01_Biblica_1_E_Kalimi_Layout 1 30/01/13 13:15 Pagina 489 01_B 489 KING SOLOMON only one son) and putting Solomon in the fourth place (while he was her first surviving son), just in order to keep “conformity with the pat- tern” in his Vorlage, even without delivering any substantial message to his potential readers. Furthermore, if McKenzie’s suggestion is cor- rect, why did the Chronicler not name the mother(s) of the other nine sons of David (3,6-8), not to mention the unnamed sons born to un- named concubines (3,9)? Recently Thomas Willi touches this problem as well. He asserts that the fact that Solomon was the first surviving son of his mother could not have been overlooked by the Chronicler; however, the order of the names in his Vorlage (2 Samuel 5) was obligatory for him. Although one cannot but agree with the first part of Willi’s state- ment, the second part of it, however, is doubtful: if it is as Willi sup- poses, why does not the Chronicler keep the order of names as they appear in his Vorlage in several other places (for example, compare 1 Chr 21,2 with 2 Sam 24,2; 2 Chr 9,28 with 1 Kgs 10,28; 2 Chr 8,7 with 1 Kgs 9,20)? Nonetheless, Willi observes that “It is difficult to answer the question, if he (i.e., the Chronicler, I.K.) sees Bathshua just as the mother of Solomon or also as the mother of the first three mentioned sons, Shimea, Shobab and Nathan” 26. But how could the Chronicler articulate his opinion on this question more clearly than what he wrote: “Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon four by Bathshua, daughter of Ammiel”? In my opinion, 1 Chr 3,5c comes from the hand of the Chronicler. This issue, which I briefly discussed elsewhere (and for whatever rea- son some scholars are unaware of it) 27, is explicitly developed in the current article. Most likely the Chronicler knew that Solomon was the first surviving son of Bathsheba. But still he structured the list of David’s four sons born in Jerusalem, which he found in 2 Samuel 5, according to the literary numerical pattern of “three–four” (or “three + one”). In his newly created structure, Solomon appears as the fourth and final son of Bathsheba. By doing so the Chronicler attempts to demonstrate the importance of Solomon by stressing that he was born in Jerusalem, and by positioning him in the fourth and last place. In “Schwierig ist die Frage zu beantworten, ob ihm (d.h., dem Chronist, 26 I.K.) Batschua nur als Mutter Salomos gilt oder auch als die der drei erstge- nanten Söhne Schima, Schobab und Natan”; see WILLI, Chronik, 111. See KALIMI, Zur Geschichtsschreibung des Chronisten, 306; ID., Re- 27 shaping of Ancient Israelite History, 365. © Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati