Anda di halaman 1dari 20

Raising Up

a Faithful Exegete
Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Edited by
K. L. NoLL and BrooKs Schramm
Winona Lake, Indiana
EisENBrauNs
2010
offpriNt from
2010 by Eisenbrauns Inc.
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America

www.eisenbrauns.com
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Raising up a faithful exegete : essays in honor of Richard D. Nelson / edited by K. L. Noll
and Brooks Schramm.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-57506-201-3 (hardback : alk. paper)
1. Bible. O.T.Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Deuteronomistic history
(Biblical criticism). 3. BibleTheology. I. Noll, K. L. II. Schramm, Brooks,
1957 III. Nelson, Richard D. (Richard Donald), 1945
BS1171.3.R35 2010
221.6dc22
2010040185
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American
National Standard for Information SciencesPermanence of Paper for Printed Library
Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.
Acknowledgment
Publication of this volume was made possible by a generous contribution from
the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, Michael L. Cooper-White,
President.
159
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters
Structure and Signifcation in the
Catalog of Davids Conquests
(2 Samuel 8:114, 1 Chronicles 18:113)
CYNTHIA EDENBURG
The catalog of Davids conquests (2 Sam 8:114, 1 Chr 18:113) pre sents a
forceful cumulative image of King Davids dominion over all the lands within
his scope. The king is depicted as an ideal empire builder, much like the depic-
tions of the great Neo-Assyrian kings whose royal authority was reinforced by
a divine mandate to establish Assyrian rule over all lands. Text- and historical-
critical issues should not supply the sole criteria for evaluating the two versions
of the catalog; rather, we should also consider the possibility that they were
shaped in order to convey diferent views of the part Davids conquests play in
Samuel and Chronicles.
1
In fact, a close comparative reading of both versions
will uncover difering ideological statements implicit in the structure of each
text, which suggest that each has undergone separate and purposeful editing. In
the following, I shall show that the scribes responsible for the two versions dif-
fered in how they viewed the intent of the catalog and its structure, and I shall
argue that the deviations in structure were conceived to convey meaning and
that they derive from purposeful editing rather than from accidents in transmis-
sion.
2
First, however, it is necessary to examine the signifcance of the struc-
tural elements that are shared by all the fully extant versions of the catalog.
1. Discussion of the relationship between synoptic texts in Samuel and Chronicles must
inevitably consider the text-critical issues arising from divergences between the various tex-
tual witnesses, which include 4QSam
a
, the LXX of Samuel and Chronicles, and Josephuss
retelling. Notwithstanding, I shall focus mainly on the MT of Samuel and Chronicles, since
the MT versions of the catalog are coherent texts in their own right that separately interact
with their larger context.
2. See Mario Liverani, Critique of the Variants and the Titulary of Sennacherib, in
Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: New Horizons in Literary, Ideological and Historical Analysis
(ed. F. M. Fales; Orientis Antiqui Collectio 17; Rome: Istituto per lOriente, 1981) 228 on
the diference between transmission variants and compositional variants in recensions of
Assyrian royal inscriptions:
Variants in transmission mark the stages of a progressive deterioration in the written tradi-
tion . . . textual variants can be explained at the graphic or mnemonic level, or also at the
level of linguistic habit, and reach a cultural level of interest only without the knowledge
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 160
General Structure of the Catalog
The catalog of Davids conquests is a discrete literary unit that is loosely
connected to the dynastic oracle in both Samuel and Chronicles (2 Sam 7:1
29, 1 Chr 17:127) by means of the introductory clause (2 Sam
8:1, 1 Chr 18:1).
3
The catalog uses the narrative perfect (wayyiqtol) to list
Davids victories over the surrounding peoples and thereby appears to present
a chronological survey of achievements accomplished after Nathan delivered
the dynastic oracle. However, the summary of Davids victories over the Am-
monites, Hadadezer of Zobah, and Aram (2 Sam 8:38, 12; 1 Chr 18:38, 11)
anticipates the full narrative of the Ammonite war that is related only later
(2 Samuel 1012, 1 Chr 19:120:3). Moreover, in Samuel the narrative in-
troduction to the dynastic oracle states that David had been granted rest from
all his enemies (2 Sam 7:1), which according to the Deuteronomist is a prior
condition to the institution of the temple and its cult (Deut 12:911).
4
But this
statement implies that David completed his conquests before he consulted Na-
than in 2 Samuel 7, rather than after Nathans oracle was delivered.
5
Similar tension arises in Chronicles; although the catalog opens by report-
ing that David vanquished the Philistines (1 Chr 18:1), the Chronicler has the
Philistine wars continuing in 1 Chr 20:48. Furthermore, while Davids wars
and bloodshed (1 Chr 18:120:8) ostensibly serve to justify YHWHs refusal
for David to build the temple, the Chronicler retained the catalogs refrain that
YHWH granted David victory in all his endeavors (1 Chr 18:6, 13), implying
that Davids wars were still in accord with divine will.
6
All these points indi-
of their authors (the copyists). Compositional variants on the contrary are the result of
voluntary decisions by authors well aware of varying and specifcally motivated (by style,
or ideology, or historical context) to vary.
3. This use of the temporal clause appears solely in the Deuteronomistic
History and Chronicles, and imposes continuity upon previously unconnected material; see
Judg 16:4; 2 Sam 2:1, 10:1, 13:1, 21:18; 2 Chr 20:1.
4. On the so-called rest theology, see Gerhard von Rad, There Remains Still a Rest
for the People of God: An Investigation of a Biblical Conception, The Problem of the Hexa-
teuch and Other Essays (trans. E. W. Trueman Dicken; Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1966)
94102 = idem, From Genesis to Chronicles: Explorations in Old Testament Theology (ed.
K. C. Hanson; Fortress Classics in Biblical Studies; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005) 8288;
Wolfgang Roth, Deuteronomic Rest Theology: A Redaction-Critical Study, BR 21 (1976)
514; compare P. Kyle McCarter, II Samuel (AB 9; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1984) 251.
5. See, for example, I. L. Seeligman, Von historischer Wirklichkeit zu historiosophi-
scher Konzeption in der Hebrischen Bibel, Gesammelte Studien zur Hebrischen Bibel
(ed. Erhard Blum, Tbingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2004) 199201.
6. See Wilhelm Rudolph, Chronikbcher (HAT; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1955) 139.
Japhet notes that the Chronicler made an efort to portray David as the great warrior of
Israels history, by assembling together in one continuous section (1 Chronicles 1820)
all the information available from his source about Davids campaigns and political activ-
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 161
cate that the catalog is intended to summarize Davids achievements in the in-
ternational sphere without regard for the chronological framework represented
by the narrative in Samuel and Chronicles.
The catalog itself has been shaped according to geographical principles,
with the notices of Davids conquests moving from west (the Philistines,
2 Sam 8:1, 1 Chr 18:1) to east (Moab, 2 Sam 8:2, 1 Chr 18:2) and then from
north (Aram, 2 Sam 8:38, 1 Chr 18:38) to south (Edom, 2 Sam 8:1314,
1 Chr 18:1213).
7
Similar four-point structures occur in boundary lists and
commemorative inscriptions, where they are best understood as merism, in
which the totality is represented by its limits.
8
The geographical structure is
also implicit in the axis extending from Philistia and its western and southern
ity; see Sara Japhet, I and II Chronicles (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993)
34445. On the achronological character of the catalog in its context, see Gary Knoppers,
I Chronicles 1029 (AB 12; New York: Doubleday, 2004) 7023.
7. See also Simon J. De Vries, 12 Chronicles, (FOTL; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1989) 15960; Antony F. Campbell, S.J., 2 Samuel (FOTL; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
2005) 84; Knoppers, I Chronicles 1029, 701. Geographical principles rather than chronol-
ogy also ruled in the composition of Assyrian summary (or display) inscriptions; see A. T.
Olmstead, Assyrian Historiography: A Source Study (University of Missouri Studies: Social
Science series 3/1; Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1916) 6, 50; Hayim Tadmor,
The Historical Inscriptions of Adad-nirari III, Iraq 35 (1973) 141; idem, The Inscriptions
of Tiglath-pileser III, King of Assyria (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humani-
ties, 1994) 22, 25; Albert Kirk Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonia, Or 49 (1980) 152, 170.
8. See, for example, the annalistic inscription of Tiglath-pileser I: from beyond the
Lower Zab . . . unto the further side of the Euphrates, and the land of atti and the Upper
Sea of the West, in Daniel D. Luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Parts
III (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 192627) 245; the Standard Inscription of
Assurnasirpal (Luckenbill, Part I 487) which delineates Assurnasirpals reach in the north
(Nairi, ubaria, the source of the Subnat River and Urartu), west (the Lebanon and the
Great Sea), east (Babite pass and land of Hashmar on the slopes of the Zagros), and south
(Kardunia / Babylonia); the bull inscription of Shalmaneser III (Luckenbill, Part I 640)
with points in the west (Amanus and atti), north (Enzite, Melid, Arsakun), east (Namri on
the slopes of the Zagros) and south (Sea of Kaldu); the Khorsabad summary inscription of
Sargon (Luckenbill, Part II 79) listing points east (the Medes up to the border of Mount
Bikni), north (Urartu), west (princes of atti) and south (Melua); the building inscription
of Ashurbanipal (Luckenbill, Part II 90612) pointing south (Kush), east (Qirbit), north
(Lydia, Cimmerians, Tabal), and west (Arvad). For locations, see The Helsinki Atlas of the
Near East in the Neo-Assyrian Period (ed. S. Parpola and M. Porter; Chebeague Is., ME:
Casco Bay Assyriological Institute / Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2001). For
similar compass-point schemes in the Bible, see Gen 28:14; Josh 11:2, 12:7; Jer 47:149:22
(west Philistia 47:17, east Moab 48:147, north Ammon 49:16, south Edom 49:722); Jer
49:2350:1 (north Damascus 49:2327, south Qedar 49:2833, east Elam 49:3439, west
Babel 50:15); Ezek 25:117. For discussion of the conventions of merism and additional
sources, see N. Wazana, All the Boundaries of the Land: The Promised Land in Biblical
Thought in Light of the Ancient Near East (Biblical Encyclopaedia Library 24; Jerusalem:
Bialik Institute, 2007; Hebrew) 5779, 12374.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 162
borders on the Sea and the Brook of Egypt (v. 1; compare Josh 13:23, 15:47),
up to the river by which David intended to erect his monument ( v. 3).
9
My understanding of v. 3b ([] [] ) requires
some qualifcation, since the syntax is ambiguous in both Samuel and Chron-
icles, and the pronominal sufxes (, ) could apply to either David
or Hadadezer. An additional ambiguity arises from the fact that the river is
unnamed in Samuel. The Chronicler identifes the river with the Euphrates
(), but this may be an interpretive gloss. Some have argued that the monu-
ment mentioned must belong to Hadadezer, since it is unlikely that David ever
reached the Euphrates. Others have suggested that the unnamed river by which
David or Hadadezer erected a monument was the Jabbok and not the Euphra-
tes.
10
Both interpretations attempt to reconcile the catalogs report with histori-
cal feasibility and assume that the notice is rooted in the historical reality of
Davids reign and perhaps even derives from a contemporary annalistic source.
However, these assumptions are questionable.
11
Despite the historical intent of historiographical compositions, they fre-
quently bend historical reality to ft ideological concerns or use data from later
times when describing poorly documented periods. Therefore, I suggest that
the statement regarding the monument by the river is best understood against
both its immediate and its larger literary context. Within the immediate con-
text, we should note that Davids achievements, and not Hadadezers, are the
subject of the catalog; thus it is most likely that the catalogs author intends to
credit David with both acts, defeating Hadadezer and erecting the monument.
Moreover, throughout the Bible, when the river is not further identifed, it
9. For this signifcance of , see 1 Sam 15:12, 2 Sam 18:18. For discussion of the
boundary between Philistia and Egypt, see Nadav Naaman, The Brook of Egypt and As-
syrian Policy on the Border of Egypt, Ancient Israel and Its Neighbors: Interaction and
CounteractionsCollected Essays, vol. 1 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005) 23864.
10. Hans Joachim Hans Joachim Stoebe, Das zweite Buch Samuelis (KAT; Gtersloh: Gtersloher
Verlag, 1994) 243, 24950; Japhet, Chronicles, 346; Baruch Halpern, The Construction of
the Davidic State: An Exercise in Historiography, in The Origins of the Ancient Israelite
States (ed. Volkmar Fritz and Philip R. Davies; JSOTSup 228; Shefeld: Shefeld Academic
Press, 1996) 4475 (esp. p. 65); Simon B. Parker, Stories in Scripture and Inscriptions:
Comparative Studies on Narratives in Northwest Semitic Inscriptions and the Bible (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1997) 69; Nadav Naaman, In Search of Reality behind the
Account of Davids Wars with Israels Neighbors, IEJ 52 (2002) 200224 (esp. p. 208).
