One consequence of the first importance follows from this fact. An ancient historical writing often records unconsciously far more than the history of the period it purports to describe. Since much in it which is ascribed to a past age in reality reflects the conditions of the present, it follows that the work as a whole may be an invaluable commentary on the author’s own period. By taking into account this law of religious historiography, by studying the writer’s method of compilation, his use and manipulation of sources and the additions he has himself made to the story, we shall find in the completed book a mirror of the thoughts, the ideals, and the conditions of the age when it was produced.
Justification for these remarks can be drawn not only from the writings of the Old Testament but also from the study of ancient literature in general. Nowhere, however, are the principles and characteristics which we have outlined more clearly exemplified than in the books of Chronicles. They are the key to the comprehension of Chronicles; and, if they are borne in mind, what is generally considered a somewhat dull book of the Bible will be seen to be one of the most instructive pieces of ancient literature. At the same time, we shall be in a position to perceive and appreciate the religious enthusiasm which animated the Chronicler.
§ 2. Relation to Ezra and Nehemiah
It is well known that the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were originally one book; but further it is certain that Chronicles has been artificially separated from them, and that the three books, Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, were once a continuous work. The reasons upon which this conclusion is based are as follows:
(1) The ending of Chronicles and the beginning of Ezra are the same (2 Chronicles xxxvi. 22 f. = Ezra i. 1–3a), i.e. after the separation was made between Chronicles and Ezra–Nehemiah the opening verses of Ezra (recording the proclamation of Cyrus permitting the Jews to return) were retained, or perhaps one should say, were added by someone who was aware of the original continuity of Chronicles with Ezra–Nehemiah and who was anxious that Chronicles should end in a hopeful strain (see [note] on 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 23). The desirability of securing a hopeful conclusion is much more obvious in the Hebrew than in the English Bible, for, whereas in the English order Ezra immediately follows Chronicles, in the Hebrew Canon Ezra and Nehemiah are made to precede Chronicles, and Chronicles is actually the last book of the Hebrew Bible. (On the reason for this order in the Hebrew, and generally on the separation of Chronicles from Ezra–Nehemiah, see [§ 9], Position in the Canon, ad fin.)
(2) The same general standpoint and the same special interests are found both in Chronicles and Ezra–Nehemiah to a remarkable degree. In particular, attention may be called to the following points:
(a) The same fondness for lists and genealogies is shown in both works; compare e.g. 1 Chronicles xii. with Ezra ii. or Nehemiah iii.; and 2 Chronicles xxxi. 16–19 with Nehemiah vii. 63–65.
(b) The same intense interest in religious festivals and institutions; compare 1 Chronicles xv., xvi.; 2 Chronicles v.–vii., xxix., xxx., xxxv. 1–19, with Ezra iii., vi. 16–22; Nehemiah viii.
(c) Three classes of Temple attendants, viz. Levites, singers, and porters, which are barely mentioned in the rest of the Old Testament, receive a great deal of notice both in Chronicles and in Ezra–Nehemiah.