by Hezekiah; of the services and sacrifices then made, and of the names of the Levites who took part in it, and the restoration of the courses and orders of the priesthood, and the supplies for the daily, weekly, and yearly sacrifices; also, the circumstantial account of the Passover observed by command of Josiah, 2Ch_35:1-19. In this way we may account not only for the omission of much that relates to the prophets, but also for the less remarkable prominence given to the history of Israel, and the greater to Judah and Jerusalem; and for the frequent omission of details respecting the idolatrous practices of some of the kings, as of Solomon, Rehoboam, and Ahaz; and the destruction of idolatry by Josiah, showing that the books of Chronicles were written in times in which the people less needed to be warned against idolatry; to which, after the captivity, they had ceased to be so prone as before.
For further information on the relation between Kings and Chronicles, SEE CHRONICLES, BOOKS OF.
V. Peculiarities of Diction.
1. The words noticed by De Wette (Einl. § 185) as indicating their modern date are the following: àִúְּé for àִúְּ , 1Ki_14:2. (But this form is also found in Jdg_17:2; Jer_4:30; Eze_36:13, and not once in the later books.) àåֹúå for àַúּå , 2Ki_1:15. (But this form of àֵú is found in Lev_15:18; Lev_15:24; Jos_14:12; 2Sa_24:24; Isa_59:21; Jer_10:5; Jer_12:1; Jer_19:10; Jer_20:11; Jer_23:9; Jer_35:2, Eze_14:4; Eze_27:26.) éַùֹּׂí for éָùֹׁí , 1Ki_9:8. (But Jer_19:8; Jer_49:17, are identical in phrase and orthography.) øָöַéï for øָöַéí , 2Ki_11:13. (But everywhere else in Kings, e.g. 2Ki_11:6, etc., øָöַéí , which is also universal in Chronicles, an avowedly later book; and here, as in öַãֹðַéï , 1Ki_11:33, there is every appearance of the å being a clerical error for the copulative å ; see Thenius, 1. c.) îְãַéðåֹú , 1Ki_20:14. (But this word occurs in Lam_1:1, and there is every appearance of its being a technical word in 1Ki_20:14, and therefore as old as the reign of Ahab.) ëֹּø for çֹîֶø , 1Ki_4:22. (But ëֹּø is used by Ezekiel xlv, 14, and homer seems to have been then already obsolete.) çֹøַéí , 1Ki_21:8; 1Ki_21:11. (Occurs in Isaiah and Jeremiah.)
øִá , 2Ki_25:8. (But as the term evidently came in with the Chaldees, as seen in Rab-shakeh, Rab-saris, Rab-mag, its application to the Chaldee general is no evidence of a time later than the person to whom the title is given.) ùָׁìֵí , 1Ki_8:61, etc. (But there is not a particle of evidence that this expression belongs to late Hebrew. It is found, among other places, in Isa_38:3, a passage against the authenticity of which there is also not a shadow of proof, except upon the presumption that prophetic intimations and supernatural interventions on the part of God are impossible.) äַùְׂëַּéì , 2Ki_18:7. (On what grounds this word is adduced it is impossible to guess, since it occurs in this sense in Joshua, Isaiah, Samuel, and Jeremiah: see Gesenius.) áַּèָּçåֹï , 2Ki_18:19. (Isa_36:4; Ecc_9:4.) éְäåּãַéú , 2Ki_18:26. (But why should not a Jew, in Hezekiah's reign as well as in the time of Nehemiah, have called his mother-tongue "the Jews' language," in opposition to the Aanzcean ? There was nothing in the Babylonian captivity to give it the name if it had it not before, nor is there a single earlier instance-Isa_19:18 might have furnished one-of any name given to the language spoken by all the Israelites, and which, in later times, was called Hebrew: ῾Åâñúóôß , Prolog. Ecclus.; Luk_23:38; Joh_5:2, etc.) àֵú îַùְׁôָּè
ãַּáֵּø , 2Ki_25:6. (Frequent in Jer_4:12; Jer_39:5, etc.) Theod. Parker adds ôֶּçָä (see, too, Thenius, Einl. § 6), 1Ki_10:15; 1Ki_20:24; 2Ki_18:24, on the presumption, probably, of its being of Persian derivation; but the etymology and origin of the word are quite uncertain, and it is repeatedly used in Jeremiah 51, as well as Isa_36:9. With better reason might áָּãָà have been adduced, 1Ki_12:33. The expression òֵáֶø äִðָּäָø , in 1Ki_4:24, is also a difficult one to form an impartial opinion about. It is doubtful, as De Wette admits, whether the phrase necessarily implies its being used by one to the east of the Euphrates, because the use varies in Num_32:19; Num_35:14; Jos_1:14 sq.; Jos_5:1; Jos_12:1; Jos_12:7; Jos_22:7; 1Ch_26:30; Deu_1:1; Deu_1:5, etc. It is also conceivable that the phrase might be used as a mere geographical designation by those who belonged to one of "the provinces beyond the river" subject to Babylon; and, at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, Judaea had been such a province for at least 23 years, and probably longer. We may safely affirm, therefore, that, on the whole, the peculiarities of diction in these books do not indicate a time after the captivity, or towards the close of it, but, on the contrary, point pretty distinctly to the age of Jeremiah. It may be added that the marked and systematic differences between the language of Chronicles and that of Kings, taken with the fact that all attempts to prove the Chronicles, in the main, later than Ezra, have utterly failed, lead to the same conclusion. (See many examples in Movers, p. 200 sq.)