11. It is doubtful whether royal scribes of the incipient monarchy would have been em-
ployed in the production of literary genres such as annalistic sources; see discussion and
references in Nadav Naaman, Sources and Composition in the History of David, Ancient
Israels History and Historiography: The First Temple PeriodCollected Essays, vol. 3
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006) 2325, 3133; idem, Sources and Composition in
the History of Solomon, in The Age of Solomon: Scholarship at the Turn of the Millen-
nium (ed. Lowell K. Handy; SHCANE 9; Leiden: Brill 1997) 5761 with additional refer-
ences there.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 163
almost invariably indicates the Euphrates.
12
Finally, the broader context of the
Deuteronomistic History (henceforth: DtrH) shows that the Chroniclers gloss,
identifying the unnamed river with the Euphrates, coincides with the utopian
vision of the extent of Solomons rule ranging from all the kingdoms from the
river as far as the land of the Philistines (1 Kgs 5:1, 4; compare 2 Chr 9:26).
This delineation includes all the kings of the territory Across the River, that
is, the Transeuphrates or bir nri.
13
Thus, even if the Chroniclers reading
is a gloss, his interpretation undoubtedly coincides with the Deuteronomists
intent. Hence, there is a sound basis for understanding 2 Sam 8:3 to claim that
David erected a monument on the western bank of the Euphrates.
Additional structuring becomes evident through the patterns of recurring
formulations. The basic framework of the catalog is a series of four conquest
notices corresponding to the four compass points. The frst three notices fol-
low one another and open in the same fashion: David defeated [x] with [x]
representing the Philistines, Moab, and Hadadezer of Zobah, respectively
(2 Sam 8:13, 1 Chr 18:13). However, the fourth notice (2 Sam 8:1314,
1 Chr 18:1213) breaks the pattern of the standard opening. Instead of the
expected formulation, David defeated Edom, we fnd something entirely dif-
ferent in both Samuel and Chronicles. For the present, it is enough to notice
that such a break of the recurring pattern at the end of a series is characteristic
of the graduated number, or x + 1 sequence. In this type of sequence, the break
in the repeated pattern not only alerts the reader that the sequence has come
to its end but also frequently marks the climax or a signifcant turn of events.
Accordingly, the victory over Edom in the Valley of Salt appears to be cast as
the crowning achievement in this series of conquests.
12. The determinate form the river () appears 20 times without a subsequent des-
ignation. With the single exception of Num 22:5, all of these instances implicitly refer to the
Euphrates; see Gen 31:21; Exod 23:31; 1 Kgs 5:1; Isa 8:7, 11:15, 27:12 and the phrase
in Josh 24:23, 1415; 2 Sam 10:16; 1 Kgs 5:4; Ezra 8:36; Neh 2:7, 9; 3:7. Five times
the river is explicitly identifed with the Euphrates (Gen 15:18; Deut 1:7, 11:24; Josh 1:4;
1 Chr 5:9) as opposed to a single identifcation with another river (the Tigris, Dan 10:4).
Nowhere does the river imply either the Jabbok or the Jordan.
13. Although the term gained currency in the Persian period, it was already attested in
the time of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal; see, for example, Rykle Borger, Die Inschriften
Asarhaddons Konigs von Assyrien (AfOB 9; Osnabrck: Biblio-Verlag, 1967) 60 v 54;
ibid., 109 iv 9 (treaty with Baalu of Tyre); Robert Francis Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian
Letters (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 18921914) 706 rev. 3. For the view that
the term was the established name for the territory west of the Euphrates, see Naaman, In
Search of Reality, 208 n. 35. According to some, this utopian vision of Solomons reach
derives from post-Deuteronomistic revision; for example, Naaman, History of Solomon,
79; compare Thomas Rmer, The So-Called Deuteronomistic History: A Sociological, His-
torical and Literary Introduction (London: T. & T. Clark, 2005) 17576. However, an exilic
Deuteronomist might choose to accentuate the loss of independence by means of a utopian
representation of Solomons empire.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 164
Other elements intermittently augment this superstructure. These include
booty notices (2 Sam 8:1b, 78; 1 Chr 18:1b, 78);
14
vassal and tribute notices
(2 Sam 8:2b, 6b, 14b; 1 Chr 18:2b, 6b, 13b); the number of causalities inficted
(2 Sam 8:5, 13; 1 Chr 18:5, 12); comments that David appointed governors
over (or stationed garrisons in) the conquered territory (2 Sam 8:6, 14; 1 Chr
18:6, 13);
15
and the statement that YHWH granted David victory in all his en-
deavors (2 Sam 8:6, 14; 1 Chr 18:6, 13).
Between the third and fourth conquest notices is an additional report relat-
ing how the king of Hamat sought an alliance with David and sent him tribute
(2 Sam 8:912, 1 Chr 18:911). This report is placed after the notices deal-
ing with Aram, since it continues the geographical progression northward and
because Hadadezer fgures in Tois motives for seeking the alliance (2 Sam
8:910, 1 Chr 18:910). Although the Hamat section stands out from its con-
text by virtue of its shift in focus, perspective, and the separate summary list
of Davids conquests (2 Sam 8:1112, 1 Chr 18:11), this does not necessarily
indicate that the catalog of conquests has been secondarily expanded by the
insertion of the material dealing with Toi.
16
Similar changes in perspective and
focus are also evident in Assyrian and West Semitic royal inscriptions.
17
Structure and Signifcation
Now that the structural principles that shaped the catalog are clear, we are
able to consider the meaning imparted by the structure. For, just as an automo-
bile is more than a set of parts, so a text comprises more than a group of state-
ments. The way parts are ordered and put together is crucial for a car to run,
14. The reading in 2 Sam 8:1 is supported by 4QSam
a
. Chronicles reads
instead, but this is undoubtedly an interpretive reading rather than a true textual vari-
ant; see, for example, S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the
Books of Samuel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1913) 280; Rudolph, Chronikbcher, 134. The phrase
probably refers to a particular piece of booty similar to the golden quivers taken
from Hadadezer (2 Sam 8:7) and the crown of Milcom taken from the temple in Rabbat
(2 Sam 12:30); compare the rl dwdh that Mesha took from Atarot and placed in Chemoshs
sanctuary in Qiryat (Mesha Inscription lines 1213); see N. Naaman, History of David,
30; Parker, Stories in Scripture, 68.
15. 1 Chr 18:6a lacks the required object and is undoubtedly corrupt.
