Bibliography
| Title: History of Interpretation. The Book of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition from Daniel to Spinoza Secondary Title: RB Volume: 105 Pages: 5-41 Type: Journal Article Year: 1998 Abstract: Harrington, Daniel J. in: NTAb 43.1 (1999), 120: "This history of the interpretation of 1 and 2 Chronicles covers its utilization in biblical and pseudoepigraphical literature (Daniel, 1 Esdras, Sirach, Lives of the Prophets, etc), by Jewish-Hellenistic historians (Eupolemus, Josephus), in the Dead Sea scrolls (biblical manuscripts, 4Q522), in rabbinic literature (Mishnah, Talmud and Midrashim; Targum; Jewish liturgy) in the mosaic inscription of the ancient synagogue at En-Gedi, by medieval commentators, and by J.S. del Medigo and B. de Spinoza".
Begg, Christopher T. in: OTA 21.3 (1998), 443-444: "Chronicles has received marginal attention among Jews. The utilization of Chronicles can be seen in Daniel, the Pseudepigrapha, Eupolemus, and Josephus Flavius. It was used in the Qumran community less than the majority of biblical books. 4Q522 reveals that the author's writing depended on Chronicles. The classification of Chronicles among the Hagiographa does not show prejudice of the Rabbis against it. They may have attempted to contrast the climax of the Hebrew Canon with that of the Christian one. Chronicles may have been considered as a summary of the entire Scriptures as well. The Rabbinic tradition talks about one comprehensive book by the authors Ezra and Nehemiah. There are examples of folk etymologies formed by the Rabbis from Chronides1 genealogies, but there is no extant midrashic book based on Chronicles. The Targum on this book was written much later than those on other biblical books and was neglected through the generations. Jewish liturgy made little reference to Chronicles. There is a utilization of 1 Chr 1:1-4 and perhaps also 1 Chr 16:36b; 2 Chr 16:9b in the mosaic inscription of the ancient synagogue at En-Gedi from the Byzantine period. The commentary ascribed to Rashi in Mikraot Gedolot is not by him. Several other Jewish commentators have written on Chronicles in medieval times; however, these do not outweigh the general lack of interest in the book. Joseph Solomon del Medigo opposed the trustworthiness of Chronicles and Benedictus de Spinoza preferred some pseudepigraphical books to it. Although these writers' statements did not encourage scholars to study the book, they opened the critical era in the study of Chronicles. The positive result of Jewish neglect of the book was that Chronicles' text remained in much better condition than did that of many other biblical books". |