2. Other peculiar or rare expressions in these books are the proverbial ones: îִùְׁúַּéï áְּ÷ַéø , found only in them and in 1Sa_25:22; 1Sa_25:34; "slept with his fathers," "him that dieth in the city the dogs shall eat," etc.; ëֹּä éִòֲùֶׂä àìֵ , 1Ki_2:23, etc.; also ÷ַøְéָä , 1Ki_1:4; 1Ki_1:45; elsewhere only in poetry and in the composition of proper names, except Deu_2:36; æֹçֶìֶä , Deu_1:9. Also the following isolated terms:
áִּøְáֻּøַéí , "fowl," 1Ki_4:23; àֻøָåֹú , "stalls," 1Ki_5:6; 2Ch_9:25; äֶòֵָìä îִñ , 2Ch_5:13; 2Ch_9:15; 2Ch_9:21; îִñִּò , "a stone-quarry" (Gesenius), 2Ch_6:7; ìַôְðָé , 2Ch_6:17; ìְúַúֵּï , 2Ch_6:19; ôְּ÷ָòַéí and ôִּ÷ֻּòåֹú , " wild cucumbers," 2Ch_6:18; 2Ki_4:39; îַ÷ְéֵä , 2Ki_10:28; the names of the months, àֵúָðַéí , 2Ki_8:2; áּåּì æַå , 1Ki_6:37-38; K3, áָּãָà to invent," 1Ki_12:33; Neh_6:8, in both cases joined with îַôְìֶöֶú ַָîìֵּá , " an idol," 1Ki_15:13; , áַּòֵø and äַáְòַéø , followed by àִçֲøֵé , "to destroy," 1Ki_14:10; 1Ki_16:3; 1Ki_21:21; ãְּáָ÷ַéí , "joints of the armor," 1Ki_22:34; ùַׂéâ , "a pursuit," 1Ki_18:27; âָּäִø , "to bend one's self," 1Ki_18:42; 2Ki_4:34-35; ùַׁðֵּñ , "to gird up," 1Ki_18:46; àֲôֵø , "a head-band," 1Ki_20:38; 1Ki_20:42; ùָׂôִ÷ , " to suffice," 1Ki_20:10; çָìִè , uncert. signif., 1Ki_20:33; òָùָׁä îְìåּëָä , ' to reign," 1Ki_21:7; öְìֹçַéú , "a dish," 2Ki_2:20; âָּìִí , "to fold up," 2Ki_2:8; ðֹ÷ֵã , " a herdsman," 1Ki_3:4; Amo_1:1; àָñåּêְ , " an oil-cup," 1Ki_4:2; çָøִã àֶì , "to have a care for," 1Ki_4:13; æֹøֵø , "to sneeze," 4:35; öַ÷ְìåֹï , "a bag," 4:42; çָøַéè , "a money-bag," 5:23; úִּçֲðåֹú , "a camp" (?), 1Ki_6:8; ëֵּøֵָä , "a feast," 1Ki_6:23; ðְçַúַּéí , "descending," 1Ki_6:9; ÷ִá ,"a cab," 1Ki_6:25; çֲøֵé éåֹðַéí , "d dove's dung," ib.; îִëְáֵּø , perhaps " a fly-net," 1Ki_8:15; âֶּøֶí (in sense of " self," as in Chald. and Samar.), 1Ki_9:13; öַáּåּø ,"a heap," 1Ki_10:8; îֶìְúָּçָä ,' "a vestry," 1Ki_10:22; îָçֲøָàָä , "a draught-house," 1Ki_10:27; ëָּøַé . " Cherethites," 1Ki_11:4; 1Ki_11:19, and 2Sa_20:23 (kethib); îִñָּç , "a keeping off," 1Ki_11:6; îִëָּø , "an acquaintance," 1Ki_12:6; the form éåֹø , from éָøָä , "to shoot," 1Ki_13:17; áְּðֵé äִúִּòֲøֻáåֹú . "hostages," 1Ki_14:14; 2Ch_25:24; áֵּéú äִçָôְùַׁéú , "sick-house," 1Ki_15:5; 2Ch_26:21 ; ÷ָáָì , before," 1Ki_15:10; ãåּîֶùֶׂ÷ , " Damascus," 1Ki_16:10 (perhaps only a false reading); îִøְöֶôֶú . "a pavement," 1Ki_16:17; îåּñִêְ or îֵéñִêְ ,"a covered way, 1Ki_16:18; çָôָà , in Piel "to do secretly," 1Ki_17:9; àֲùֵׁéøָä , with é , 16, only besides Deu_7:5, Mic_5:14; ðָãָà , i. q. ðָãָä , 1Ki_17:21 (kethib); ùֹׁîְֵֹøðַéí , " Samaritans," Ki_17:29; ðְçֻùְׁúָּï , "Nehustan," 1Ki_18:4; àֹîְðָä , " a pillar," 1Ki_18:16; òָùָׂä áְøָëָä , "to make peace," 31; Isa_36:16; ñָçַéùׁ , " that which grows up the third year," 19:29; Isa_37:30; áֵּéú ðְëֹú , "treasure-house," 1Ki_20:13; Isa_39:2; îַùְׁðֶä , part of Jerusalem so called, 1Ki_21:14; Zep_1:10; Neh_11:9; îִæָּìåֹú , "-signs of the zodiac," 23:5; ôִּøְåָø , "a suburb," 23:11; âְּáַéí , "ploughmen," 25:12 (kethib); ùַׁðָּà for ùַׁðָּä , "to change," 25:9; àֵéëäֹ for àֵéëåֹ , 2Ki_6:13; àֲëַéìָä , "meat," 1Ki_19:8; àִìְîֻâַּéí "'almug trees," 1Ki_10:11-12; âָּäִø , "to stretch one's self," 1Ki_18:42; 2Ki_4:34-35; àֲôֵø , a "turban" (" ashes"), 1Ki_20:38; 1Ki_20:41; ãֹּáְøåֹú , "floats," 1Ki_5:9; éָöַéò "chambers," 1Ki_6:5-6; 1Ki_6:10; îִòֲáֶä , "clay," 1Ki_7:46; ðְùַׁø , "debt," 2Ki_4:7; ñִø , "heavy," 1Ki_20:43; 1Ki_21:4-5; ëּúֶֹøֶú , "chapter," only in Kings, Chronicles, and Jeremiah; îְæִîְּøåֹú , "snuffers," only in Kings, Chronicles, and Jeremiah; îְëåֹðָä , "base," only in Kings, Chronicles, Jeremiah, and Ezra. To these may be added the architectural terms in 1Ki_6:7 :and the names of foreign idols in 2 Kings 17. The general character of the language is most distinctly that of the time before the Babylonian captivity.
VI. Variations in the Septuagint.-These are very remarkable, and consist of transpositions, omissions, and some considerable additions, of all which Thenius gives some useful notices in his Introduction to the book of Kings.
1. The most important transpositions are the history of Shimei's death, 1Ki_2:36-46, which in the Sept. (Cod. Vat.) comes after 3:1, and divers scraps from ch. 4, 5, and 9, accompanied by one or two remarks of the translators. The sections 1Ki_4:20-25; 1Ki_4:2-6; 1Ki_4:26; 1Ki_4:21; 1Ki_4:1, are strung together and precede 1Ki_3:2-28, but many of them are repeated again in their proper places. The sections 1Ki_3:1; 1Ki_9:16-17, are strung together, and placed between 1Ki_4:34 and 1Ki_5:1. The section 1Ki_7:1-12, is placed after 1Ki_7:51. Section 1Ki_8:12-13, is placed after 53. Section 1Ki_9:15-22, is placed after 1Ki_10:22. Section 1Ki_11:43, 1Ki_12:1-3, is much transposed and confused in Sept. 11:43, 44, 1Ki_12:1-3. Section 1Ki_14:1-21, is placed in the midst of the long addition to Chronicles 12 mentioned below. Section 1Ki_22:42-50, is placed after 1Ki_16:28. Chap. 20 and 21 are transposed. Section 2Ki_3:1-3, is placed after 2Ki_1:18.
2. The omissions are few. Section 1Ki_6:11-14, is entirely omitted, and 37, 38 are only slightly alluded to at the opening of chap. 3. The erroneous clause 1Ki_15:6, is omitted; and so are the dates of Asa's reign in 16:8 and 15; and there are a few verbal omissions of no consequence.
3. The chief interest lies in the additions, of which the principal are the following. The supposed mention of a fountain as among Solomon's works in the Temple in the passage after 1 Kings ii, 35; of a paved causeway on Lebanon, 3:46; of Solomon pointing to the sun at the dedication of the Temple, before he uttered the prayer, ' The Lord said he would dwell in the thick darkness." etc., 8:12, 13 (after 53, Sept.), with a reference to the âßâëéïí ôῆò ᾠäῆò , a passage on which Thenius relies as proving that the Alexandrian had access to original documents now lost; the information that " Joram his brother" perished with Tibni, 16:22; an additional date " in the twenty-fourth year of Jeroboam," 15:8; numerous verbal additions, as 11:29, 17:1, etc.; and, lastly, the long passage concerning Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, inserted between 12:24 and 25. There are also many glosses of the translator, explanatory, or necessary in consequence of transpositions, as 1Ki_2:35; 1Ki_8:1; 1Ki_11:43; 1Ki_17:20; 1Ki_19:2, etc. Of the above, from the recapitulatory character of the passage after 1Ki_2:35, containing in brief the sum of the things detailed in 1Ki_7:21-23, it seems far more probable that ÊÑÇÍÇÍ ÔÇÓ ÁÕËÇÓ is only a corruption of ÊÑÉÍÏÍ ÔÏÕ ÁÉËÁÌ , there mentioned. The obscure passage about Lebanon after 3:46 seems no less certainly to represent what in the Heb. is 9:18, 19, as appears by the triple concurrence of Tadmor, Lebanon, and äõíáóôåýìáôá , representing îֶîְùִׁìְúּå . The strange mention of the sun seems to be introduced by the translator to give significance to Solomon's mention of the house which he had built for God, who had said he would dwell in the thick darkness; not therefore under the unveiled light of the sun; and the reference to "the book of song" can surely mean nothing else than to point out that the passage to which Solomon referred was Psa_97:2. Of the other additions, the mention of Tibni's brother Joram is the one which has most the semblance of an historical fact, or makes the existence of any other source of history probable. See, too, 1Ki_20:19; 2Ki_15:25.
