II Chronicles 26:22-23 · Bible study
2 Chronicles 26:22-23 Commentary: Why Isaiah's Lost Record Matters
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does the Chronicler cite Isaiah's now-lost history of Uzziah? Analysis of burial, leprosy, and prophetic authority.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The Chronicler concludes Uzziah’s reign by noting Isaiah’s prophetic record and the king’s isolated burial as a leper.
- Key words: wrote (כתב, Qal perfect, Isaiah completed the record); leper (מצורע, passive participle, he was in a state of leprosy); field of burial (שדה הקבורה, a separate plot near the royal tombs).
- Main debate: Why cite a lost source? (Authentication of the Chronicler’s account vs. emphasis on prophetic interpretation of history.)
- Theological theme: Sin’s consequences extend beyond death; God’s truth is faithfully recorded by prophets even when human leaders fall.
- Best use: A warning about pride and presumption, and a reminder that God’s word endures beyond any king’s reputation.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
22As for the rest of the acts of Uzziah, from beginning to end, they are recorded by the prophet Isaiah son of Amoz.
23And Uzziah rested with his fathers and was buried near them in a field of burial that belonged to the kings; for the people said, “He was a leper.” And his son Jotham reigned in his place.
WEB World English Bible 2000
22Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, wrote.
23So Uzziah slept with his fathers; and they buried him with his fathers in the field of burial which belonged to the kings, for they said, “He is a leper.” Jotham his son reigned in his place.
KJV King James Version 1769
22Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write.
23So Uzziah slept with his fathers, and they buried him with his fathers in the field of the burial which belonged to the kings; for they said, He is a leper: and Jotham his son reigned in his stead.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
22Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write.
23So Uzziah slept with his fathers; and they buried him with his fathers in the field of burial which belonged to the kings; for they said, He is a leper: and Jotham his son reigned in his stead.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
22And the rest of the matters of Uzziah, the first and the last, hath Isaiah son of Amoz the prophet written;
23and Uzziah lieth with his fathers, and they bury him with his fathers, in the field of the burying-place that the kings have, for they said, `He is a leper;' and reign doth Jotham his son in his stead.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
22And the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz write.
23And Uzziah slept with his fathers; and they buried him with his fathers in the burial-ground of the kings, for they said, He is a leper. And Jotham his son reigned in his stead.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
22But the rest of the acts of Ozias first and last were written by Isaias the son of Amos, the prophet.
23And Ozias slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the field of the royal sepulchres, because he was a leper: and Joatham his son reigned in his stead.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · II Chronicles 26:22
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that verse 22 refers to a historical work written by the prophet Isaiah, now lost. Gill, Barnes, and Clarke each state that Isaiah’s writing on Uzziah is not preserved in the canonical book of Isaiah. The Cambridge Bible notes this detail is absent from Kings. On verse 23, the consensus is that Uzziah’s burial in a separate field, not in the royal tombs, was a direct consequence of his leprosy. Barnes and Clarke both connect this to the law in Leviticus 13:46, which isolated lepers from the community even in death. The Chronicler’s point is clear: Uzziah’s punishment did not end at death. The shame of his sin followed him to the grave. Yet the passage also quietly underscores God’s faithfulness, Jotham took the throne, the line of David continued, and a prophet had been recording events all along.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Source-authentication view: The Chronicler cites a known work (Isaiah’s history) to establish the credibility of his account, following a pattern used for other kings (2 Chronicles 9:29; 12:15).
- Prophetic-emphasis view: Naming Isaiah as both prophet and historian signals that the true interpretation of Uzziah’s reign comes from God’s spokesman, not from royal annals alone.
What is clear: Uzziah died a leper because of his pride, was buried apart from the royal tombs, and was succeeded by his son Jotham.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| The lost source of Isaiah | Isaiah wrote a historical account of Uzziah’s reign that is not preserved in the biblical book of Isaiah. | Some see this as a standard editorial formula that authenticates the Chronicler’s work; others argue it highlights the prophet’s role as God’s interpreter of history, giving theological weight to the narrative. |
| The burial location | Uzziah was buried in a field that belonged to the kings but not in the royal tombs proper. | Was this due entirely to ritual defilement (the corpse of a leper polluted the grave) or did it also carry a social and symbolic penalty, making his shame permanent in the eyes of the people? |
| The cause of leprosy | The Chronicler directly links Uzziah’s leprosy to his prideful act of offering incense in the temple. | The parallel in 2 Kings 15:5 only reports the leprosy without giving a reason. Some scholars wonder if the Chronicler added this cause as a theological lesson; others accept it as historical tradition preserved only in this source. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Uzziah’s (also called Azariah) reign of 52 years was one of the longest and most prosperous in Judah’s history. He fortified Jerusalem, reorganized the army, and developed agriculture (2 Chronicles 26:6, 15). But success bred pride.
Verses 16, 21 tell the crucial backstory: Uzziah entered the temple to burn incense, a duty reserved for priests. When eighty priests confronted him, he grew angry. At that moment leprosy broke out on his forehead. He was rushed out and lived in isolation until his death. The Chronicler alone reports the cause of this judgment; Kings only mentions the leprosy (2 Kings 15:5).
Isaiah the prophet began his ministry during Uzziah’s reign and dated his temple vision to the year the king died (Isaiah 6:1). The Chronicler’s note that Isaiah “wrote” the rest of Uzziah’s acts (v. 22) fits a pattern in Chronicles: earlier kings also had their deeds recorded by prophets (Nathan for Solomon, Shemaiah for Rehoboam, see 2 Chronicles 9:29; 12:15). These were historical works, not the same as the prophetic books we have today.
Burial in “the field of burial which belonged to the kings” (v. 23) was a compromise. Jewish tradition held that a leper’s corpse would defile the royal tombs. Barnes notes this followed the logic of Leviticus 13:46: separation in life meant separation in death. So Uzziah lay in the same plot but not in the same graves. The people’s words, “He is a leper”, echoed his living condition and sealed his posthumous disgrace.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for these verses. The Hebrew text is stable across major manuscripts. The name Uzziah appears consistently, whereas Kings uses the name Azariah for the same king (2 Kings 15:1, 7), but this does not affect the passage itself.
Reception History
Matthew Henry (1710) called this “the only blot we find on the name of king Uzziah” and noted it was unique among Judah’s kings, his sin was not idolatry or murder but the presumption of priestly office. The Jewish historian Josephus (first century AD) embellished the story by adding that an earthquake occurred when Uzziah threatened the priests, and that a ray of sunlight striking his face produced the leprosy (Antiquities 9.10.4). Early Christian writers often used Uzziah as a caution against pride, linking his isolation to the separation of the sinner from God’s presence. The phrase “slept with his fathers” appears throughout the books of Kings and Chronicles as a standard formula for a king’s death, yet here it carries an additional sting, he could not rest among them.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The prophet’s pen outlasts the king’s pride. Isaiah wrote the full account of Uzziah, the good and the bad. God preserves a true record of every life, not just the successes.
- Separation in death reveals the cost of presumption. Uzziah died isolated, buried apart from his fathers. His attempt to take what was not his cost him not only his throne but also his place among the dead kings.
- A throne continues even after a fall. Jotham reigned in his place. God’s promises to David did not end with one man’s sin. Grace carries the story forward.
Five-point outline
- The source we lack: Why does the Chronicler mention Isaiah’s lost book? To show that God’s prophets were the true historians.
- The judgment that sticks: Leprosy as a visible sign of the heart’s condition.
- The burial that whispers: Not in the tomb, not among the honored dead, a lesson in humility.
- The voice that condemns: “He is a leper”, the verdict of the community.
- The son who steps up: Jotham’s succession is a quiet hope in this dark end.
Illustration hooks
- A company founder who built a successful business but was later convicted of fraud. His name is remembered, but now joined with shame, not honor.
- A respected community leader whose fall from grace leaves him isolated in retirement. People still say “Remember what happened”, a social leprosy.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why does God let successful people fall so hard?
- Is God’s punishment of Uzziah fair, he only wanted to worship?
- What does it mean that Isaiah wrote this history but it's lost? Does that weaken the Bible’s reliability?
Leading a Discussion
This passage closes Uzziah’s story on two notes: a prophet wrote his record, and his burial was separate because of leprosy. The Chronicler could have just said “he died and was buried.” Instead he adds these details. Why? These questions help your group explore the text.
Discussion questions
- Read verses 22, 23 aloud. What stands out to you about how Uzziah’s reign is summarized?
- Why do you think the Chronicler mentions that Isaiah wrote about Uzziah? What does that tell you about how God preserves history?
- Compare this burial with the royal burials of other kings (e.g., 2 Chronicles 21:20 for Jehoram). What does the location say about Uzziah’s legacy?
- The people said “He is a leper.” How does public opinion match or differ from God’s judgment in this story?
- Uzziah’s sin was pride and disobedience (v. 16). In what ways can success lead us to step outside God’s boundaries?
- Jotham became king in his place. How does God’s mercy still appear even in a story of judgment?
- If you were to write a summary of your life “first and last,” what would you want recorded? How does knowing that God’s prophet writes true history affect how you live today?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| II Chronicles 9:29 | Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, aren’t they written in the history of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat? |
| II Chronicles 12:15 | Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, aren’t they written in the histories of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer, in the genealogies? There were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually. |
| Isaiah 1:1 | The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. |
| Isaiah 6:1 | In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up; and his train filled the temple. |
| II Kings 15:6 | Now the rest of the acts of Azariah, and all that he did, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? |
| II Kings 15:7 | Azariah slept with his fathers; and they buried him with his fathers in David’s city; and Jotham his son reigned in his place. |
| II Chronicles 21:20 | He was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years. He departed with no one’s regret. They buried him in David’s city, but not in the tombs of the kings. |
| II Chronicles 26:18 | They resisted Uzziah the king, and said to him, “It isn’t for you, Uzziah, to burn incense to Yahweh, but for the priests the sons of Aaron, who are consecrated to burn incense. Go out of the sanctuary, for you have trespassed. It will not be for your honor from Yahweh God.” |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
8 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke notes that Isaiah's full written account of Uzziah's reign is lost, as no such history survives in the prophet's writings. He also observes that Uzziah's leprosy prevented him from being buried in the royal tombs, since even a leper's corpse was considered defiling.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes notes that Isaiah, likely only about twenty when Uzziah died, must have written his history of the king’s reign from documents rather than from firsthand knowledge. He also explains that Jewish custom, following the law’s separation of lepers during life, required Uzziah to be buried in a separate tomb within the same burial field.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
II Chronicles 26:22 did Isaiah … write ] This statement is not in Kings. Uzziah is mentioned in Isa_6:1 . II Chronicles 26:23 the field of the burial ] R.V. the field of burial . In Kings, “in the city of David.” d
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva notes highlight that Uzziah, though a king, was denied burial in the royal tombs because he was a leper. His acts were recorded by the prophet Isaiah, but his disease set him apart even in death, buried in a nearby field rather than with his fathers.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill points out that Isaiah recorded Uzziah's acts in a now-lost historical book, not in his prophetic writings. He also notes that Uzziah died the same year he was struck with leprosy, and that Isaiah received his famous temple vision in that same year.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB notes that this king was not buried in the royal tombs themselves but in the nearby field set aside for kings, because his leprosy would have defiled the main sepulcher. The place of burial thus reflects the ceremonial uncleanness he carried, setting him apart even in death.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch stresses that Uzziah's sin was not ordinary pride but a deliberate violation of the divinely appointed priesthood: he intruded into the sanctuary to burn incense, a duty reserved for Aaronite priests alone. This transgression, unlike anything David or Solomon attempted, brought leprosy as immediate punishment, paralleling Miriam's rebellion against Moses.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry points out that Uzziah's sin stands alone among Judah's kings: no other ruler is charged with this specific offense. While other kings fell into idolatry or violence, Uzziah's pride drove him to usurp the priest's role, making this the one blot on an otherwise good reign. His punishment of leprosy and exclusion from God's house was immediate and lifelong.