them. It is possible, and indeed probable, that in the one " book of the Chronicles," the memoirs of the three historians had been condensed, arranged, and harmonized; but it hardly admits of doubt that the latter were the originals of the former. And the same remarks apply, mutatia mutandis, to the "book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah." The history of Rehoboam in 1 Kings xii. 1-19 is identical with the account of that monarch in 2 Chron. x. 1-4 ; the words of 1 Kings xii. 20-24 are the same that are found in 2 Chron. xi. 1-4; while 2 Chron. xii. 18 is practically a repetition of 1 Kings xiv. 21. But the authority to which our author refers is the " book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah," whereas that mentioned by the Chronicler is '' the book of Shemaiah tM prophet, and of Iddo the seer." Now it is clear that these parallel passages are derived from the same source, and that source m11Bt be the book or books of these two prophets.* Nor does it invalidate this contention that the Chronicler, in addition to the prophetic writings just named, also cites occasionally the "book of the kings of Israel and Judah" (2 Chron. xvi. 11; xxv. 26; xxvii. 7; xxviii. 26; xxxii. 32; xxxv. 27, &c.); in one place apparently called" the book of the kings of Israel'' (2 Chron. xx. 84), together with a. "Midrash of the book of the Kings" (2 CbJ:on. xxiv. 27). For we have no evidence whatso- ever that any of these authorities were of a public and civil character. On the contrary, we have ground for believing that they were composed of the memoirs of the prophets. It is not quite clear what the Midrash just referred to was, but the two works first cited were probably identical with " the Books of the Chronicles '' so often mentioned by our historian. And in one case (2 Chron. xx. 84), we have distinct mention of a. prophetio book or writing-that of J ehu, the son of Hanani-which was embodied in the book of the kings of Israel. t We can hardly be mistaken, therefore, in concluding from these data that the pl'ime " sources of this work " were really the prophetic memoirs mentioned by the Chronicler (1 Chron. xx.vii. 24; xxix. 29 ; 2 Chron. ix. 29; xii. 15; xiii. 22; xx. 84; xxiv. 27; xx.vi. 22 ; xxxii. 82; xxxiii. 18) which, together, perhaps, with other writings, the authors of which are unknown to us, furnish the materials for the " Books of the Words of the Days," &o. The relation of the Kmos to the Books of the CHBoNioLEs will be more appropriately discussed in the Introduction to that volume.
• The faot that the Chronicler alleges hie authority, and that a different one from the authority given by the Kmas, forbids the assumption that the agreemeni is the resuU of copying on the part of the former from the latter. t i17P,h, literally w:is made to a.,cend upon, i.e., was introduced or inoorp0rated into the history of the kings of Iarael, rlv INTRODUCTION TO
VII. CREDIBILITY. But the question may possibly arise, Are these writings, whatever their origin, to be accepted as authentic, sober history ? It is a question, happily, which may be dismissed with few words, for their veracity has never been seriously doubted. If we except the miraculous portions of the history-to which the only serious objection is that they are miraculous, and therefore in the nature of things must be mythical-there is absolutely no reason for challenging the veracity and honesty of the narrative. Not only has it throughout the air of sober history; not only is it accepted as such-including the supernatural portions-by our Lord and His apostles (Matt. vi. 29; xi. 14; Luke iv. 25-27; ix. 8, 64; Mark i. 6; Acts vii. 47, 48; Rom. xi. 8, 4; Heb. xi. 85; Jamesv. 17, 18; Rev. ii. 20; xi. 9), but it is everywhere confirmed by the monuments of antiquity and the records of profane historians, whensoever it and they happen to have points of contact. The reign of Solomon, for example, his friendly relations with Hiram, ·his Temple, and his wisdom are mentioned by the Tyrian historians, from whom Dins and Menander of Ephesus derived their information (Jos., Contra Apion. i. sectt. 17, 18). The proficiency of the Zidonians in the mechanical arts and their knowledge of the sea is attested both by Homer and Herodotus.* The invasion of J ttdah by Shishak in the reign of Reho- boam, and the conquest of many of the cities of Palestine, is proved by the inscription of Karnak. t The name and the importance of Omri are pro- claimed by the inscriptions of Assyria, which also tell of the defeat of "Ahab of Jezreel " by the Assyrian armies, of the defeat of Azariah, and the conquest of Samaria and Damascus by Tiglath Pileser.t And, to pass by later matters and points of less moment, the recently discovered Moabite stone bears its silent but most striking witness to the conquest of Moab by Omxi, and its oppression by him, and by his son and successor, for forty years,§ and to the successful rebellion of Moab against Israel, II and also mentions by name Mesha, Omxi, Chemosh, and Jehovah. In the face of such remarkable and minute corroborations of the statements of our historian, and in the absence of any wellsfounded instances of misstatement on his part, and, indeed, of any solid grounds for impeaching his historical accuracy, it would be the very wantonness of criticism to deny the credibility and truthfulness of these records. VIII. CHRONOLOGY. There is one particnla.r, however, in which Olll' text, as it now stands, is open to some suspicion, and that is the matter of datea. Some of these, it • See note on eh. v. 6. t See note on oh. xiv. 2G. t See notes on 2 Kings xvi. 7-16. I See note on 2 Kings i 1, and ill. ,, i, II Bee Dote OD 2 Kings iii. a. THE BOOKS OF THE KINGS. xv