Writing and Rewriting the Story of Solomon in Ancient Israel by Isaac Kalimi

Abstract

Reviewed by: Writing and Rewriting the Story of Solomon in Ancient Israel by Isaac Kalimi Kyle H. Keimer isaac kalimi, Writing and Rewriting the Story of Solomon in Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019). Pp. xvii + 385. $125. Kalimi’s work is a methodologically informed and nuanced contribution to studies on the historicity of biblical narratives pertaining to King Solomon. Its main purpose is the analysis and comparison of the early (Samuel–Kings) and late (Chronicles) biblical accounts of Solomon’s birth, naming, early life, ascension, and reign, including in particular his building of the temple in Jerusalem. K. draws out the unique representations of Solomon that arise in these two historiographical sources as a result of different and specific theological, ideological, and didactic contexts. He argues that 2 Samuel 9–20 + 1 Kings 1–2 do preserve a good amount of historically informed detail that has been fashioned into an early and coherent historiography (providing a portrait of Solomon “the man”), while the later Book of Chronicles has entirely different historiographic aims in view (providing a portrait of “the myth,” a “utopic” Solomon who never actually existed). Each portrait of Solomon arose because that was what was needed; the two portraits fit the contexts of the individual authors. Kalimi’s study proceeds in two main parts. Part 1 details the sources and historical background of Solomon’s time (four chapters), while part 2 addresses literary and historio-graphical observations pertaining to Solomon’s birth, rise, and temple building (ten chapters). After a brief introduction that articulates the study’s purpose and methods, in chap. 2 K. details the epigraphic, archaeological, and biblical sources available (or lacking), for Solomon and his reign, even though a reconstruction of the historical Solomon is not the main purpose of the volume. [End Page 117] In chap. 3, K. provides a survey of scholarship that has rejected the historicity of a united monarchy and raises the question of whether there is any foundation for such a view. It is this chapter in particular that defines K.’s careful and meticulous work, which is evident throughout the volume. While recognizing that the biblical text cannot simply be taken at face value, K. ably dissects a number of works by so-called biblical minimalists, drawing out their shortcomings and methodological fallacies before concluding that such minimal-ist/revisionist approaches to the biblical text are “baseless,” “unsupported,” and tendentious, leaving “the real work of historical reconstruction . . . to be done” (p. 63). He then follows up this chapter with his own historical evaluation of Solomon’s kingdom, focusing in particular on the historicity of Solomon’s temple, Jerusalem in the days of David and Solomon, the size of David and Solomon’s kingdom, and Solomon’s harem (chap. 4). In particular, K. notes that many of the narratives preserved about Solomon—and about David—are apologetic in nature and, fitting with other ancient Near Eastern apologies, find their best historical setting in the period of Solomon or very shortly thereafter. What is striking about this chapter in particular is that K. weds the archaeology to detailed textual study in a very informed manner. The result is that many of the straw-men arguments espoused by archaeologists and biblicists are illuminated for what they are: evidence of poor attention to detail and unwarranted interpolation. For example, the well-rehearsed claim that the biblical texts portray Jerusalem as a large and rich city from which David and Solomon controlled a far-reaching “empire,” while the archaeology indicates that the site was a small hill country settlement from which only local chieftains could have controlled the local territory, is attacked with facts and informed sociological and anthropological considerations. Kalimi builds a sustained case to show that the size of Jerusalem is not related to the extent of David’s or Solomon’s kingdom. Moreover, while the biblical description of David and Solomon’s kingdom is not as grandiose as modern scholars purport, it nevertheless is described in a manner comparable to what is used elsewhere in the ancient Near East, which is to say that power and authority were understood differently by ancient authors in comparison to how modern scholars...