16. Contra Stoebe, Das zweite Buch Samuelis, 250; Parker, Stories in Scripture, 70. The
other catalog notices focus on conquest, booty, and subjugation and are told from Davids
perspective, while the Hamat section deals with diplomacy and patron-client relations and is
narrated from Tois perspective. On the narrative mode of the section and its stylistic parallel
in the Mesha Inscription, see Parker, Stories in Scripture, 71.
17. This change in theme and perspective is particularly characteristic of the letter to
the god genre; see Sargons letter reporting on his eighth campaign and Esarhaddons
letter dealing with the campaign against Shupria (Luckenbill, Part II 14078, 593612).
See also the description of Shalmanesers thirtieth year in the Black Obelisk Inscription
(Luckenbill, Part I 587).
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 165
and so too, the structurethat is, the interaction between constituent partsis
integral to the signifcation of a text. In other words, there is a metonymic rela-
tionship between the texts structure and the signifcance conveyed by the text
as a whole. I suggest that the merisms implicit to the geographical structure not
only shape the catalog of conquests but also impart signifcance beyond the list
of separate victories.
18
Moreover, the merisms and other geographical topoi in
the catalog are best paralleled by literary conventions known from Assyrian
royal inscriptions.
First, the merism inherent to the westeast, northsouth structure implies
that the scribe shaped the catalog in order to credit David with subjection of
all the lands adjacent to Israel in all four cardinal directionsfrom west to
east and from north to south. I think the scribe may even have intended this
structure implicitly to claim for David the Mesopotamian royal title king of
the four quarters [of the world] (ar kibrtim arbaim).
19
The title King of
the Four Quarters has a lengthy history in Mesopotamian royal inscriptions,
and many kings employed the title from the beginning of their reigns before
engaging in campaigns to every point on the compass.
20
However, from the
time of Sennacherib, the title appears in Assyrian royal inscriptions only after
enumerating campaigns to the four compass points.
21
Familiarity with the title
penetrated westward with the advance of the Neo-Assyrian empire, as is at-
tested by the Aramaic equivalent applied to Tiglath-pileser III in royal inscrip-
tions of the kings of Yaudi/Samal.
22
Additionally, the statement that David defeated Hadadezer when heDa-
vidset out to erect his monument by the river casts David in the role of one
of the great kings who undertakes a hazardous campaign to the banks of the
distant river, where he erects his stele symbolizing his claim to dominion over
all the territory up to that point. This topos was a recurring motif in Assyrian
royal inscriptions, and several Assyrian kings sought to enhance their prestige
by erecting steles and engraving inscriptions on clifs and walls by distant and
immense natural boundaries at the far extreme of the kings reach.
23
18. On implicit spacial merism, see Wazana, Boundaries, 6465.
19. From Narm-Sin of Akkad down to Cyrus, the title was claimed by Mesopotamian
kings who pursued an aggressive policy of military campaigning; see M.-J. Seux, pithtes
Royales Akkadiennes et Sumriennes (Paris: Letouzey et An, 1967) 3058; William W.
Hallo, Early Mesopotamian Royal Titles: A Philologic and Historical Analysis (AOS 43;
New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society, 1957) 4956; Liverani, Critique, 23436,
241; B. Cifola, Analysis of Variants in the Assyrian Royal Titulary from the Origins to
Tiglath-Pileser III (Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1995) 4041 and passim.
20. See, for example, Hallo, Titles, 50; Cifola, Titulary, 41, 63, 82.
21. Liverani, Critique, 23436.
22. See KAI 215 lines 1314 (Panammu); 216 lines 14, 217 lines 12 (Barrakkab).
23. See Mario Liverani, The Ideology of the Assyrian Empire, in Power and Prop-
aganda: A Symposium on Ancient Empires (ed. Mogens Trolle Larsen; Mesopotamia:
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 166
Another geographical convention of the Assyrian royal inscriptions uses
the opposition of extreme boundaries, as in the royal title king of the upper
and lower seas (ar tmti elti u upalti).
24
This opposition I think is refected
by the trajectory running from the land of the Philistines up to the river (Eu-
phrates) and undoubtedly is intended to imply that David realized the divine
promises that Israel would inherit all the land from the Great River to the Sea
and the Brook of Egypt at the southern border of Philistia (Gen 15:18, Deut
11:24, Josh 1:4; compare 1 Kgs 5:1).
The use of these geographical conventions conveyed by structure and titu-
lary in order to represent maximalistic expansion and universal domination
is specifcally characteristic of Mesopotamian royal inscriptions (particularly
of Neo-Assyrian kings) and rarely occurs in West Semitic inscriptions.
25
Me-
shas Inscription, for example, details his conquests without invoking merism
or maximalistic geographical topoi. Hence, I suggest that, in this aspect, the
catalog emulates the literary conventions of Neo-Assyrian rather than West
Semitic royal inscriptions.
Furthermore, the clustering of augmenting formulas in the catalog (2 Sam
8:38, 1314; 1 Chr 18:38, 1213) imparts special emphasis to the notices
dealing with the conquest of Aram and Edom, which represent the northern
and southern extremes of Davids empire. These two extreme points are dis-
tinguished by the comments about appointing governors over the conquered
territory and by the summation that YHWH granted David victory in all his
endeavors. As a result, although the narratives in Samuel and Chronicles only
Copenhagen Studies in Assyriology 7; Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag, 1979) 297317
(esp. p. 307); Hayim Tadmor, Propaganda, Literature, Historiography: Cracking the Code
of the Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, in Assyria 1995: Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary
Symposium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project (ed. S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting;
Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997) 32538 (esp. pp. 33031); idem,
World Dominion: The Expanding Horizon of the Assyrian Empire, in Landscapes: Ter-
ritories, Frontiers and Horizons in the Ancient Near EastPapers Presented to the XLIV
Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (ed. L. Milano et al.; History of the Ancient Near
East: Monographs 3/1; Padua: Sargon, 1999) 5562; . Harmanah, Source of the Tigris:
Event, Place and Performance in the Assyrian Landscapes of the Early Iron Age, Archaeo-
logical Dialogues 14 (2007) 179204.
24. Liverani, Ideology, 307; idem, Critique, 241; see also Cifola, Titulary, 42. Com-
pare similar formulas, from beyond the lower Zab . . . unto the further side of the Euphrates
. . . and the Upper Sea of the West, in the annalistic inscription of Tiglath-pileser I (Luck-
enbill, Part I 245); from beyond the Tigris unto Mount Lebanon and the Great Sea, in
Ashurnasirpals bull inscription (Luckenbill, Part I 516); from Bitter Sea of Bit-Yakin . . .
up to the Western Sea, in Tadmor, Tiglath-Pileser, 159, summary inscription 7.
25. An interesting exception is the Azitiwada inscription from Karatepe (KAI 26), in
which Azitiwada claims to have extended his land from the rising sun to its setting (A i
45; compare A ii 23) and to have built fortresses in all the remote areas along the borders
(A i 14).
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 167
relate specifc battles that David waged against the Philistines, the Ammonites,
and the Arameans, the shape of the catalog summarily establishes an ideal pic-
ture of the extent of Davids empire, attributing to David the subjugation of the
entire Transjordan, from Aram in the north to Edom in the south.
Finally, inclusion of the Hamat section within the catalog of Davids con-
quests casts David in the role of the great patron alongside his role as the great
warrior. Moreover, this section implies that David realized virtual control over
the ideal boundaries of the promised land up to Lebo Hamat in the far northeast,
an area that the Deuteronomistic conquest account relegated to the territory of
the land that yet remains (Josh 13:5, Judg 3:3; compare Num 13:21, 34:8;
1 Kgs 8:65).
26
In sum, merisms and other geographical topoi work together
to paint a larger picture, one that emulates Neo-Assyrian style and intends to
present David as the great king in the manner of Assyrian royal propaganda.
The Relationship between the Catalogs in
2 Samuel 8 and 1 Chronicles 18
All the elements discussed till now are shared by all the fully extant ver-
sions of the catalog. Now I shall examine some of the issues relating to the
diferences between the versions and concentrate on points that contribute to
the structure or signifcation of the catalog.
Signifcant Pluses in the Versions of Samuel and Chronicles
There are three signifcant pluses in the versions of the catalog. The frst,
which describes Davids treatment of the Moabite prisoners, is found in the
versions of Samuel (MT, LXX, and 4QSam
a
) but is lacking in Chronicles.
Some have suggested that the Chronicler deliberately deleted the comment
because he found it denigrating to the character of David.
27
However, this is
unlikely, since the Chronicler retained a similar report regarding Davids cruel
treatment of a subject population in the description of the Ammonite war in
1 Chr 20:3. Thus, the phrase probably was already lost in the transmission of
the Chroniclers Vorlage, possibly due to homoioarkton ( ).
The situation is much more complex with regard to the other two pluses,
placed at the end of consecutive verses (vv. 78) and dealing with the even-
tual fate of spoil taken from Hadadezer. The frst comment, at the end of v. 7,
states that the golden quivers taken from Hadadezer were later taken as booty
26. Compare Nadav Naaman, Lebo-Hamath, Subat-Hamath, and the Northern Bound-
ary of the Land of Canaan, UF 31 (1999) 41741; Edward Lipinski, The Aramaeans: Their
Ancient History, Culture, Religion (OLA 100; Leuven: Peeters / Sterling, VA: Department
of Oriental Studies, 2000) 338.
27. Compare Edward Lewis Curtis and Albert Alonzo Madsen, A Critical and Exegeti-
cal Commentary on the Books of Chronicles (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1910) 23233;
Japhet, Chronicles, 346; Knoppers, I Chronicles 1029, 690.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 168
by Shishak when he attacked Jerusalem in the time of Rehoboam. This plus is
attested in Samuel by 4QSam
a
and the Greek versions (the LXX of Samuel and
Josephus) but is not extant in the MT of Samuel or in Chronicles. The second
comment, at the end of v. 8, relates that the bronze taken from Hadadezer was
used by Solomon in making various furnishings for the temple. This plus is
found in the LXX of Samuel as well as in the MT of Chronicles and in Jose-
phuss paraphrase but is not preserved in the MT of Samuel or in 4QSam
a
. It is
initially tempting to view the additional comment in 1 Chr 18:8 in light of the
Chroniclers tendencies, since this note occurs at the midpoint of the catalog,
implying that the true signifcance of Davids gains lay in the fact that they
served to glorify the future temple.
28
Given the distribution of these pluses in the diferent versions, it seems
most likely that they originated in a specifc stem of copies of Samuel, with
which both the Chronicler and the OG translator were familiar.
29
Even so,
these anticipatory remarks are out of place in a catalog that revolves around
Davids conquests and achievements. Therefore, they appear to be interpre-
tive glosses that were inserted by a creative scribe who was infuenced by the
recurring comments in the DtrH regarding the temple treasury (for example,
1 Kgs 14:2526; 15:18; 2 Kgs 12:5, 19; 14:14; 16:8, 1718; 18:1316; 24:13;
25:1315). While the remarks in Kings about the temple treasury may have
stemmed from a temple chronicle, their cumulative force within their context
in the DtrH presents a picture of continual despoiling of the temple.
30
Thus,
I think that the scribe who added the glosses to vv. 78 in the catalog may
have wanted to make a double point. On the one hand, his comments empha-
size Davids role in establishing the temple treasury by devoting his spoils to
YHWH. On the other hand, the remarks foreshadow later key developments in
the history of the temple. The temple furnishings mentioned as those made by
Solomon in the Chronicles plus to v. 8 are the same as those despoiled by Ne-
28. Rudolph, Chronikbcher, 139; Stephen Pisano, Additions or Omissions in the Books
of Samuel (OBO 57; Freiburg: Universittsverlag / Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1984) 4748. However, compare Japhet (Chronicles, 34849), who notes that proleptic re-
marks are not characteristic of the Chronicler.
29. See, for example, Steven L. McKenzie, The Chroniclers Use of the Deuteronomistic
History (HSM 33; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1984) 5354; Frank H. Polak, Statistics and
Textual Filiation: The Case of 4QSam
a
/LXX (With a Note on the Text of the Pentateuch),
in Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings: Papers Presented to the International Sym-
posium on the Septuagint and Its Relations to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings
(ed. George J. Brooke and Barnabus Lindars; SBLSCS 33; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992)
24950; Knoppers, I Chronicles 1029, 692; Frank Moore Cross et al., Qumran Cave 4, 12:
12 Samuel (DJD 17; Oxford: Clarendon, 2005) 2526, 133.
30. See, for example, Victor Hurowitz, Another Fiscal Practice in the Ancient Near
East: 2 Kings 12:517 and a Letter to Esarhaddon (LAS 277), JNES 45 (1986) 28994 (esp.
p. 290 n. 5); Nadav Naaman, The Deuteronomist and Voluntary Servitude to Foreign Pow-
ers, JSOT 65 (1995) 3753.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 169
buchadnezzar at the end of the DtrH (1 Chr 18:8, 2 Kgs 25:13).
31
Furthermore,
the 4QSam
a
and LXX plus to v. 7 alludes to the frst despoiling of the temple
treasures recorded in the DtrH, which occurred in the course of Shishaks cam-
paign (1 Kgs 14:26).
These pluses should therefore be considered editorial glosses refecting a
process of compositional revision and not true transmission variants. Thus, it is
not surprising that the Chronicler added the comment about the temple furnish-
ings, since this note apparently derives from the copy of Samuel before him.
But why did he not add the afliated note about Shishak? Did he purposely
delete this notice in order to avoid detracting from Davids conquests, as Frank
Polak suggests?
32
Or was it already lacking from the copy of Samuel that lay
before the Chronicler?
33
2 Samuel 8:3, 13 and 1 Chronicles 18:3, 12
The next diference in structure to be considered arises from a comparison
of the pair of notices in Samuel and Chronicles regarding the victory over Ha-
dadezer and the victory in the Valley of Salt. The MT of 2 Sam 8:3, 13 refects
opposing movements expressed by the phrases on his way to []
(v. 3) and upon returning from [] (v. 13) as well as opposing
places: the river and the Valley of Salt. In addition, each of the verses con-
tains one unit of the hendiadys that is synonymous with an everlasting
name or memorial (Isa 56:5; compare Isa 44:5, Jer 16:21, 2 Sam 18:18).
34
The
breakup of the hendiadys along with the various oppositions between the two
verses convey the impression that the two events are conceived as two parts
of a whole and that the march to the river in the north and the victory in the
Valley of Salt in the south are meant to signify a single achievementnamely,
subjugating all of the east between Aram and Edom.
35
31. The Chronicles plus stands in inverse relation to the despoiling notice at the end of
the DtrH. According to 1 Chr 18:8, the bronze that David takes from Hadadezers cities is
used by Solomon to make the bronze sea and the columns, while 2 Kgs 25:13 reports that
the Babylonians dismantle the bronze columns and the bronze sea and carry them of to
Babylon. Moreover, the Chronicles plus reverses the order of the clauses and the word pairs
occurring in 2 Kgs 25:13, which may indicate intentional intertextual reference.
32. Polak, Statistics, 250.
33. For the suggestion of homoioteleuton, see McCarter, II Samuel, 244; Cross et al.,
12 Samuel, 133; compare McKenzie, Chroniclers Use, 53.
34. For as a hendiadys and instances in which the two components are separated
and appear in parallel cola, see Shemaryahu Talmon, Yd wm: An Idiomatic Phrase
in Biblical Literature and Its Variations, HS 25 (1984) 817 [repr. Literary Studies in the
Hebrew Bible: Form and ContentCollected Studies (Jerusalem: Magnes / Leiden: Brill,
1993)]. Talmon noted (p. 12) the occurrence of the broken up form of the hendiadon in
2 Sam 8:3, 13 but did not indicate its function in structuring the catalog.
35. The MT reading Aram in 1 Sam 8:13 is generally thought to be a scribal slip for
Edom caused by the graphic similarity of dalet and re (compare 2 Kgs 16:6; Ezek 16:57,
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 170
Here we fnd that a specifc version of the catalogthe version in Sam-
uelevokes an additional motif familiar from Mesopotamian royal inscrip-
tions. This motif of placing the name (uma aknu) of the monarch on a
monument or a votive object was in use from the Old Akkadian period (latter
third of the third millenium B.C.E.) down to the times of Nebuchadnezzar II
(604562 B.C.E.) and, according to Sandra Richter, was employed in order to
claim something as ones own by placing ones name upon it.
36
In several in-
scriptions from diferent periods, Mesopotamian kings claim to have marched
to the shore of the Great Sea, to the Cedar mountains, or to other distant land-
marks and erected their stela and placed their name. Erecting the commemo-
rative stela on which the king has placed his name preserves the memory of
the king and his achievements for posterity and establishes the extent of his
territorial hegemony. Sandra Richter has argued that in some inscriptions the
idiom placing the name is a metonym signifying the act of erecting a monu-
ment.
37
In the context of 2 Samuel 8, this suggestion might be extended, with
the catalog itself as a literary composition flling the role of an actual monu-
ment by establishing the claim for Davids hegemony over all the neighboring
lands and by commemorating his achievements for all time.
38
The framework and ideas conveyed by splitting the hendiadys in the
Samuel version of the catalog are absent from Chronicles. Chronicles makes
no reference to making a name in conjunction with the victory at the Valley
of Salt. Nor does Chronicles convey an opposition in movement between the
encounter with Hadadezer and the victory in the Valley of Salt, since v. 12
lacks the temporal clause . Finally, Chronicles disagrees with
Samuel by attributing the Valley of Salt victory to Abishai rather than to David
(2 Sam 8:13, 1 Chr 18:12).
39
27:16; 2 Chr 20:2), and all the other versions (LXX Samuel, Peshitta Samuel, and 1 Chr
18:12) read Edom for Aram in this clause. The exchange of Edom for Aram seems to
have occurred already in 2 Sam 8:12. The parallel in 1 Chr 18:11 has Edom at the begin-
ning of the summary list, which refects a geographical progression from south to northern
Transjordan through Moab and up to Ammon. By contrast, placement of Aram at the open-
ing of the list in the MT of 2 Sam 8:12 has no internal logic and appears superfuous since
Hadadezer of Zobah is mentioned at the end of the list. Thus, an initial slip at the beginning
of 2 Sam 8:12 seems to have led to a continuation of the same error in v. 13.
36. Sandra L. Richter, The Deuteronomistic History and the Name Theology: Leakkn
em m in the Bible and the Ancient Near East (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002) 183.
37. Ibid., 15384.
38. Compare Parker, Stories in Scripture, 73.
39. Some suggest that in 1 Chr 18:12 is a corruption of a postulated read-
ing in the Samuel Vorlage, such as, ; see, for example, Curtis and Madsen,
Books of Chronicles, 23536; Rudolph, Chronikbcher, 13435; Thomas Willi, Die Chronik
als Auslegung: Untersuchungen zur literarischen Gestaltung der historischen berlieferung
Israels (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 7475; Japhet, Chronicles, 344. How-
ever, this proposal is not supported by any textual witness.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 171
Naaman has suggested that the catalogs notice about the Valley of Salt
victory is based on the account in 2 Kgs 14:7 about Amaziahs war there.
40

Indeed, the notice about Amaziahs victory in the Valley of Salt is indepen-
dent of the other variants and is integrated into the narrative of Amaziahs
reign.
41
By contrast, the account of Davids reign preserves no information
about Davids victory over Edom, and the only other extant source for a cam-
paign against Edom was incorporated into the episode dealing with Hadad the
Edomite in 1 Kgs 11:1516, which reports Joabs slaughter of the Edomites.
42

As I have shown, the royal inscriptions of Mesopotamian kings who claimed
to establish or rule an empire employed titles and geographical structures that
represented them as sovereigns whose rule extended over the far extremes of
the familiar world. If the author of the catalog was infuenced by the literary
conventions of these inscriptions, then he must have been motivated to credit
David with the conquest of Edom in order to establish his rule over all the
Transjordan, which represented the eastern horizon of the familiar world as
seen from Judah. To this end, the author picked up a conquest notice associated
with another kingAmaziahand adapted it to his own purposes.
By contrast, Chronicles signifcantly deviates from the pattern of the royal
report, which focuses solely on the kings accomplishments. At frst it seems
unlikely that the Chronicler would have deviated from a prior Davidic tradi-
tion, particularly given his tendency to glorify David. Therefore, some hold
that the Chronicler simply followed his source in attributing the Valley of Salt
victory to Abishai.
43
This view implies that Chronicles preserves the earlier
version of the notice and that the catalog was subsequently revised to refect
the form of a royal summary inscription in which all achievements are at-
tributed to the king. This position approaches the notion that Chronicles and
SamuelKings have separately evolved from a common source.
44
40. Nadav Naaman, Sources and Composition in the Biblical History of Edom, in Se-
fer Moshe: The Moshe Weinfeld Jubilee VolumeStudies in the Bible and the Ancient Near
East, Qumran, and Postbiblical Judaism (ed. C. Cohen, A. Hurvitz, and S. M. Paul; Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004) 31819; idem, History of David, 31.
41. Compare the unparalleled note in v. 7a
2
regarding the conquest of Sela as well as the
additional reference to Amaziahs victory over Edom in v. 10. Furthermore, the postscript to
Amaziahs reign in vv. 2122, which introduces Uzziah and reports his building project in
Eilat, assumes the victory over Edom.
42. For the source of this episode, see Naaman, History of Solomon, 6263.
43. Stoebe, Das zweite Buch Samuelis, 245; Diana V. Edelman, The Deuteronomists
David and the Chroniclers David: Competing or Contrasting Ideologies? in The Future of
the Deuteronomistic History (ed. Thomas Rmer; BETL 147; Leuven: Leuven University
Press, 2000) 6783 (esp. pp. 7578); Knoppers, I Chronicles 1029, 693. For a comparable
case in which Chronicles introduces an additional victor alongside David, see 1 Chr 11:4
9 // 2 Sam 5:610.
44. Edelman, David, 83. (See the essay by A. Graeme Auld in this volume.)
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 172
However, both versions of the catalog refect the geographical structure of
the summary inscription genre, which seems to indicate that the Chroniclers
source already attributed all the victories to David. If Chronicles was com-
posed at the end of the fourth century B.C.E., as Japhet, Knoppers, and others
propose, then the Chronicler probably was not sensitive to the literary conven-
tions of the Mesopotamian royal inscriptions, which heavily infuenced scribes
educated in the Neo-Assyrian and Babylonian periods.
45
Naaman suggests
that the Chronicler may have been troubled by an apparent confict between the
report in the catalog that David defeated the Edomites and the report in 1 Kgs
11:1516, according to which Joab commanded the campaign against Edom.
46

Of course, he was also aware of the similar report regarding Amaziahs vic-
tory in the Valley of Salt, and the formulation found in 2 Kgs 14:7 appears
to have infuenced his revision of the catalog notice. If indeed the Chronicler
revised the catalog in order to resolve the conficting reports, he may have hit
upon Abishai ben Zeruiah as victor in the Valley of Salt not only because he
is related to Joab but also because his name contains the alep, sade, yod, and
he found in Amaziahs name.
47
On the one hand, this view implies that the
Chronicler was less concerned with enhancing Davids reputation as a valiant
conqueror, and on the other hand, it presents the Chronicler in the role of a
historian trying to make sense out of his sources.
Interaction between the Catalog and the Dynastic Oracle
In both Samuel and Chronicles, the catalog of Davids conquests imme-
diately follows the pronouncement of the dynastic oracle and Davids subse-
quent prayer. This juxtaposition implies that Davids empire was established
as a direct consequence of the divine promises and underscores the Deuter-
onomistic principle of double causality, according to which success results
from human initiative accompanied by divine aid.
48
Thus, in the dynastic or-
acle (2 Sam 7:9; compare 1 Chr 17:8), YHWH promised to assist David in all
his endeavors ( ), to eradicate () all his enemies, and to
make his name great ( ). These themes are underscored in
45. On the date of Chronicles, see Japhet, Chronicles, 2328; Gary N. Knoppers,
1 Chronicles 19 (AB 12; New York: Doubleday, 2003) 116.
46. Naaman, Sources and Composition in the Biblical History of Edom, 318.
47. This may also explain why 2 Chr 25:11 appears to paraphrase rather than reproduce
from the formulation of Amaziahs victory in 2 Kgs 14:7. If the Chronicler deliberately pat-
terned the catalog notice on the report of Amaziahs victory, then he probably preferred to
vary the formulation when relating the events of Amaziahs reign.
48. See, for example, Knoppers, I Chronicles 1029, 694, 703. On the principle of
double causality, see I. L. Seeligman, Menschliches Heldentum und gttliche Hilfe, in
Gesammelte Studien zur Hebrischen Bibel (ed. Erhard Blum; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2004) 13759; Yairah Amit, The Dual Causality Principle and Its Efects on Biblical Lit-
erature, VT 87 (1987) 385400.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 173
the catalog through the enumeration of Davids victories along with the sum-
mary refrain that YHWH granted him victory in all his endeavors ( ;
2 Sam 8:6, 14; 1 Chr 18:6, 13).
At the same time, the catalog interacts diferently with the oracle in the
separate versions in Samuel and Chronicles. Only the Samuel version of the
catalog explicitly picks up the promise of aggrandizing Davids name by stat-
ing that David made his name ( ) through the Valley of Salt vic-
tory, and this statement, as we saw, is lacking in Chronicles (2 Sam 8:13;
compare 1 Chr 18:12). On the other hand, Chronicles adds a link lacking in
Samuel. The Chronicles version of the dynastic oracle reads in 1 Chr 17:10 I
shall subdue () all your enemies, where 2 Sam 7:11 has I shall grant
you rest () from all your enemies. The Chroniclers divergent reading
in the dynastic oracle echoes the opening of the catalog that states that David
subdued the Philistines (, 1 Chr 18:1).
49
The Chroniclers divergence
here undoubtedly stems from his rejection of the idea that YHWH granted David
rest from Israels enemies (1 Chr 17:1; compare 2 Sam 7:1). The postponement
of the period of rest to the days of Solomon (1 Chr 22:810) plays a central role
in the Chroniclers attempt to justify the reason that the temple was built by
Solomon and not by the founder of the dynastyDavid. Thus, the interaction
in Chronicles between the dynastic oracle and the catalog of conquests helps
convey the notion that YHWH subdues Davids enemies, without granting him
rest from them. Here it is evident that the Chronicler is manipulating the meta-
narrative according to his purpose and that the divergence in reading derives
from editorial or compositional considerations, rather than separate processes
of transmission.
50
Conclusion
I suggested above that the geographical scheme refected by the catalogs
structure alludes to various Mesopotamian royal titles and topoi and conveys
an ideological message, claiming for David the same prestigious position as-
sumed by Mesopotamian kings who built empires and claimed to rule the four
quarters of the world. If there is merit in my suggestion, then the catalog has
been composed by a scribe familiar with the scribal conventions of the Neo-
Assyrian inscriptions. Although neither the DtrH nor Chronicles applies any
royal titles to David or any other king of Judah or Israel, the geographical
structure of the catalog alludes to a number of titles borne by Neo-Assyrian
49. See also Gary N. Knoppers, Changing History: Nathans Oracle and the Struc-
ture of the Davidic Monarchy in Chronicles, in Shai le-Sara Japhet: Studies in the Bible,
Its Exegesis and Its Language (ed. M. Bar-Asher et al.; Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2007)
111*12*.
50. Michael Avioz, Nathans Prophecy in II Sam 7 and in I Chr 17: Text, Context, and
Meaning, ZAW 116 (2004) 54254 (esp. p. 549); Knoppers, Changing History, 104*5*.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
CYNTHIA EDENBURG 174
kings. While the title King of the Four Quarters and its implicit claim for uni-
versal dominion is already attested in the West Semitic sphere from the time
of Tiglath-pileser III, the daring characterization of David in the image of a
Neo-Assyrian empire-builder suggests that the architect of the catalog worked
either after the demise of the Assyrian Empire or when it was waning.
51
The
fact that the catalog draws upon Neo-Assyrian conventions frmly places it
within the scope of Deuteronomistic literary production, even though it does
not employ Deuteronomistic idioms.
52
The lack of Deuteronomistic idioms
may be explained by the notion that the scribe derived some of the notices
from a relatively early source, such as a Chronicle of Early Israelite Kings,
as Naaman proposes.
53
The depiction of David in the fgure of a Neo-Assyrian
conqueror could easily ft within the working hypothesis of either a single ex-
ilic or double (preexilic and exilic) redaction of the DtrH. If the case for a
double redaction is still compelling, as Richard Nelson argues, then the scribe,
who viewed David as the alter-ego of Josiah, designed the catalog to imply
that, with the withdrawal of Assyrian rule from Judah, David/Josiah became
heir to the title King of the Four Quarters.
54
In the context of an exilic edition
of the DtrH, the catalog helps build the fgure of David as the image of the ideal
king from which all subsequent kings steadily declined until YHWH rescinded
the dynastic promise, just as he revoked Israels inheritance to the land prom-
ised to Moses and Joshua.
By contrast, the catalog in Chronicles overlooks the theme of making Da-
vids name and downplays his conquering warrior image by casting Abishai as
51. See n. 22 above.
52. On the literary infuence of Neo-Assyrian inscriptions on the idiom, style, and liter-
ary structure of the Deuteronomistic literature, see, for example, Moshe Weinfeld, Deuter-
onomy and the Deuteronomic School (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972; repr. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992); Eckhart Otto, Das Deuteronomium: Politische Theologie und
Rechtsreform in Juda und Assyrien (BZAW 284; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999).
53. Naaman, History of David, 2531, 34.
54. R. D. Nelson, The Double Redaction of the Deuteronomistic History: The Case Is
Still Compelling, JSOT 29 (2005) 31937. The double or multiple redaction hypothesis de-
rives further support from the conficting view of the Transjordanian kingdoms in 2 Samuel
8 and Deut 2:223. The total subjugation of the Transjordan as depicted by the catalog in
2 Samuel 8 probably conformed with utopian aspirations following the weakening of Assyr-
ian hegemony during the rule of Josiah. By contrast, the view expressed in Deut 2:223, that
Edom, Moab, and Ammon are outside the borders of the land that YHWH has apportioned
to Israel, probably refects later territorial realities, when the Transjordan was incorporated
into the Babylonian and Persian province systems. See Piotr Bienkowski, New Evidence
on Edom in the Neo-Babylonian and Persian Periods, in The Land That I Will Show You:
Essays on the History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East in Honor of J. Maxwell
Miller (ed. J. Andrew Dearman and M. Patrick Graham; JSOTSup 343; Shefeld: Shefeld
Academic Press, 2001) 198213; Oded Lipschits, Ammon in Transition from Vassal King-
dom to Babylonian Province, BASOR 335 (2004) 3752; Rmer, So-Called, 125.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
David, the Great King, King of the Four Quarters 175
victor alongside him. The link with the dynastic oracle along with the proleptic
notice regarding the bronze spoils invites the reader to reassess the impact of
Davids achievements according to Chronicles catalog. Davids victories did
not bring about rest in his day, but nonetheless, they helped amass the wealth
and materials needed later to realize Davids ambition to build a temple.
Thus, my examination of the versions of the catalog reafrms the old view
that the Chronicler based his work on the Deuteronomistic History and that
his tendencies are evident, not only in what he chose to add or delete, but
also in the way in which he reworked the source before him. Finally, although
the catalog interacts diferently with the dynastic oracle in both Samuel and
Chronicles, this does not indicate that they represent separate editions deriving
from a common source, particularly if the Chronicles version of the Valley of
Salt victory has been infuenced by key texts in the DtrH that were not repli-
cated by the Chronicler (for example, 2 Kgs 14:7).
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.
Offprint from:
K. L. Noll and Brooks Schramm, eds.,
Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson
Copyright 2010 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai