• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 1271 0

the Bible includes some of the earliest written history, as many scholars profess, it also includes some of the earliest “revisionist history.” The two books of Chronicles, in fact, practically define the notion of “revisionism” as changing historical facts to suit a specific purpose. These books, when read objectively, present some of the best evidence for the multiple—and very human—authorship of the Bible. These are awkward books, difficult to explain away in their numerous contradictions of other biblical materials. That is one reason they occupy different places in the Hebrew and Christian versions of the Bible. In the Hebrew scriptures, the books of Chronicles are placed at the end of the section called “Writings,” making them the final books in the Tanakh. In the Christian Old Testament, the two books of Chronicles follow Kings, falsifying the original order of the Hebrew scriptures.

The two books of Chronicles and the books of Ezra and Nehemiah may have once formed one longer book, and some scholars regard all four books as the work of a single author. Ancient Jewish authorities attributed the books to Ezra himself, but there is no proof of that. Whether he also wrote the other books or not, the “Chronicler’s” name and identity are a mystery. The manner in which the story is told and the way details have been altered in Chronicles suggest that the author was a Levite, or a member of the priestly clan. Recent scholarship suggests that the book was probably composed between 350 and 300 BCE.

Put simply, Chronicles is the ancient Reader’s Digest version of everything that has already taken place in the Bible, from Genesis on. It is abridged, condensed, simplified, and a lot of the nasty parts have been left out. That’s why it is a perfect example of revisionism. Essentially someone set out to tell the story of Israel and Judah from the creation of Adam to the beginnings of the Persian empire, culminating with the decree of Persia’s King Cyrus that the Jews exiled in Babylon could return to Jerusalem. But “he” wanted to tell a safer version with some considerable changes in details. These weren’t small details. For instance, David’s relationship with Bathsheba, a central event in the Samuel version, is ignored, and David’s role in planning the Temple is greatly enhanced. Solomon’s worst excesses are similarly glossed over, and Chronicles dwells on his more glorious achievements in constructing the Temple.

If tedium—or genealogy—is your cup of tea, the first nine chapters of 1 Chronicles may be for you. They contain long tables of “begats,” showing the descendants of the Israelite tribes, from Adam down to the time of King David. The rest of 1 Chronicles and most of 2 Chronicles deal with the reigns of David and Solomon and the subsequent history of the kingdom of Judah until the time of the Babylonian Exile. The material in Chronicles was clearly based upon the accounts in Samuel and Kings, which are quoted verbatim though never mentioned by name, as well as Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, and Ruth. In addition, some sixteen other sources are mentioned, such as “The Chronicles of Samuel the Seer,” “The Chronicles of Nathan the Prophet,” and “The Commentary on the Book of Kings,” titles that may refer to parts of a single book, now lost.

The “Chronicler” freely altered the facts to bring his version of history in line with his priestly viewpoint. As a “southerner,” he wrote as little as possible about the northern kingdom of Israel, since to him it did not represent the “true Israel.” His account emphasized the descendants of Judah in the genealogies. He omitted almost all information about the prophet Samuel and King Saul, the political difficulties and personal misdeeds of David and Solomon, and nearly all historical information about the northern kingdom. He also gives previously unrecounted details of the building and rituals of the First Temple and pays close attention to the role of the Levites and priests and temple singers. The “Chronicler” was interested in advocating a strict religious life for his own