Piet B. Dirksen, «Chronistic Tendency in 1 Chr 18,10-11», Vol. 80 (1999) 269-271

The omission of wyh wdybw and the addition of lkw in 1 Chr 18,10 are deliberate. The last part of v. 10 now connects with v. 11 and refers to the spoil of Hadadezer instead of to the gift of King Toi. This interpretation is confirmed by three other Chronistic changes in v. 11.

longer connected with what precedes, but is the proleptic object of "dedicate" in v. 11, taken up by Mt): "As for all the articles of gold, silver and bronze, David dedicated them also". As far as I am aware, only Braun maintains this division. This rendering, based on a smooth syntax, is the most natural translation of the text of Chronicles. That we have here indeed a deliberate restructuring of the text is confirmed by the addition of lkw, "and all". In the first place, the waw marks a new clause. Secondly, "all" is meaningless if the text is understood on the basis of Samuel: Hadoram came with (a number of) articles, not with "all articles"², but in Chronicles it makes good sense: all articles which had been taken as spoil were dedicated (see below).

        The decisive question, of course, is what the Chronicler may have intended by this change. The answer lies, I propose, in the fact that wyh wdybw refers to a gift, and the Chronicler was not willing to have gifts from foreign kings used for the temple. He did not object to spoils of war being used that way, since in that case David or Solomon (vv. 8.11) assigned for the temple what in fact belonged already to God. In this connection it is interesting to note a small but telling difference between this verse and its parallel. 2 Sam 8,11 has: "These also King David dedicated to YHWH together with the silver...that he had dedicated from all the peoples...". Chronicles has "the silver...that he had taken ()#&n) from all the peoples...". Although the Samuel text can only refer to spoil, the Chronicler wants to make this explicit by using the unambiguous "taken [as spoil]".

        This dogmatic change was possible with only a small textual change. By leaving out wyh wdybw the articles were no longer gifts from Toi (or Tou), brought to David by Hadoram. The diplomatic mission now marks the victorious end of David’s campaign against Hadadezer. In the new sentence, which begins with lkw, the Chronicler implies that the articles had been taken as spoil from Hadadezer and the emphatic Mt)-Mg "these also", connects with v. 8. The Chronicler wants us to understand that these articles were taken as spoil in addition to that mentioned in vv. 7-8. It is true that in v. 8 it is Solomon who actually used the bronze for the temple, but no doubt the Chronicler implies that Solomon only used what David had assigned for this purpose; compare ch. 22; 28; 2 Chr 5,1.

        The above is confirmed by two other changes in v. 11, which commentators do not link up with the omission in v. 10. The Samuel parallel of 1 Chr 18,11, 2 Sam 8,11, reads "These also King David dedicated to YHWH together with the silver and the gold that he had dedicated from all the peoples which he had subdued, from Aram, Moab, the Ammonites, the Philistines, Amalek, and from the spoil of King Hadadezer, son of Rehob of Zobah". Instead of "from Aram" Chronicles has "from Edom". Commentators consider this a case of interchange between waw and daleth, as often occurs. Michaeli and Rudolph think that "Aram" is the older text on the basis of the Samuel parallel; Williamson and Japhet do not commit themselves with respect to this question. However, the