Troy D. Cudworth, «The Division of Israel’s Kingdom in Chronicles: A Re-examination of the Usual Suspects.», Vol. 95 (2014) 498-523
The Chronicler constantly adapts the story of Israel’s kingship from the narrative in Samuel-Kings to show his great interest in the temple. With regard to the division of the united kingdom, recent scholarship has correctly shown how he has removed all the blame from Solomon due to his successful construction of the temple, but it has not come to any firm conclusion on whom the Chronicler does find guilty. This article contends that the Chronicler blames Rehoboam for ignoring the plea of «all Israel», an essential facet of the nation’s temple worship.
002_cudworth_co_498_523 13/02/15 11:26 Pagina 512
512 TROY D. CUDWORTH
shapes this episode to demonstrate that Solomon continued to
build his labor force like David by enlisting the help of foreigners
such as Hiram and his servants (vv. 1-15), and also the resident
aliens in the land of Israel (vv. 16-17). In other words, the Chron-
icler mentions these extra workers in addition to all Israel (i.e. not
to the exclusion of all Israel) as a means of illustrating the great
amount of labor that went into the temple’s construction and,
hence, its greater glory.
2. The problem of 2 Chr 8,9 and 10,4
On the surface level, the text in 2 Chr 8,7-10 appears more dif-
ficult. Verse 9 reads, “But from the children of Israel Solomon made
no slaves (~ydb[) for his work, for they were soldiers, his com-
manders, his captains, and commanders of his chariots and his
horsemen”. How can the statements made in 8,9 and 10,4 make
sense together? As a preliminary point, it is worth noting that the
Chronicler has borrowed both texts from 1 Kings, yet no scholar
(to my knowledge) has suggested that the people have made an il-
legitimate claim there (cf. 1 Kgs 9,22; 12,4). Additionally, Klein
concedes that if we take the MT of 2 Chr 8,9 which includes the
relative pronoun rXa, then the text would concede that Solomon
did in fact submit Israelites to forced labor. However, along with
most commentators and English translations, he takes into account
several other textual witnesses that leave it out 45.
Perhaps the broad range of meanings for the root db[ has caused
the most difficulty for finding coherence between the accounts in
2 Chr 8,9 and 10,4, from the very positive (“servant”) as with David
in the dynastic oracle (e.g. 1 Chr 17,4) to the extremely negative
(“slave”) as in 2 Chr 8,9a. For the latter, the Chronicler confirms
that Solomon did not oppress his own people with slave-labor, but
imposed such work on non-Israelites. In contrast, the list of roles
in 2 Chr 8,9b (i.e. soldiers, his commanders, etc.) does not present
an exhaustive list of assignments the Israelites received but asserts
that Solomon chose his leaders from his own people (cf. v. 10, “And
these were the chief officers […] 250 who ruled over the people”).
Hence, 2 Chr 8,7-10 focuses on the highest and lowest ranks to as-
45
Cf. KLEIN, 2 Chronicles, 116, n. 11.