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 514
514 TROY D. CUDWORTH
tention to the people at large. At various points in his reign, all Israel
appears as a mark that Solomon faithfully sought YHWH (2 Chr 1,2;
7,6.8). Moreover, even though the Chronicler does not mention
them specifically as taking part in the work of temple construction,
the story makes little sense if they did not. Though this may not
have resembled anything like the “forced labor” imposed on the in-
digenous peoples, they still would have needed to exert a great
amount of energy to make their contribution to the temple project,
a monumental endeavor in the Chronicler’s narrative. All this pos-
itive (though rigorous) work still took its toll on the people, so that
they asked for a lighter workload. They were willing to serve the
new king Rehoboam, but they did not want to labor as hard as they
did under Solomon. Although not explicitly stated by the Chronicler,
the now finished temple must have been a factor in his depiction of
the people’s attitude 48.
IV. The Scattered Testimony Concerning Jeroboam
Like Japhet, Knoppers also claims that the Chronicler’s changes
in the broader context lessen Rehoboam’s guilt. However, instead
of blaming the people for a false charge, he argues that Jeroboam
victimized the tender-hearted Rehoboam in an effort to secure king-
ship for himself as a usurper. In his interpretation, two of the Chron-
icler’s earlier changes figure heavily 49. For his first point, Knoppers
notes that the Chronicler leaves out the episode where YHWH prom-
ised Jeroboam his own separate kingdom with governance over all
but one of Israel’s tribes and with his own opportunity for an ever-
lasting kingdom similar to David in 1 Kgs 11,26-39. He claims that
this omission removes any legitimacy for the northern kingdom in
Chronicles. Second, Knoppers suggests that the Chronicler’s lauda-
tory treatment of the united monarchy under David and Solomon
due to their lifelong fidelity places a stigma on any tribe that would
try to secede or on any person that would attempt to deviate from
48
In other words, just because the Chronicler does not develop this aspect
of the story it does not mean he cannot expect his readers to assume it. The
Chronicler focuses on the actions of kings (e.g. Solomon’s construction of
the temple), not ordinary people.
49
Cf. KNOPPERS, “Rehoboam in Chronicles”, 430.