182 Serge Frolov whole, and ultimately the Davidic monarchy remained in shambles even with Israel restored in its land. Predictably, biblical and post- biblical texts that try to keep Davidic hopes alive never cite 2 Kgs 25,27-30 as a source of encouragement. By contrast, with Evil-Merodach still on the throne 2 Kgs 25,27-30 would read as a striking confirmation of the Davidic promise and its (ever)lasting validity. In 2 Sam 7,16, YHWH is quoted as telling David: “Your house and your kingship shall ever be secure before you; your seat (˚ask) shall be established forever”. The pronouncement is addressed to a king of Israel ruling from Jerusalem. By the end of Kings, there is no Israel or Jerusalem to speak of, certainly not as far as the narrator of 2 Kgs 25,27-30 is concerned. And yet a descendant of David is back on his seat (wask), secured by the world’s most powerful monarch; moreover, for the first time ever this descendant towers above all other local potentates (v. 28b). Of course, as Murray has rightfully pointed out, the underside of the Babylonian ruler’s support, both figurative (v. 28) and literal (v. 30), is dependence upon him (24). But with Evil-Merodach in power and the passage proving his benevolence beyond reasonable doubt, why does it have to stop here? What if his next step will be to reinstate Jehoiachin in Jerusalem, or even appoint him a de-facto ruler of the entire Babylonian empire, making him thereby a trailblazer of Israel’s redemption or even ascendancy (25)? To put it in a different way, from the perspective of Evil-Merodach’s reign, and from none other, 2 Kgs 25,27-30 goes a long way to kindle or sustain hope, centered upon a Davidic king, and trust in the theology of kingship articulated by 2 Samuel 7 and similarly minded texts. The last (24) MURRAY, “Jehoiachin”, 259-22. (25) Farfetched as it may seem, the motif of an exiled Israelite holding the reins of a foreign empire is recurrent in the Hebrew Bible: Joseph, Mordechai, and Daniel (in Daniel 5) attain precisely that status, and in two former cases it massively benefits the entire community. Jehoiachin’s elevation above all kings except Evil-Merodach himself follows this pattern. T.C. RÖMER, “Trans- formations in Deuteronomistic and Biblical Historiography”, ZAW 109 (1997) 11, points out that such an outcome would represent an alternative to Israel’s restoration in the promised land. It is noteworthy, however, that the Former Prophets carefully avoids making the Davidic promise contingent upon the promise of land. For example, Nathan’s discourse in 2 Samuel 7 never mentions the land, not even in the context of YHWH’s vow to “establish a home for… Israel” and “plant them firm, so that they shall dwell secure and shall tremble no more” (v. 10). This strategy, designed to keep all options open, would fit in with the situation that obtained in Evil-Merodach’s reign when Davidic restoration seemed possible but its format remained uncertain.