Memories of the Early Israelite Monarchy in the Books of Samuel and Kings (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Philistines serve as an important literary device in the tales of the emergence of monarchy in Israel: they are the Other against whom the plot is constructed. According to the grand narrative in 1 Sam 4–2 Sam 8, the Philistines are the fierce warriors who threatened the highland tribes who, in response, united and established kingship. Decades of struggle culminated in the coronation of Saul, his heroic deeds, his downfall, and the rise of David, who ultimately vanquished the Philistines. From the moment of their defeat onward, this Other appears only sporadically in the stories of the monarchy in Israel (e.g., 1 Kgs 15:15, 27) and Judah (e.g., 2 Kgs 18:8). For many years this sequence of the formative days of the emergence of monarchy in Israel dominated historical reconstructions and was synchronized with ancient written sources and material remains. But the assumingly perfect accord of biblical texts, Egyptology, and archaeology suffers from major flaws that preclude accepting the historicity of the grand narrative. Instead, an alternative interpretation of the material remains involved is presented and a framework for reconstructing several genuine memories of the Philistines in the stories of the early monarchy is proposed.
Saul, Benjamin and the Emergence of Monarchy in Israel AIL 40, 2020
For a copy of this article, please contact me only VIA EMAIL. Full citation: 16. Sergi, O. 2020. Saul, David and the Formation of the Israelite Monarchy: Revisiting the Historical and Literary Context of 1 Samuel 9–2 Samuel 5. In: Krause, J., Sergi, O. and Weingart, K. eds. Saul, Benjamin and the Emergence of Monarchy in Israel (Ancient Israel and its Literature 40). Atlanta (SBL Press): 57–91.
Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel , 2017
The article examines the literary relations between the accounts of Davidʼs war with Israelʼs neighbours (2 Sam 8:1–14) and his war with the Ammonites and Arameans (2 Sam 10:1–11:1a; 12:26–31). I suggest that the former was written later than the pre-Deuteronomistic story cycles of David and Solomon, and that it rests heavily on these works. I further posit that due to the long process of oral transmission of the history of David’s rise, this account includes memories of different periods, some of which might reflect the time of Jeroboam II.
A Sure House: Studies on the Dynastic Promise to David in the Books of Samuel and Kings
This book is a study of the texts referring or alluding to the dynastic promise to David in the books of Samuel and Kings (and the "Law of the King" in Deut 17,14-20). Attention is paid to the textual problems of some of the studied passages, especially 2 Sam 7 which has different meanings in the most important textual witnesses (MT, LXXB, LXXL, 1 Chr 17MT, 1 Chr 17LXX). Although the most ancient retrievable text of 2 Sam 7 is not to be identified with MT, this text form corresponds to the original basic meaning of the chapter. Special attention is given to the value of 1 Chr 17 for the reconstruction of the oldest text of 2 Sam 7. There are many "synonymous" differences between 2 Sam 7 and 1 Chr 17, which cannot be explained as resulting from "mistakes" or "tendentious" (e.g. ideologically motivated) changes in one of the two traditions. A statistic study of the patterns of agreements among the witnesses leads to the conclusion that evaluating these differences "case by case" would lead to arbitrary decisions; the great majority of these differences are a result of the Chronicler's relatively free approach to his source. The emergence of 2 Sam 7,1-17 may be construed in two historical contexts. In the "exilic" period, the purpose of the dynastic promise being linked to the polemic against the traditional significance of the temple in royal ideology might be to preserve-or to establish-the validity of the promise after the fall of the temple. Alternatively, 2 Sam 7,1-17 might have been written at the time after Zerubbabel (at the end of the 6th / beginning of the 5th c.?), during the period when the temple of Jerusalem was restored, but the Davidides could not derive their legitimacy from it, since the cult and the temple were understood as the domain of priests under the auspices of Persian rule. The author of 2 Sam 7,1-17 may also be thought to be responsible for 1 Sam 10,8 + 13,7b-15a and 1 Sam 25, the texts that primarily emphasize, in accordance with 2 Sam 7,14-15, the unconditional nature of the dynastic promise once it is given. In the books of Kings, 1 Kgs 2,24.33.45; 1 Kgs 11,29-38*; 15,4; 2 Kgs 8,19 could be ascribed to this hand as well. All these texts could have been written in both the Neo-Babylonian and Persian period, similarly to 2 Sam 7,1-17. However, some other references to the dynastic promise in Samuel (1 Sam 2,27-36; 2 Sam 7,18-29; 22,51; 23,1-7) cannot be dated to the Neo-Babylonian period (or even the very beginning of the Persian period). Theoretically, these texts could belong to the same redactional layer as 2 Sam 7,1-17, but only in case we adopt the later one of the two suggested dates of its origin. In contrast, if the earlier date is accepted for the first group of texts, the second group must have been added later (in one or several stages). At any rate, whereas all these texts may be regarded as a defense of actual political interests of the ex-royal family in the exilic and/or post-exilic period, this does not hold for 1 Kgs 2,4; 8,25; 9,4-5 where the power of the Davidic kings is explicitly conditional upon the eternal loyalty of David's descendants to Yhwh. These passages cannot be ascribed to the same author(s) as the other references to the dynastic promise in Samuel-Kings; on the other hand, this redaction in Kings was perhaps not driven by actual anti-Davidic political interests, representing rather an attempt to explain the unfulfillment of the dynastic promise. Following W. Oswald (and building on the work of S. McKenzie), we ascribe the oracles against the founders of the dynasties (or, in the case of Ahab, the dynasty's other "prominent" member) ruling in northern Israel and the related fulfillment notices (
THE DISTINCTIVE SHAPE OF KINGSHIP IN ANCIENT ISRAEL: A CONSIDERATION OF KINGSHIP IN THE PENTATEUCH
Semănătorul (The Sower), 2023
This article explores the shape of kingship in ancient Israel with reference to the Pentateuch and particularly Deuteronomy 17:14-20. It demonstrates that Israel's kingship is distinctive from that of the surrounding nations. The distinctive nature is linked, in the first place, to the creation of the nation and, secondly, to the stipulations for kings contained in Deuteronomy 17. It concludes that although there is some similarity between kingship in Israel and the surrounding nations, at root kingship in Israel is fundamentally distinctive. Whereas in the ancient Near East the king was god, in Israel God was king.