⬅ Back to Bible page
Introduction to the Historical Books
The books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther are altogether termed the "Histories," this is a misleading title, however, as the genres of the books are diverse and are often not historical in the modern sense of the word. Furthermore, the Bible contains several books that are similar to some of these "historical books," yet they are found in different sections of the bible. In the traditional Jewish view, the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are called the Former Prophets, thus beginning the second major division of the Hebrew Bible, the Prophets. This designation suggests that these books should be viewed as prophecy, and not as history. The books of Ruth, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther are known collectively as the Writings.
A division is established here between the objective retelling of past events as literal history for the sake of defining that history, and the usage of past events as a narrative shorthand to serve as a basis for the observance of a central set of laws or practices, namely, Exodus.
The division of some biblical writings into separate books is oftentimes arbitrary: It has been proposed that since the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, along with the preceding book of Deuteronomy, fit so well together, these five books were edited together as a single work. This work is typically called the Deuteronomistic History, meaning the history written under the influence of ideas found in the book of Deuteronomy. Many details of this theory are debated, however; some scholars suggest that these books are not unified enough to be the product of a single movement. For example, the book of Samuel shows remarkably few contacts with the language of Deuteronomy, and the book of Kings, in its final form, contains narratives in which the great prophets Elijah and Elisha are legitimately active outside the Jerusalem Temple.
Scholars have also found many similarities between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah and have posited that these works belong to a single large history that parallels the Deuteronomistic History. The author of these books is often called "the Chronicler." A closer look at Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, however, shows that they differ from each other in outlook and vocabulary, and that hte general similarities between them are best attributed not to common authorship but to the shared era in which they were written, most likely the fourth century BCE.
Chronicles is a retelling of Genesis through Kings. It is likely that its author used a form of the Torah, along with some other books now in our bible, that was very close to the form we now know them. Chornicles is most notable for how it uses and changes its sources to suit a particular narrative, however. A key example is the long-lived reign of King Manasseh, a particularly evil King of Judah. The book of Kings (which Chronicles seeks to recount) does not have a clear retribution theory, that is, a theory concerning divine punishment and reward. This is awkward because, for many biblical writers, a long life was a sign of divine favor. The contradiction between the behavior of Manasseh and his long reign is reconciled by the Chronicler, who, himself very much believing in retribution theology, simply adjusted the facts of Manasseh's life, entering his own narrative and interpretation into the record:
The Lord spoke to Manasseh and to his people, but they gave no heed. Therefore the Lord brought against them the commanders of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh captive in manacles, bound him with fetters, and brought him to Babylon. While he was in distress he entreated the favor of the Lord his God and humbled himself greatly before the God of his ancestors. He prayed to him, and God received his entreaty, heard his plea, and restored him again to Jerusalem and to his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord indeed was God.
Other examples of this type of revisionism are found throughout Chronicles. They are especially easy to isolate since we have much of the same material that this author revised—it is preserved in our Bible.
The books of Ruth and Esther are short stories, historical fictions that incorporate literary convention, prose, and setpieces in order to narrate a past to the ends of conveying their lessons.
The books of Ezrah-Hehemiah, frequently told from a first-person perspective, purport to be individual and accurate accounts of the events described, and though they were seemingly written closer to those events than most other biblical retellings (that are often centuries removed before being put to paper), this does not mean they are any more accurate. Ideology may motivate the speedy reshaping of the past in this manner: Ezrah-Nehemiah is highly ideological, interested in fostering the importance of the Torah as the central document of the postexilic community, and in emphasizing the grave dangers of intermarriage.
Introduction to the Historical Books
The books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther are altogether termed the "Histories," this is a misleading title, however, as the genres of the books are diverse and are often not historical in the modern sense of the word. Furthermore, the Bible contains several books that are similar to some of these "historical books," yet they are found in different sections of the bible. In the traditional Jewish view, the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are called the Former Prophets, thus beginning the second major division of the Hebrew Bible, the Prophets. This designation suggests that these books should be viewed as prophecy, and not as history. The books of Ruth, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther are known collectively as the Writings.
A division is established here between the objective retelling of past events as literal history for the sake of defining that history, and the usage of past events as a narrative shorthand to serve as a basis for the observance of a central set of laws or practices, namely, Exodus.
The division of some biblical writings into separate books is oftentimes arbitrary: It has been proposed that since the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, along with the preceding book of Deuteronomy, fit so well together, these five books were edited together as a single work. This work is typically called the Deuteronomistic History, meaning the history written under the influence of ideas found in the book of Deuteronomy. Many details of this theory are debated, however; some scholars suggest that these books are not unified enough to be the product of a single movement. For example, the book of Samuel shows remarkably few contacts with the language of Deuteronomy, and the book of Kings, in its final form, contains narratives in which the great prophets Elijah and Elisha are legitimately active outside the Jerusalem Temple.
Scholars have also found many similarities between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah and have posited that these works belong to a single large history that parallels the Deuteronomistic History. The author of these books is often called "the Chronicler." A closer look at Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, however, shows that they differ from each other in outlook and vocabulary, and that hte general similarities between them are best attributed not to common authorship but to the shared era in which they were written, most likely the fourth century BCE.
Chronicles is a retelling of Genesis through Kings. It is likely that its author used a form of the Torah, along with some other books now in our bible, that was very close to the form we now know them. Chornicles is most notable for how it uses and changes its sources to suit a particular narrative, however. A key example is the long-lived reign of King Manasseh, a particularly evil King of Judah. The book of Kings (which Chronicles seeks to recount) does not have a clear retribution theory, that is, a theory concerning divine punishment and reward. This is awkward because, for many biblical writers, a long life was a sign of divine favor. The contradiction between the behavior of Manasseh and his long reign is reconciled by the Chronicler, who, himself very much believing in retribution theology, simply adjusted the facts of Manasseh's life, entering his own narrative and interpretation into the record:
The Lord spoke to Manasseh and to his people, but they gave no heed. Therefore the Lord brought against them the commanders of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh captive in manacles, bound him with fetters, and brought him to Babylon. While he was in distress he entreated the favor of the Lord his God and humbled himself greatly before the God of his ancestors. He prayed to him, and God received his entreaty, heard his plea, and restored him again to Jerusalem and to his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord indeed was God.
Other examples of this type of revisionism are found throughout Chronicles. They are especially easy to isolate since we have much of the same material that this author revised—it is preserved in our Bible.
The books of Ruth and Esther are short stories, historical fictions that incorporate literary convention, prose, and setpieces in order to narrate a past to the ends of conveying their lessons.
The books of Ezrah-Hehemiah, frequently told from a first-person perspective, purport to be individual and accurate accounts of the events described, and though they were seemingly written closer to those events than most other biblical retellings (that are often centuries removed before being put to paper), this does not mean they are any more accurate. Ideology may motivate the speedy reshaping of the past in this manner: Ezrah-Nehemiah is highly ideological, interested in fostering the importance of the Torah as the central document of the postexilic community, and in emphasizing the grave dangers of intermarriage.