Matthew Henry on 2 Chronicles 26:16–end
Here is the only blot we find on the name of king Uzziah, and it is such a one as lies not on any other of the kings. Whoredom, murder, oppression, persecution, and especially idolatry, gave characters to the bad kings and some of them blemishes to the good ones, David himself not excepted, witness the matter of Uriah. But we find not Uzziah charged with any of these; and yet he transgressed against the Lord his God, and fell under the marks of his displeasure in consequence, not, as other kings, in vexatious wars or rebellions, but an incurable disease.
I. His sin was invading the priest's office. The good way is one; by-paths are many. The transgression of his predecessors was forsaking th…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on 2 Chronicles 26:21
dwelt in a several house--in an infirmary [BERTHEAU].
Adam Clarke on 2 Chronicles 26:22
The rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet - write - This work, however, is totally lost; for we have not any history of this king in the writings of Isaiah. He is barely mentioned, Isa 1:1; Isa 6:1.
John Gill on 2 Chronicles 26:22
Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last,.... What were done by him, both in the beginning and latter end of his reign:
did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write: not in his own prophecy, but in the history of his own times, which was usual for every prophet to write, though now lost, see 2 Kings 15:6.
Tyndale Open Study Notes on 2 Chronicles 26:21
The leprosy forced King Uzziah to spend the end of his life in quarantine in a separate house (literally a free house). The significance of this term is not known; it is often interpreted to mean that he was free from the duties of the monarchy. In Ugaritic texts, it seems to be a euphemism for a place of total confinement.