There remains only the long passage about Jeroboam. That this account is only an apocryphal version, made up of the existing materials in the Hebrew Scriptures, after the manner of I Esdras, Bel and the Dragon, the apocryphal Esther, the Targums, etc., may be inferred on the following grounds. The framework of the story is given in the very words of the Hebrew narrative, and that very copiously, and the new matter is only worked in here and there. Demonstrably, therefore, the Hebrew account existed when the Greek one was framed, and was the original one. The principal new facts introduced, the marriage of Jeroboam to the sister of Shishak's wife, and his request to be permitted to return, is a manifest imitation of the story of Hadad. The misplacement of the story of Abijah's sickness, and the visit of Jeroboam's wife to Ahijah the Shilonite, makes the whole history out of keeping-the disguise of the queen, the rebuke of Jeroboam's idolatry (which is accordingly left out from Ahijah's prophecy, as is the mention at 5:2 of his having told Jeroboam he should be king), and the king's anxiety about the recovery of his son and heir. The embellishments of the story, Jeroboam's chariots, the amplification of Ahijah's address to Ano, the request asked of Pharaoh, the new garment not washed in water, are precisely such as an embellisher would add, as we may see by the apocryphal books above cited. Then the fusing down the three Hebrew names, öְøֵãָä , öְøåּòָä , and úַּøְöָä , into one, ÓáñéñÜ , thus giving the same name to the mother of Jeroboam, and to the city where she dwelt, shows how comparatively modern the story is, and how completely of Greek growth. A yet plainer indication is its confounding the Shemaiah of 1Ki_12:22 with Shemaiah the Nehelamite of Jer_29:24; Jer_29:31, and putting Ahijah's prophecy into his mouth; for, beyond all question, Å᾿íëáìß (1 Kings 12) is only another form of Áἰëáìßôçò (Jer_36:24, Sept.). Then, again, the story is selfcontradictory; for, if Jeroboam's child Abijam was not born till a year or so after Solomon's death, how could " any good thing toward the Lord God of Israel" have been found in him before Jeroboam became king? The one thing in the story that is more like truth than the Hebrew narrative is the age given to Rehoboam, sixteen years, which may have been preserved in the MS. which the writer of this romance had before him. The calling Jeroboam's mother ãõíὴ ðüñíç instead of ãõíὴ ÷ήñá was probably accidental.
On the whole, then, it appears that the great variations in the Sept. contribute little or nothing to the elucidation of the history contained in these books, nor much even to the text. The Hebrew text and arrangement is not in the least shaken in its main points, nor is there the slightest cloud cast on the accuracy of the history, or the truthfulness of the prophecies contained in it. But these variations illustrate a characteristic tendency of the Jewish mind to make interesting portions of the Scriptures the groundwork of separate religious tales, which they altered or added to according to their fancy, without any regard to history or chronology, and in which they exercised a peculiar kind of ingenuity in working up the Scripture materials, or in inventing circumstances calculated, as they thought, to make the main history more probable. The story of Zerubbabel's answer in I Esdras about truth, to prepare the way for his mission by Darius; of the discovery of the imposture of Bel's priests by Daniel, in Bel and the Dragon; of Mordecai's dream in the apocryphal Esther, and the paragraph in the Talmud inserted to connect 1Ki_16:34 with 17:1 (Smith's Sacr. Ann. ii, 421), are instances of this. The reign of Solomon, and the remarkable rise of Jeroboam, were not unlikely to exercise this propensity of the Hellenistic Jews. It is to the existence of such works that the variations in the Sept. account of Solomon and Jeroboam may most probably be attributed.
VII. Another feature in the literary condition of our books must be noticed, viz., that the compiler, in arranging his materials, and adopting the very words of the documents used by him, has not always been careful to avoid the appearance of contradiction. Thus the mention of the staves of the ark remaining in their place " unto this day" (1Ki_8:8) does not accord with the account of the destruction of the Temple (2Ki_25:9). The mention of Elijah as the only prophet of the Lord left (1Ki_18:22; 1Ki_19:10) has an appearance of disagreement with 20:13,28,35, etc., though 18:4, 19:18 supply, it is true, a ready answer. In 1Ki_21:13 only Naboth is mentioned, while in 2Ki_9:26 his sons are added. The prediction in 1Ki_19:15-17 has no perfect fulfilment in the following chapters. 1Ki_22:38 does not seem to be a fulfilment of 21:19. The declaration in 1Ki_9:22 does not seem in harmony with 11:28. There are also some singular repetitions, as 1Ki_14:21 compared with 31; 2Ki_9:29 with 8:25; 14:15, 16, with 13:12, 13. But it is enough just to have pointed these out, as no real difficulty can be found in them.
VIII. As regards the sources of information, it may truly be said that in the books of Kings we have the narrative of contemporary writers throughout. It has already been observed, SEE CHRONICLES, that there was a regular series of state annals both for the kingdom of Judah and for that of Israel, which embraced the whole time comprehended in the books of Kings, or at least to the end of the reign of Jehoiakim (2Ki_24:5). These annals are constantly cited by name as " the Book of the Acts of Solomon" (1Ki_11:41); and, after Solomon, " the Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah, or Israel" (e.g. 1Ki_14:29; 1Ki_15:7; 1Ki_16:5; 1Ki_16:14; 1Ki_16:20; 2Ki_10:34; 2Ki_24:5, etc.); and it is manifest that the author of Kings had them both before him while he drew up his history, in which the reigns of the two kingdoms are harmonized, and these annals constantly appealed to. (Similar phraseology is used in Est_10:2; Est_6:1, to denote the official annals of the Persian empire. Public documents are spoken of in the same way in Neh_12:23). But, in addition to these national annals, there were also extant, at the time that the books of Kings were compiled, separate works of the several prophets who had lived in Judah and Israel, and which probably bore the same relation to the annals as the historical parts of Isaiah and Jeremiah bear to those portions of the annals preserved in the books of Kings, i.e. were, in some instances at least, fuller and more copious accounts of the current events, by the same hands which drew up the more concise narrative of the annals, though in others perhaps mere duplicates. Thus the acts of Uzziah, written by Isaiah, were very likely identical for substance with the history of his reign in the national chronicles; and part of the history of Hezekiah we know was identical in the chronicles and in the prophet. The chapter in Jeremiah relating to the destruction of the Temple (ch. 52) is identical with that in 2 Kings 24, 25. In later times some have supposed that a chapter in the prophecies of Daniel was used for the national chronicles, and appears as Ezra 1. (Comp. also 2Ki_16:5 with Isa_7:1; 2Ki_18:8 with Isa_14:28-32). As an instance of verbal agreement, coupled with greater fulness in the prophetic account, see 2 Kings 20 compared with Isaiah 38, in which latter alone is Hezekiah's writing given.
These other works, then, as far as the memory of them has been preserved to us. were as follows (see Keil's Apolog. Vers.). For the time of David, the book of Samuel the seer, the book of Nathan the prophet, and the book of Gad the seer (2 Samuel 21-24 with 1 Kings 1, being probably extracted from Nathan's book), which seem to have been collected-at least that portion of them relating to David-into one work called " the Acts of David the king" (1Ch_29:29). For the time of Solomon, "the Book of the Acts of Solomon" (1Ki_11:41), consisting probably of parts of the " Book of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo the seer" (2Ch_9:29). For the time of Rehoboam, " the words of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies" (2Ch_12:15). For the time of Abijah, " the story ( îַãְøָùּׁ ) of the prophet Iddo" (2Ch_13:22).
For the time of Jehoshaphat," the words of Jehu, the son of Hanani" (2Ch_20:34). For the time of Uzziah, "the writings of Isaiah the prophet" (2Ch_26:22). For the time of Hezekiah, " the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz" (2Ch_32:32). For the time of Manasseh, a book called " the sayings of the seers," as the A.V., following the Sept., Vulg., Kimchi, etc., rightly renders the passage, in accordance with 2Ch_32:18 (2Ch_33:19), though others, following the grammar too servilely, make Chozai a proper name, because of the absence of the article. For the time of Jeroboam II, a prophecy of " Jonah, the son of Amittai the prophet, of Gath-hepher," is cited (2Ki_14:25); and it seems likely that there were books containing special histories of the acts of Elijah and Elisha, seeing that the times of these prophets are described with such copiousness. Of the latter Gehazi might well have been the author, to judge from 2Ki_8:4-5, as Elisha himself might have been of the former. Possibly, too, the prophecies of Azariah, the son of Oded, in Asa's reign (2Ch_15:1), and of Hanani (2Ch_16:7) (unless this latter is the same as Jehu, son of HIanani, as Oded is put for Azariah in 15:8), and Micaiah, the son of Imlah, in Ahab's reign; and Eliezer, the son of Dodavah, in Jehoshaphat's; and Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, in Jehoash's; and Oded, in Pekah's; and Zechariah, in Uzziah's reign; of the prophetess Huldah, in Josiah's, and others, may have been preserved in writing, some or all of them. These works, or at least many of them, must have been extant at the time when the books of Kings were compiled, as they certainly were extant much later when the books of Chronicles were put together by Ezra. But whether the author used them all, or only those duplicate portions of them which were embodied in the national chronicles, it is impossible to say, seeing he quotes none of them by name except the acts of Solomon and the prophecy of Jonah. On the other hand, we cannot infer from his silence that these books were unused by him, seeing that neither does he quote by name the Vision of Isaiah as the chronicler does, though he must, from its recent date, have been familiar with it, and seeing that so many parts of his narrative have every appearance of being extracted from these books of the prophets, and contain narratives which it is not likely would have found a place in the chronicles of the kings. See 1Ki_14:4, etc.; 16:1, etc., 11; 2 Kings 17, etc.
With regard to the work so often cited in the Chronicles as " the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah" (1Ch_9:1; 2Ch_16:11; 2Ch_27:7; 2Ch_28:26; 2Ch_32:32; 2Ch_35:27; 2Ch_36:8), it has been thought by some that it was a separate collection containing the joint histories of the two kingdoms; by others, that it is our books of Kings which answer to this description; but by Eichhorm, that it is the same as the Chronicles of the kings of Judah so constantly cited in the books of Kings; and this last opinion seems to be the best founded. For in 2Ch_16:11, the same book is called " the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel," which in the parallel passage, 1Ki_15:23; is called " the Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah." So, again, 2Ch_27:7, comp. with 2Ki_15:36; 2Ch_28:26, comp. with 2Ki_16:19; 2Ch_32:32, comp. with 2Ki_20:20; 2Ch_35:27, with 2Ki_23:28; 2Ch_36:8, with 2Ki_24:5. Moreover, the book so quoted refers exclusively to the affairs of Judah; and even in the one passage where reference is made to it as "the Book of the Kings of Israel" (2Ch_20:34), it is for the reign of Jehoshaphat that it is cited. Obviously, therefore, it is the same work which is elsewhere described as the Chronicles of Israel and Judah, and of Judah and Israel. Nor is this an unreasonable title to give to these chronicles.
Saul, David, Solomon, and in some sense Hezekiah (2Ch_30:1; 2Ch_30:5-6), and all his successors, were kings of Israel as well as of Judah, and therefore it is very conceivable that in Ezra's time the chronicles of Judah should have acquired the name of the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah. Even with regard to a portion of Israel in the days of Rehoboam, the chronicler remarks, apparently as a matter of gratulation, that "Rehoboam reigned over them" (2Ch_10:17); he notices Abijah's authority in portions of the Israelitish territory (2Ch_13:18-19; 2Ch_15:8-9); he not unfrequently speaks of Israel, when the kingdom of Judah is the matter in hand (as 2Ch_12:1; 2Ch_21:4; 2Ch_23:2, etc.), anti even calls Jehoshaphat " king of' Israel" (2Ch_21:2), and distilnguishes '"Israel and Judah" from "Ephraim and Manasseh" (30:1); he notices Hezekiah's authority from Dan to Beersheba (2Ch_30:5), and Josiah's destruction of idols throughout all the land of Israel (34:6-9), and his Passover for all Israel (35:17,18), and seems to parade the title "king of Israel" in connection with David and Solomon (35:3, 4), and the relation of the Levites to " all Israel" (2Ch_30:3); and therefore it is only in accordance with the feeling displayed in such passages that the name, " the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah," should be given to the chronicles of the Jewish kingdom. The use of this term in speaking of the " kings of Israel and Judah who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression" (1Ch_9:1) would be conclusive if the construction of the sentence were certain. But though it is absurd to separate the words " and Judah" from Israel, as Bertheau does (Curzgef Exeg. Handb.), following the Masoretic punctuation, seeing that the " Book of the Kings of Israel and Judath" is cited in at least six other places in Chronicles, still it is possible that Israel and Judah might be the antecedent to the pronoun understood before äָâְìåּ . It seems, however, mulch more likely that the antecedent to àֲùֶׁø is îִìְëֵé éù 8 åéä 8. 0n the whole, therefore, there is no evidence of the existence in the time of the chronicler of a history, since lost, of the two kingdoms, nor are the books of Kings the work so quoted by the chronicler, seeing he often refers to it for "the rest of the acts" of Kings, when he has already given all that is contained in our books of Kings. He refers, therefore, to the chronicles of Judah.
From the above authentic sources, then, was compiled the history in the books under consideration. Judging from the facts that we have in 2 Kings 17, 19, 20 the history of Hezekiah in the very words of Isaiah , 36-39; that, as stated above, we have several passages from Jeremiah in duplicate in 2 Kings, and the whole of Jeremiah 52 in 2Ki_24:18, etc., 25; that so large a portio