2 Chron. xx. 35., &c., and 1 Kings xxii. 49., &c., gravely ascribes it to the Chronicle-writer's "hatred against Israel." Were these charges really fact, the only wonder would be that the books ever obtained any kind of authority or respect.2 If these books are compared with those of Samuel and Kings, there will appear various classes of differences. : There are omissions: the domestic scene between Michal and David (2 Sam. vi. 20-23.); David's kindness to Mephibosheth (2 Sam. ix.); his adultery with Bathsheba (2 Sam. xi. 2—xii. 25.); Amnon's incest and Absalom's rebellion (2 Sam. xiv.-xix.) ; Sheba's insurrection (2 Sam. xx.); the giving up of Saul's sons to the Gibeonites (2 Sam. xxi. 1-14.); a Philistine war (2 Sam. xxi. 15-17. this was prior to that mentioned 1 Chron. xx. 4.); David's thanksgiving psalm and last words (2 Sam. xxii., xxiii. 1-7.); Adonijah's attempt on the throne, and the anointing of Solomon (1 Kings i.); David's charge to the latter (1 Kings ii. 1-9.); the settlement of Solomon's authority by the punishment of the insurgents (1 Kings ii. 13-46.); his marriage with Pharaoh's daughter (1 Kings iii. 1.); his wise judgment (1 Kings iii. 16-28.); his officers, magnificence, and wisdom (1 Kings iv. 1-v. 1.); the building of his palace (1 Kings vii. 1-12.); his strange wives and idolatry (1 Kings xi. 1-40.); and, finally, the history of the kingdom of the ten tribes.3 There are also facts added in Chronicles which are not noticed in Samuel or Kings: the list of the troops that came to David at Ziklag and Hebron, to make him king (1 Chron. xii.); his preparations for building the temple (xxii.); his numbering and arranging of the Levites and priests (xxiii.-xxvi.); his regulations for the army and officers (xxvii.); his last directions in an assembly of the people shortly before his death (xxviii. xxix.); then, in the history of Judah, the account of Rehoboam's fortifying his kingdom, his reception of the Levites who were driven out of Israel, his wives and children (2 Chron. xi. 5-24.); Abijah's war with Jeroboam (xiii. 3-20.); his wives and children (xiii. 21.); Asa's strengthening of his realm and victory over Zerah the Ethiopian (xiv. 3-14.); Azariah's address to him, in consequence of which he suppresses idolatry (xv. 1-15.); the reproof he receives from Hanani (xvi. 7—10.); Jehoshaphat's establishment of religion, his strength, and his army (xvii. 2.-xviii. 1.); the reproof he had from Jehu, and his judicial regulations (xix.); his victory over the Ammonites and others (xx. 1-30.); his providing appanages for his sons, whom his successor Jehoram puts to death (xxi. 2-4.); Jehoram's idolatry and punishment (xxi. 11-19.); death of the priest Jehoiada, and consequent apostacy of Joash (xxiv. 15-22.); Amaziah's military power (xxv. 5-10.), and idolatry (xxv. 14-16.); Uzziah's wars, victories, fortifications, and forces (xxvi. 6-15.); Jotham's fortifications and war with the Ammonites (xxvii. 4—6.); the cleansing of the temple, keeping of the passover, and re-establishment of religion under Hezekiah (xxix. 3.-xxxi. 21.); his riches (xxxii. 27-30.); Manasseh's captivity in Babylon, his deliverance and conversion (xxxiii. 11—17.).' Einleitung, § 190. p. 249. 2 See Hävernick, Einleitung, § 178. II. i. pp. 230, &c. Ibid. pp. 480, 481. There are, besides, fuller details of matters shortly noticed in Samuel and Kings. Thus, the list of David's heroes is given more largely in 1 Chron. xii. 11-47., than in 2 Sam. xxiii. 8., &c.; also the account of the carrying of the ark from Kirjath-jearim to its establishment in Zion (comp. 1 Chron. xiii. 2., xv. 2-21., xvi. 4-43., with 2 Sam. vi.). Other examples may be seen in Keil.1 Short historical additions are also made; as the fact that Joab was the first to enter the strong-hold of Zion and smite the Jebusites, and was hence appointed captain (comp. 1 Chron. xi. 6, 8. with 2 Sam. v. 8, 9.), &c. &c.2 Occasionally a few words are left out of a narrative. Thus comp. 1 Chron. x. 12., with 1 Sam. xxxi. 12.; 1 Chron. xiii. 7. with 2 Sam. vi. 3., &c. &c. There are also additional words, explanatory remarks, reflections, &c.; as in 1 Chron. xiii. 9., compared with 2 Šam. vi. 6. Comp., moreover, 1 Chron. xix. 2, 16. with 2 Sam. x. 2, 16.; v. 15. with v. 14.; 1 Chron. xx. 2. with 2 Sam. xii. 30., &c. &c. Further, differences are to be found in the spelling, as the more frequent use of the scriptio plena, in the employment of Aramæan and later forms, modes of construction, &c. &c., of which very many examples are given by Keil.5 All these variations make the task of exactly reconciling the different accounts not an easy one. But, if we bear in mind that there have been errors of transcription, and that we are often not acquainted with all the circumstances, the passages that present any considerable difficulty are but few. Frequently, indeed, the objections are of the most frivolous character. Thus 2 Chron. xiv. 2-5. is said to contradict xv. 17.; and 2 Chron. xvii. 6. to contradict xx. 33.6; on which Hävernick sensibly observes that the historian is speaking in one place of the high-places dedicated to idols, which were destroyed, in