of the present were represented as facts of the past. The converse of this tendency was also in force. As the present sought the support of the authority of the past, so the past could only continue to be deemed important provided it conformed to some extent with the beliefs and ideals of the present. Ideas change and expand. Thus it was quite impossible in the Chronicler’s time to represent the age of David and Solomon as great and glorious unless the moderate figures given in Kings were altered to correspond with the ideas of men accustomed to think of the mighty armies of the Persian monarchs or of Alexander the Great. As Kuenen says, “In ancient times, and specifically in Israel, the sense of historic continuity could only be preserved by the constant compliance on the part of the past with the requirements of the present, that is to say by the constant renovation and transformation of the past. This may be called the Law of religious historiography” (_The Modern Review_, vol. i. [1880], p. 705). 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: