Book Of Chronicles Research Articles

The Formation of Israelite Identity in the Book of Chronicles

The Formation of Israelite Identity in the Book of Chronicles

From Mere Precious Metal to Divine Weapon: The Despoliation Motif and the Fate of the Temple Vessels

Abstract: This study examines the transformation of the motif of the despoliation of the temple vessels in the Hebrew Bible. Opening with a comparison between 2 Kgs 24:13 and 2 Kgs 25:13–17, I proceed to analyze the representation of the fate of the vessels in the books of Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezra, and Daniel. As suggested by Peter R. Ackroyd, the cultic vessels emerged as a “continuity theme” in the exilic and postexilic literature. In this article, I explore how this literary phenomenon triggered changes in the perception and depiction of the despoliation(s) of the temple vessels at the hands of the Babylonians. These changes paved the way for what was initially portrayed as mere precious metal to become a token of continuity, and, in a surprising twist, God’s “secret weapon” in the land of Judah’s exile.

In Nehemiah's Footsteps? Uzziah at the Service of the Chronicler's Ideology

Uzziah ruled in Judah for many years, yet the description of his rule in the book of Kings is laconic. The book of Chronicles, on the other hand, provides an extensive description of his reign that stems from authorial ideology, theology, and processes of identity formation. The book of Ezra-Nehemiah describes a series of confrontations from four directions, with Uzziah’s battles with the Philistines, the Arab tribes, and the Ammonites being three of these fronts. The Chronicler, writing several decades after Ezra-Nehemiah, was aware of the Ezra-Nehemiah text or its narrative, and developed the figure of Uzziah as a great king, thus serving his own national, economic, ethnic, and religious goals.

Toward a Better 'Hezekiah': The Literary Structuring of Isaiah 1-39

This study proposes a new structure for Isa 1-39 in its received form that brings together the observations of numerous studies concerning individual units and themes within this larger section of the book. Whereas parallels have been discerned between Isa 1-12 and Isa 13-27, here it is argued that those parallels can be found in Isa 28-39 as well. Particular attention will be paid to how the pieces of the book contribute to the reader's evolving perception of the figure of Hezekiah. The person or school who crafted the book called Isaiah initially exalts the figure of Hezekiah such that the naïve reader might be led to hope that Hezekiah was the idealised Davidic ruler of Isa 1-12. Therefore, Hezekiah's failure in Isa 39 that leads to the exile is all the more disappointing. The presentation of Hezekiah in the book called Isaiah comes into starker relief when compared to the presentations in the books of Kings and Chronicles. The Chronicler's re-telling of the Hezekiah stories points backwards to the Isaiah editors' priorities in adopting material from Kings.

The Literary and Theological Function of the Philistines and Arameans in Chronicles

The book of Chronicles is a well-known example of how theological developments in Judah during the Persian and Hellenistic periods played a role in reshaping the received literary traditions of the Hebrew Bible. This study focuses specifically on Chronicles’ narratives of violent conflicts between Israel/Judah and the Philistines and Arameans and their relationship to the portrayal of the Philistines and Arameans in Samuel–Kings. It discusses five case studies pertaining to violent encounters between Israelite/Judahite kings and the Philistines (Saul in 1 Chr 10; Jehoshaphat in 2 Chr 17; Jehoram in 2 Chr 21; Uzziah in 2 Chr 26; Ahaz in 2 Chr 28) and five pertaining to the Arameans (Asa in 2 Chr 16; Jehoshaphat in 2 Chr 18–19; Ahaziah in 2 Chr 22; Joash in 2 Chr 24; Ahaz in 2 Chr 28). Among other new findings, the study highlights how Chronicles repeatedly depicts the Philistine threat in tandem with conflicts with the Edomites (a phenomenon not found in Samuel–Kings) and, furthermore, casts the Arameans as an instrument of divine punishment not only against northern Israelite kings but also against Judahite kings.

St. Grigor Narekats‘i’s Use of Extra-Canonical Writings: Two Examples

St. Grigor Narekats‘i’s Use of Extra-Canonical Writings: Two Examples1 Senior Archimandrite Shahe Ananyan (bio) Translated from Eastern Armenian by Roberta R. Ervine -I- The Repentance of Solomon and St. Grigor Narekats‘i One might well say that the study of Narek’s Book of Prayers is one of Armenology’s most rewarding fields. Theologians, philologists, philosophers, linguists and, more recently, medical psychologists, have taken note of St. Grigor Narekats‘i’s work, and continue to do so. However, despite the existence of so many studies, there remains much to be done with regard to ferreting out the sources used in the Book of Prayers. The present article is devoted to an examination of one such source, which by virtue of both its form and its content may be considered both theoretically and theologically fundamental to the central theme of Narek’s work: repentance. [End Page 89] The work referred to is the apocryphal writing, From the Commentary on the Paralipomena, Concerning the Repentance of Solomon. Its influence, as well as traces of direct citation, are noticeable in Narek’s Ban 48. Michael E. Stone, who published the critical text of this apocryphal work, already noted that the expression From the Commentary refers to a commentary pseudepigraphically attributed to Ephrem the Syrian. It is an expansion on an episode in the Book of Chronicles; in the published text, the pseudonymous commentary follows after two narratives of Solomon’s repentance.2 According to one apocryphal writing concerning the penitence of Solomon, the story of the king’s repentance was related in two different versions. The Armenian texts to the following variants and excerpts are found in Stone, Appendix I. 3 Variant 1 Variant 2 But Solomon made himself many wives, seven hundred . . . and he openly fornicated opposite the Temple and in front of his enemies. But it happened that he had free time in his room; he pondered in his mind, remembering the injunction of his father David, “Walk you,” said he, “in the ways of the Lord and in the law of Moses his servant.” When he remembered this injunction of his father and the hour of David’s death, he wept from the depths of his heart, till he watered his room and his bed in the winter palace of his kingdom. And as a limit of repentance, he set for himself that the door of his room would open of itself, without anyone opening it. According to another [source], thus: But Solomon, becoming saddened over these many transgressions, hopelessly called his chamberlain and ordered him to burn the multitude of his writings, which he had spoken through the grace of the Spirit, and he carried out the order. Then Solomon asked, “What did you see?” And he said, “An uncontainable light rose up to heaven together with the fire.” And for that he wept from the depths of his heart. [End Page 90] Commentary on these episodes is drawn from three excerpts of the Commentary on the Paralipomena: Excerpt 1 Excerpt 2 The blessed Ephrem says thus: that Solomon the Wise, after his sins and his distancing himself from God because of the deceptions of his wives, was sitting one day in his winter palace, in the house of his father David, and he recalled his injunction at the time of his death, and he went into his room and wept before the Lord with great weeping. And he set for himself a limit, to weep until the door of the room should open without a hand. Others say [until] it should close, but to open is more fitting, as a sign of the opening of the door of God’s mercy, as also took place. For the door of the room opened of itself. And when he was rejected from the help of God, he ordered his chamberlain to burn his writings, which were through the knowledge of the Spirit: three thousand proverbs, from the cedars of Lebanon to the hyssop that goes up the wall, and the birds and beasts and reptiles. However, taking part of them, he hid them, which later the friends of Hezekiah wrote [down]. And when Solomon asked concerning...

Historical Books: 1 Chronicles–2 Maccabees

Historical Books1 Chronicles–2 Maccabees Christopher T. Begg, Brian J. Meldrum, and William J. Urbrock 2214. [Commentaries on 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther] James C. Pakala, "A Librarian's Comments on Commentaries 46: 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther," Presb 47 (1, 2021) 170-76. P. has been writing his librarian's comments concerning commentaries on the books of the Bible (OT and NT) for many years. The above contribution is a follow-up to his survey of English-language resources on the five biblical books of his title that appeared in Presbyterion 24 (1998) and 25 (1999). In it, P. calls attention to the abundance of new commentaries on the books in question that have appeared in the intervening decades. His survey includes commentaries of a primarily scholarly character as well as those whose principal aim is to assist ministers looking to preach on the five books.—C.T.B. **2215. [The Priestly Tent of Meeting in Chronicles] Jaeyoung Jeon, "The Priestly Tent of Meeting in Chronicles: Pro-Priestly or Anti-Priestly?" JHebS 18 (2018) 1-15 [see Editor's Notes, p. 981]. This paper examines how the Chronicler treats the Pentateuchal tradition of the Priestly Tent of Meeting. The Chronicler consistently mentions the Tent of Meeting, but its cultic significance is reduced and placed in an inferior relation to the Davidic cultic system in Jerusalem. Such ambivalent treatment of the Tent of Meeting in Chronicles can be understood in the socio-historical context of the Persian period, especially in terms of the Levites' ideological struggle against the dominant Zadokite priestly group. [Adapted from published abstract—B.J.M.] **2216. [The Altar in Chronicles] Itamar Kislev, "The Role of the Altar in the Book of Chronicles," JHebS 20 (2020) 1-16 [see Editor's Notes, p. 981]. The Book of Chronicles, in several passages that relate the establishment of the temple, features an emphasis on—and an elevation of the status of—the altar and the sacrifices offered on it. By contrast, this elevation of the altar's status in the parallel accounts of Samuel and Kings is lacking. My article examines this phenomenon and suggests that [End Page 821] the shift is part of the Chronicler's attempt to cope with a fundamental theological problem regarding the Second Temple. [Adapted from published abstract—B.J.M.] 2217. [The Reception of Ritual Laws in the Second Temple Period; Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles] Julia Rhyder, "The Reception of Ritual Laws in the Early Second Temple Period: Evidence from Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles," Text and Ritual in the Pentateuch, 255-79 [see #2504]. R. addresses the relationship between text and ritual in the early Second Temple period through a close reading of selected texts from Nehemiah and Chronicles. She begins by noting that the notion that the writing down of ritual texts fosters ritual standardization has become axiomatic in ritual studies, and the existence of narratives recounting the celebration of festivals mandated in the Pentateuch provides us with a fine opportunity to verify this notion. While these descriptions do not reflect actual historical events, they inform us nonetheless about "the diverse ways in which … scribes imagined that the law might be ideally applied." Basing her analysis on three key texts (Nehemiah 8; 2 Chronicles 30; 2 Chronicles 35), R. argues that in each of these accounts the description of the given festival claims to adhere to the instructions for its celebration found in earlier laws, while in fact they simultaneously present many examples of adaptation, innovation, and revision with regard to those laws. Thus, the story of Nehemiah 8 presents a "new conception" of how the feast of Sukkot (Booths) "was to be applied to the urban context of Jerusalem specifically," whereby the feast is connected more closely to the household than is the case with the corresponding law of Leviticus 23. 2 Chronicles 30, which recounts Hezekiah's Passover, presents substantial deviations from the pentateuchal model for this festival—such as the celebration of the feast in the second month instead of the first, or the eating of the sacrificial meat by unclean members of the community...

A Blameworthy Burial: A Methodology for Inner-Biblical Allusion with a Case Study from Chronicles

King Asa’s funeral description is the longest in the book of Chronicles and unique in the number of specific details it includes. Scholars generally see Asa’s funeral in 2 Chron. 16.14 in a positive light despite the negative tone of the preceding verses. Certainly, Chronicles is not afraid to portray a Judean king in both positive and negative terms (e.g., Manasseh). However, using an adapted synchronic and diachronic methodology for assessing inner-biblical connections, this study identifies and evaluates the shared language found in Exod. 30.25, 1 Chron. 9.30, and 2 Chron. 16.14. The study reveals a recurrent allusion that is both 1) an indication that post-exilic temple workers followed the Torah and 2) an indictment against using a special anointing oil for honoring the dead instead of honoring God.

The Phenomenon of Targumism in the Aramaic Version of the First and Second Books of Chronicles

The main objective of the article is to show the features of the Aramaic translation of the First and the Second Books of Chronicles, which belongs to late Targums. The work presents the main data related to the authority, date and origin of the Targum and its manuscripts, as well as a review of major translation techniques and the method of rabbinic interpretation, which are all important elements of targumism. Linguistic changes, as well as cultural and religious ones, conditioned by various processes that occurred in the community of believers in YHWH over the centuries, were reflected in a variety of interpretative tendencies.

The structure of Ezra-Nehemiah as a literary unit

The OT books, Ezra and Nehemiah, are to be considered as one book. This is more or less the common conviction of most OT scholars today. However, their redaction process raises many questions. What is their relation to the book of Chronicles, and how is their actual structure to be understood? Why do we find two almost identical lists of returnees from exile in Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7? What about the differences between these lists? This article understands the structure of Ezra-Nehemiah as a consciously created literary unit, where the two lists of returnees serve as an important part of the literary structure. The author works on the assumption of the so-called new literary criticism, understanding the narrative in the book on a synchronic basis. He shows that the book of Ezra-Nehemiah can indeed be understood as one literary unit, and that the two lists of returnees function as a literary means to structure the book. There is therefore no need to ‘re-organise’ the narrated events in Ezra-Nehemiah according to an alleged different chronological order.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: The study argued for a canonical and synchronic approach to biblical narratives. The biblical texts should be understood as consciously created narratives, where the apparent discrepancies are important aspects of the narrative fixture.

Reinterpretation of History in the Books of Chronicles: The Case of King Manasseh

Manasseh of Judah: an idolatrous ruler and murderer to be condemned, as depicted in 2 Kgs 21:1-18, or a converted sinner and restorer of his kingdom, a pattern to follow, as presented in 2 Chr 33:1-20? These two biblical portrayals of the king cannot be reconciled without raising questions about the assumptions of the biblical historiographers who built up two alternative traditions about this biblical figure. The case of King Manasseh is therefore an intriguing example of the Chronicler’s reinterpretation of historical material found in the Books of Kings. It is argued that particular narrative strategy and theological issues lie behind this vision of the king and its significance for the addressees of both writings. Consequently, the biblical figure of Manasseh is somehow biased, and its historical reconstruction has its limitations.

The Books of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah as a Project of New Future for Israel

1–2 Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah express a different approach to the future of Israel to that provided in the Earlier Prophets. Firstly, the nature and the dating of this part of the Hebrew Bible are discussed, suggesting the end of the fifth and the very beginning of the fourth century B.C. as the time of its origins. Secondly, the retrospect of the past in 1–2 Chronicles is presented with a very specific attitude towards the Exile. The article focuses on the detailed analysis of Ezra 4:1–5, a passage representing the very core of this book. Against the backdrop of the identity of the deputation visiting Jerusalem as seen by the author of Ezra and the completely different self-presentation of the envoys from the north, the serious conflict that ensues is described. It bears analogies with the former antagonisms and tensions between the kingdom of Judah and the kingdom of Israel. On the basis of this conflict, a new reality emerges, namely Judaism. The religion of the preexilic Israel was profoundly transformed, having been exclusively limited to those Judeans who had come back from the Exile. As a result of this separation, the question of the “true Israel” became more crucial, setting new direction for the project of the national and religious identity of biblical Israel.

Historical Books: 1 Chronicles–2 Maccabees

Historical Books1 Chronicles–2 Maccabees Christopher T. Begg Christopher T. Begg Catholic University of America 1349. [The Genealogy of Judah in 1 Chr 2:3–4:23] Tomasz Tułodziecki, "Genealogia pokolenia Judy w 1Krn 2,3–4,23 i jej wpływ na teologiczne presłanie 1–2Krn [The Genealogy of Judah in 1 Chr 2:3–4:23 and Its Influence on the Theological Message of 1 and 2 Chronicles]," ColT 89 (4, 2019) 117-38. Judah as a geographical area and an inhabited country has always had an exceptional and extraordinary character. The oldest historical source material points to Judah's status as an independent socio-political entity, with only a loose connection to Israel as a whole. … The reason for this uniqueness of Judah in the history of Israel should be traced back to a prior history involving the proximity and influence of Egypt, a factor that served to enhance Judah's independence and self-sufficiency. This self-sufficiency was tested particularly in connection with Judah's relative autonomy and self-rule in the period of Persian domination beginning in 538 b.c. This is the period in which the author of the Book of Chronicles wrote his work, the focus of which is the New Israel, i.e., the newly formed Judean entity under the authority of the Persian kings. Judah in 1 and 2 Chronicles is presented as the heir to all the key promises Yhwh made to Judah's ancestors. In Chronicles, David the king and his successors are the guardians of these promises of Yhwh. The Torah ascribes the initial forms of the cult and the holiness associated with Israel's liturgy to the figure of Moses. According to the Chronicler, however, David appears as the role model for holiness who, as such, can appropriately be called the second Moses. In the Chronicler's presentation, members of the Davidic dynasty are the only legitimate sovereigns who rule over the country and who sit upon the throne of Yhwh himself (see 1 Chr 17:4; 28:5; 29:23; 2 Chr 9:8; 13:8). As such, Judah is portrayed as a "home" for all the twelve tribes of Israel in which, despite their conflicts, friction, and political obstacles, are all heirs of Yhwh's promises in the fraternity that they share. This conception finds expression in the Chronicler's entire work, beginning with the detailed presentation of Judah's genealogy in 1 Chr 2:3–4:23 and continuing through to the final verses of 2 Chronicles. [Adapted from published abstract—C.T.B.] Google Scholar 1350. [The Names of Saul's Descendants in 1 Chr 8:33-34; 9:39-40] Marek I. Baraniak, "Historiografia biblijna w perspektywie hebrajskiej onomastyki. Przypadek imion potomków Saula w ksiȩgach Kronik (1Krn 8,33-34; 9,39-40) [Biblical Historiography as Reflected in Hebrew Onomastics. The Case of the Names of Saul's Descendants in 1 Chr 8:33-34; 9:39-40]," ColT 89 (4, 2019) 95-115. The names of Saul's descendants are cited differently in the Book of Chronicles (see 1 Chr 8:33-34; 9:39-40) as compared with the Book of Samuel (see 2 Sam 2–4; 19; 21). In particular, Chronicles speaks of Eshbaal rather than of Ishbosheth and Meribaal rather than Mephibosheth. My article discusses the differences between the names in the context of early Hebrew epigraphy. The Chronicler's mention of the names of Saul's descendants might be explained, not only in terms of his use of an earlier version of the Book of Samuel, but also on the basis of Judean oral tradition or royal archival documents that survived the Babylonian conquest. [Adapted from published abstract—C.T.B.] Google Scholar 1351. [1 Chronicles 10; Saul in Chronicles] Ehud Ben Zvi, "Reading Chronicles and Remembering Saul in the Late Persian/Early Hellenistic Period," Fortgeschriebenes Gotteswort, 369-80 [see #1707]. In contrast to that of the Book of Samuel, the Chronicler's presentation of King Saul is very brief, being essentially confined to a single chapter, i.e., 1 Chronicles 10 in [End Page...

Рецензия на: Возникновение монархии в древнем Израиле. Комментарий на Первую книгу Царств. Сергиев Посад: изд. Московской духовной академии, 2020. 464 с.: илл. ISBN 978-5-6044668-0-3

In 2020 Moscow Theological Academy Publishing House published a monograph by Candidate of Theology Priest Andrei Vydrin, which presents a commentary on 1 Samuel. Priest A. Vydrin is a well-known Russian Orthodox biblical scholar, lecturer in the Department of Biblical Studies at Moscow Theological Academy (since 2012). Until 2016 he was known mainly for his articles on the book of Chronicles, which were actually excerpts or variations on the theme of his PhD thesis, "Historical and Philological Analysis of the Narrative of King Hezekiah in 2 Chr. 29-32", defended in 2012. Since about 2016, however, while remaining in the same field of study (the historical books of the Old Testament), he has switched to a different object of study, dealing with issues related to the interpretation of 1 Samuel. This monograph, published in 2020, is the culmination of nearly five years of work.

Three Evil Kings and One Promise: Another Look at the Doctrine of Retribution and the Question of the Eternal Reign of the Davidic Dynasty in the Book of Chronicles

Abstract One of the most widely studied subjects in scholarship on the book of Chronicles is the question of the Eternal Reign of the Davidic dynasty. Most scholars have adopted the same methodic approach: analyzing sources in the book connected to the promise of the Davidic dynasty. This article addresses this issue from a novel angle–through a discussion of the three most wicked kings described in the book of Chronicles, Jehoram, Ahaziah, and Ahaz. It seems that the question whether the rule of a certain king, and the succession of his son after him, can be justified, arises only in cases where the king has no merits whatsoever. The comparison between these three kings uncovers numerous connections between them, especially the motif of the death of their children.

The Role of the Altar in the Book of Chronicles

In the book of Chronicles, in several passages that relate the establishment of the temple, we find an emphasis on—and an elevation of the status of—the altar and the sacrifices offered on it. To compare, we do not find this elevation of the altar’s status in the accounts of Samuel and Kings. This article examines this phenomenon and suggests that this shift is part of the Chronicler’s coping with a fundamental theological problem regarding the Second Temple.

Melting Pots and Rejoinders? The Interplay among Literature Formation Processes during the Late Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods

Abstract Traditionally, the book of Chronicles had been studied in relationship to the deuteronomic-deuteronomistic traditions on which it is mainly based. However, in recent years Chronicles and Pentateuch studies have also started moving closer to one another. It is realised now that the finalisation of the Pentateuch in the post-exilic period and the formation of new literature (such as Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah) happened in temporal proximity to one another. It is therefore worthwhile to investigate the relationship between these late stages of literature formation of the Hebrew Bible to come to a deeper understanding of the dynamics of ideological discourses during the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods. The present contribution widens the scope further to include the prophetic literature of Ezekiel 40-48 (particularly 44) in the investigation.

Iluminaciones en la sombra: el diario de Alejandro Sawa en la literatura española

Iluminaciones en la sombra (1910) se publicó póstumamente un año después de la muerte de Alejandro Sawa (1862-1909). El presente trabajo propone analizar su carácter de diario personal con entidad literaria, algo que no ha ocurrido con frecuencia y que puede ayudar a su asentamiento canónico. Se ha definido Iluminaciones en la sombra, así, como un libro de ensayos, un libro de crónicas, un libro misceláneo a secas e incluso como una novela, y solo algunos especialistas lo han catalogado como un diario. Un análisis que permita una definición más clara sobre su naturaleza literaria y autobiográfica puede dar cuenta de su importancia en la constitución de un nuevo género en el contexto español. Iluminaciones en la sombra (1910) was published posthumously one year after the death of Alejandro Sawa (1862-1909). The present work proposes to analyze its character as a personal diary with a literary entity. This can affect the canonical consideration of this work. Iluminaciones en la sombra has been defined as a book of essays, a book of chronicles, a miscellaneous book or a novel; only some specialists have cataloged it as a personal diary. This article aims to clarify the literary and autobiographical nature of this work, with the objective of confirming its importance in the constitution of a new genre in the Spanish context.

Expansion and exile in the Chronicler’s narrative of the two and a half tribes (1 Chr. 5.1-26)

Discussion of Exile in the book of Chronicles is generally limited to questions regarding its duration, scope, and comparisons of its portrayal in Chronicles with that in parallel books (Kings and Jeremiah). The prevalent approach to these questions in scholarship is that the Chronicler does not perceive this exile as a permanent state and usually downplays its duration or the number of people exiled. This is not the case, however, in regard to the two and a half tribes in 1 Chr. 5. Their exile is mentioned no fewer than three times in the genealogical lists of these tribes. I will attempt to explore why the exile of these tribes is relatively prominent in the text and how this contributes to the Chronicler’s perception of ‘all of Israel’.

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

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...