The past couple of decades have seen book of Chronicles go from being the Bible's best-kept secret1 to being one of most studied and researched of all biblical books. One reason for this is a renewed interest in Persian period and an acknowledgment of its importance in formation of biblical corpus as we know it today.2 Most recent commentators on Chronicles assume that Chronicler lived in late Persian-period Yehud and have come to realize importance of his book for our understanding of ideology, theology, and historiography of this period.3 One particular aspect of Chronicles research that has returned to forefront is that of Chronicler's genealogies. These nine chapters serve as an introduction to entire book, one in which Chronicler lays out historical, geographic, and demographic background for his entire composition.4 To quote one commentator, genealogies are like lions guarding gates, driving away fainthearted from treasures inside.5 In a recently published article, I attempted to utilize these genealogies in order to elucidate social setting in which author of Chronicles operated and audience for which he wrote.6 I concluded that Chroniclers use of genealogical genre, especially that of segmented lists of clans and their relationships, as well as fact that genealogies of central tribes of judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, Manasseh, and (southern) Asher seem to reflect reality of Chroniclers own day, indicates that he was writing for an audience that was largely agrarian and clan-based and so would be able to relate to genealogical genre as stemming from its own life experience. A second conclusion was that, although author of Ezra-Nehemiah held an exclusive view of contemporary Israelite/Judean identity,7 Chroniclers view was inclusive, regarding descendants both of unexiled Judahite phratries and of remnant Samarian8 clans as legitimately Israelite and drawing upon their surviving traditions as a source for his own composition.9 The purpose of present article is to take this investigation one step further: to examine ways in which Chronicler, in constructing his genealogies, utilized and combined various genealogical forms that he had at his disposal in order to create his story. In doing so, we shall focus especially on linear portions of genealogies, those that serve to supply movement in time, or chronological progression. I. The Structure of Late Iron Age and Persian Period Israelite Society and Oral Genealogies Many scholars of past generations assumed that society of postexilic Yehud was fundamentally different from its preexilic predecessor. The society that produced such books as Ezra-Nehemiah has been described as an imperially instated of proven loyalty ... a semi-autonomous temple-community controlled by dominant stratum of Babylonian immigrants.14 These elite were almost totally cut off from local inhabitants, importing their own, Diaspora-developed way of life, which was less land-based and basically not a direct extension of preexilic society.15 However, more recently many scholars have argued that Persian-period Yehud was much more diverse and that temple theocracy of EzraNehemiah represents only one facet of this society, perhaps even a minority one at that.16 The returnees from Babylon came to a land that was inhabited, albeit sparsely, by those whom Babylonians had left behind.17 These remnants continued to lead their lives in traditional manner, probably thinking of themselves as true remnant of Judah.18 The arrival of exiles to reclaim land must have caused all sorts of tensions,19 but in time two groups became drawn together.20 The Chronicler certainly makes no distinction between them, and no such distinction exists in later Hellenistic Judaism. …