the other of those dedicated to Jehovah, which were not.7 Many of the alleged contradictions have been already considered": only one or two more shall be noticed here. 9 It is said that there is an evident mistake in 2 Chron. xx. 36., as compared with 1 Kings xxii. 48. The phrase "ships of Tharshish," in the last-named place may, it is allowed, be properly used, though the vessels were intended to go to Ophir; ships of Tharshish meaning very likely any large vessels fitted for a long_navigation. Whereas it is urged that ships would never be built at Ezion-Geber to go to Tharshish. Even Hävernick and Keil 10 admit an error here, and account for it by supposing that the phrase "ships of Tharshish" was misunderstood in the Chronicle-writer's time, and supposed by him to mean those which went to Tharshish. This, however, is very unlikely: he could hardly be so ignorant. But it is not easy to offer a better explanation as the text stands. The alteration of a single word would bring both passages into harmony. The lists also, 1 Chron. ix. 1-34., and Neh. xi. 3—36., do not Einleitung, § 142. p. 481. Ibid. pp. 485, 486. • Ibid. p. 484. Einleitung, p. 237. 2 Ibid. p. 482. De Wette, Einleitung, § 190. c. p. 247. agree. Keil supposes that they are not intended to be the same; and the student is recommended to consult his disquisition.' There is certainly a difficulty, whether we suppose them identical or not. But it must be repeated that, if no satisfactory explanation of this and the previously-noted discrepancy can be given now, it is somewhat bold to charge the errors, if errors there be, upon the author instead of on some transcriber.2 And the student must be reminded that the points of exact agreement between the various and independent writers throughout the scriptures are almost innumerable 3; those of stubborn discrepancy very few. A word may be said on the similarity of expressions used in Chronicles and Ezra. De Wette has noticed several'; but some that he has produced are of no weight. Surely no one can imagine that any proof of the identity of authorship is afforded by the fact that the same doxology is found in both books, Ezra iii. 11.; 1 Chron. xvi. 41.; 2 Chron. v. 13.; especially when this very doxology appears in more than one Psalm, Psalms cxviii. cxxxvi.] SECTION VIIL ON THE BOOK OF EZRA. I. Title and author.-II. Argument, scope, and synopsis of its contents.III. Observations on a spurious passage ascribed to Ezra. I. THE books of Ezra and Nehemiah were anciently reckoned by the Jews as one volume, and were divided by them into the first and second books of Ezra. The same division is recognized by the Greek and Latin churches; but the third book, assigned to Ezra, and received as canonical by the Greek church, is the same, in substance, as the book which properly bears his name, but interpolated. And the fourth book, which has been attributed to him, is a manifest forgery, in which the marks of falsehood are plainly discernible, and which was never unanimously received as canonical either by the Greek or by the Latin church, although some of the fathers have cited it, and the Latin church has borrowed some words out of it. It is not now extant in Greek, and never was extant in Hebrew. [Some critics, as Bialloblotzsky, Keil, and others have maintained that this book was composed throughout by one person. The former, endeavouring to account for the interchangeable use of the first and third persons in the narrative, cites Niebuhr as saying that "there is an essential difference between public events which a man recollects, though only as in a dream, to have heard of at the time when they occurred, and those which preceded his birth. The former we think of with reference to ourselves; the latter are foreign Einleitung, § 142. pp. 477, 478. 2 Stuart thinks it probable that the books of Chronicles, have been "negligently tran scribed." Hist. of Old Test. Canon, sect. vi. p.153. Such books as Blunt's Undesigned Coincidences cannot be too diligently perused. See also Rawlinson, Hist. Evid. of the Truth of the Script. Records, lectt. iii. iv. Einleitung, § 196 b. p. 262. See below, pp. 660, 661. to us. The epoch and duration of the former we measure by our own life, the latter belong to a period for which our imagination has no scale. Life and definiteness are imparted to all that we hear or read with respect to the events of our own life." These remarks will, he thinks, account for the enallage in question. There are frequent examples of it in the sacred volume, e. g. Ezek. i. 1—3.; Hos. i. 2-4., iii. 1. &c., &c. Nor is it uncommon in ordinary modern writings.1 It may, however, be doubted whether this reasoning is satisfactory. The instances cited are only from the prophetic books; and, though Hävernick conceives that Ezra imitated the prophetic style', it is not easy to believe in an imitation of this kind. The history of the first return from Babylon and of the building of the temple, chaps. i.—vi. presents some diversity from the rest of the book. The first person is never used, except chap. v. 4.; where it is probably to be ascribed to Tatnai and his companions. There are also varieties of expression, as "the law or book of Moses," (iii. 6.; vi. 18.); a phrase which is met with only once in the second part of the book (vii. 6.); while other phrases are elsewhere found (vii. 11, 12, 14, 21, 25., x. 3.). But this variation is of little weight, as the greater number of the passages referred to occur in a Persian state document. Nor are some others which are alleged more convincing. But there is a stronger proof in the fact that, not only are letters and decrees, but part of the history itself, in the former section written in Chaldee, (iv. 8-vi. 18.); while in the latter there is only one state paper in that dialect, vii. 12-26. It is not likely that a single author, unless writing at considerable intervals, would use two languages. The probability, then, seems to be that chaps. i.-vi. were not from Ezra's pen; and there is an equal probability that the remainder, chaps. vii.-x., was written by him. If so, he must have had the previous part before him, and have intended to continue it by the introductory words, vii. 1. It is urged against this view that viii. 1–26. and x. stand apart from the rest, in the use of the third person; and also that Ezra would scarcely have spoken of himself in such terms as we find vii. 6, 10. These objections are by no means decisive; what possible impropriety could there be in a man's declaring that it was his purpose, that "he had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it"? St. Paul's language of himself was stronger, Acts xxiii. 1., xxiv. 16.; Phil. iii. 13, 14, 17, &c. &c. If, however (and the matter is a balance of probabilities) a different view is taken, it must be supposed that some final editor incorporated Ezra's own narrative, vii. 27ix. 15., with other documents, connecting them into a continuous history.] II. The book of Ezra harmonizes most strictly with the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah, which it materially elucidates (comp. Ezra v. with Hagg. i. 12. and Zech. iii. iv.). It evinces the paternal care of Jehovah over his chosen people, whose history it relates from 'Kitto's Cycl. of Bibl. Lit. art. Ezra. Einleitung, § 183. II. i. p. 281. VOL. II. UU the time of the edict issued by Cyrus, to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus-a period of about seventy-nine, or, according to some chronologers, of one hundred years.' [If the book be considered as carrying on the history to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, the time comprised in it cannot be less than ninety-two years; but it would seem hardly to go beyond Artaxerxes' eighth year.] This book consists of two principal divisions: the first contains a narrative of the return of the Jews from Babylon under the conduct of Zerubbabel; and the second gives an account of the reformation of religion under Ezra. PART I. From the return of the Jews under Zerubbabel to the re-building of the temple (i.vi.). 1. The edict of Cyrus, permitting the Jews to return into Judæa and re-build the temple; account of the people who first returned under the conduct of Zerubbabel, and of their offerings towards re-building the temple (i. ii.). 2. The building of the temple commenced, but hindered by the Samaritans (iii. iv.). 3. The temple finished in the sixth year of Darius Hystaspes, by the encouragement of the decree issued in the second year of his reign (v. vi). PART II. The arrival of Ezra at Jerusalem, and the reformation made there by him (vii.—x.). 1. The departure of Ezra from Babylon with a commission from Artaxerxes Longimanus (vii.). 2. Account of his retinue and arrival at Jerusalem (viii.). 3. Narrative of the reformation effected by him (ix. `x.). The zeal and piety of Ezra appear, in this book, in a most conspicuous point of view: his memory has always been held in the highest reverence by the Jews, who consider him as a second Moses: though not expressly styled a prophet, he wrote under the influence of the Divine Spirit; and the canonical authority of his book has never been disputed. [Zunz has objected to its credibility, on the ground that the history in chap. i. is made up from v. 13-16., and vi. 3-5., and that the numbers, i. 9-11, are excessive. But these are groundless surmises. He also alleges an anachronism; for Ezra (x. 6.) goes into the chamber of Johanan, son of Eliashib; whereas this high-priest lived (Neh. xii. 22, 23.) long after Nehemiah. But Johanan might have been the son of the Eliashib mentioned Neh. xiii. 4, 7.'] Ezra is said to have died in the hundred and twentieth year of his age, and to have been buried at Jerusalem. III. In Justin Martyr's conference with Trypho the Jew, there is a very extraordinary passage respecting the typical import of the passover, cited by that father; in which Ezra, in a specch made before the celebration of the passover, expounds the mystery of it as clearly relating to Christ; and which, Justin concludes, was at a very early day expunged from the Hebrew copies by the Jews, as too manifestly favouring the cause of Christianity. The passage 'See Zunz, Die Gottesdienstl. Vörtrage, pp. 21. &c.; and Keil, Einleitung, § 150. p |