SOLOMON (PERSON) . The third king of the kingdom of Israel and the second king of the kingdom of Judah in the 10th century BC
—
A. Filiation, names and family
B. Chronology
C. Sources
D. Succession of Solomon
E. Divine approval of Solomon’s reign
F. Administration
G. Diplomacy and trade
H. Construction companies
I. Zion theology and state worship
The wisdom of J. Solomon
K. Society
L. Summary
—
A. Filiation, names and family
Solomon was the tenth of David’s seventeen (2 Sam 3:2-6; 5:14-16) or nineteen sons (1 Chronicles 3:1-8; cf. 14:4-7). He was born to Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam (2 Sam 11:3) as his second son (12:18, 24) or he was born to Bathshua, daughter of Amiel, as his fourth son (1 Chronicles 3:5) in Jerusalem.
David called him Solomon (2 Sam 12:24; according to qerê, Syr. , Tg. Jon., the mother named him), while by Yahweh’s revelation through the prophet Nathan he was called Jedidiah, “Beloved of Yahweh” ( 12 : 25). The explanation of the name šĕlōmōh is given in 1 Chronicles 22:9 that Yahweh “will give šālôm (peace) and tranquility to Israel in his days”. However, modern scholars explain the meaning of the name as a “replacement” (from šillem-Compensate-) for the loss of a brother. This explanation seems apt for the story of Solomon’s birth (2 Sam 12:14-24). In that case, it is impossible to accept the view that the name Solomon was the name of the throne. It seems that the episode about the name -Jedidiah- originated in an attempt to show that Solomon had received divine choice from him for the future kingdom in his youth (cf. Akk migir ilāni rabûti, -beloved of the great gods-, a Mesopotamian royal epithet).
Solomon is reported to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). Although the figure is clearly legendary, he undoubtedly had a large harem. He had a reputation as a “lover of many women,” especially foreign ones (11:1; cf. Cant. 1:1; 6:8). However, of Solomon’s many wives, no proper name is handed down except Naamah the Ammonite, who was the mother of Rehoboam, Solomon’s successor (1 Kings 14:21, 31). Also, Solomon’s two daughters are known by name, Taphath (4:11) and Basemat (4:15), both of whom were married to district prefects of the king.
B. Chronology
It is a difficult task to establish the chronology of Solomon’s reign, since all the chronological notes of his acts do not give more than typological figures: his reign of 40 years, as in the case of David, means one generation (1 Kings 11, 42; 2 Chronicles 9:30). Similarly, the fourth year of his reign in which he laid the foundation of the Temple, which was also 480 years after the Exodus; the 20-year period for the duration of his temple and palace construction projects; and the 7 years spent building the temple (1 Kings 6:1, 37-38; 7:1; 9:10; 2 Chronicles 3:2; 8:1) are all symbolic figures. Furthermore, Solomon’s age at the time of accession is missing from his chronological notes.
Therefore, the chronology of Solomon’s reign is a matter of conjecture based on circumstantial evidence. Judging from his passive role in the narrative about kingship struggles in 1 Kings 1, we can assume that Solomon was a minor at the time of his accession (see 1 Kings 3:7; 1 Chronicles 22:5; 29). . : 1). At the same time, the report of his successor’s age of 41 at the time of accession (1 Kings 14:21; 2 Chronicles 12:13), together with the abundance of Solomon’s deeds, suggests that he had a long reign. lasted for about a generation. Furthermore, the synchronisms of Solomon with Hiram of Tire (1 Kings 5: 15-26 – Eng 5: 1-12; 9: 10-14; 2 Chronicles 2: 3-16) and with Shishak of Egypt (1 Kings 11: 40), together with the absolute date of the division of the United Kingdom calculated by chronological notes in the biblical sources, BEFORE CHRIST
C. Sources
Neither the name of Solomon nor the allusion to his reign have yet been found in any contemporary extra-biblical source. Therefore, we have to rely solely on the relevant biblical sources for the reconstruction of Solomon’s period. Portions of 2 Samuel and 1 Kings 1-11 are available for the main source, while 1 Chronicles 22:5-23:1; 1 Chronicles 28: 1-2 Chronicles 9:31 should be treated as secondary. Some wisdom publications, such as the books of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles, are also associated with Solomon, but the associations (except for some parts of Proverbs) seem legendary.
As is widely accepted, the books of Samuel and Kings are part of the Deuteronomist History (DH) that was finally written in the Babylonian exile. The DH editorial work seen in the biblical sources for Solomon’s reign focuses on the Temple and Solomon as its builder. According to editorial design, Solomon’s reign is romanticized as the Golden Age in Israel’s history, with Solomon himself depicted as an extremely wise, extraordinarily wealthy, and supremely powerful monarch. This idealization of Solomon and his reign is based on the view that the builder of the temple and his time must have been blessed by God with all kinds of blessings, in contrast to the miseries of exile after the temple had been destroyed. been destroyed. Furthermore, the structure of the literary complex in 1 Kings 3-11 is built by arranging the report on the construction of the Temple and the matters directly related to it (1 Kings 5:15-9:25) in the center between the accounts on the establishment of his rule as preparations for the construction work (3:1-5:14) and the narratives about the prosperity of his kingdom as a result of the construction of the temple (9:26-10:29). Chap. 11, in which Solomon’s apostasy and troubles are narrated, is added as an explanation for the division of the kingdom after his death (based on the Deuteronomistic theory of retribution).
In compiling the literary complex on Solomon and his reign, the DH drew his materials from many sources; Unfortunately, these sources can no longer be identified with certainty from their original form. However, scholars have tried to distinguish them by content, style, and other criteria. They are, among others, the Succession Narrative, which consists of most of 2 Samuel and 1 Kings 1-2; official records of the royal court, p. eg, the lists of Solomon’s high officials and of the twelve district prefects (1 Kings 4:1-19); Temple records, for example, the description of the architectural structure of the temple and its furnishings (6:2-36; 7:15-50); popular legends, such as the tale of Solomon’s arbitration (3:16-28) and the story of the Queen of Sheba’s visit (10:1-10, 13); a prophetic legend centering on Ahijah (11:26-40); and -the book of the acts of Solomon- (11:41), perhaps a collection of analytical accounts, anecdotes and legends about Solomon.
There is a difference of opinion about the prospects of extracting historical information on Solomon’s reign from biblical sources. Skeptical views are based primarily on the assumption that editorial distortions are prevalent throughout HD. However, it is plausible to assume that, putting aside the stereotypical words of exhortation, judgment or editorial modification, there is in principle no fabrication in the DH, since the main task of this historian was the collection of materials from various sources transmitted from previous . generations. In any case, before calling it ahistorical, we must carefully scrutinize all the information in the biblical sources. This rule should also apply to the information in the Chronicles where the modification, exaggeration or tendentious treatment of historical facts is more noticeable.
D. Succession of Solomon
Thanks to the epilogue of the Narrative of the succession (1 Kings 1-2), we are informed in detail about the course of events regarding Solomon’s accession to the Davidic throne and his consolidation of kingship. This narrative has long been appreciated as one of the earliest historical works of the Bible, yet doubts about its historicity are nevertheless expressed in many recent studies (see Whybray 1968; Rost 1982). However, by acknowledging its literary genre as the category -real historical writings of an apologetic nature- in the ANE, we can prove that the narrative is basically historical, despite all the descriptions colored by a tendency to Solomonic apology.
When David became senile (1:1) without explicitly designating his successor, the leading courtiers split into two parties revolving around the two rivals for the royal throne. The first candidate was Adonijah, son of Haggith, who was the fourth son, but the oldest surviving prince after the death of Amnon and Absalom. The general public expected him to be David’s successor (2:15) and was supported by Joab, commander-in-chief of the army, and Abiathar the priest (1:7). A rival candidate was Solomon, son of Bathsheba, supported by Zadok the priest, Nathan the prophet, Benaiah, the leader of the royal guard called the Cerethies and Pelethites, and David’s heroes (1:8). Except Benaiah and David’s heroes who had followed David as members of his bodyguard called the Thirty (2 Sam 23:8-39; 1 Chronicles 11:11-47) since the days of his wilderness wanderings (1 Sam 22 :1-2; 1 Chronicles 12:8, 16), Bathsheba, Zadok, and Nathan first appeared after David transferred his capital from Hebron to Jerusalem. On the contrary, Adonijah and his supporters were those who had held court positions as early as the days of David’s reign in Hebron. Furthermore, the fact that members of these rival parties opposed each other to contest the same positions shows that the conflict was caused by the newcomers’ defiance of the old authority. The tendency to posit here a conflict between the Yahwist of Hebron and the Jebusite-Canaanite religion of Jerusalem is a hypothesis based on unproven evidence. and Nathan first appeared after David transferred his capital from Hebron to Jerusalem. On the contrary, Adonijah and his supporters were those who had held court positions as early as the days of David’s reign in Hebron. Furthermore, the fact that members of these rival parties opposed each other to contest the same positions shows that the conflict was caused by the newcomers’ defiance of the old authority. The tendency to posit here a conflict between the Yahwist of Hebron and the Jebusite-Canaanite religion of Jerusalem is a hypothesis based on unproven evidence. and Nathan first appeared after David transferred his capital from Hebron to Jerusalem. On the contrary, Adonijah and his supporters were those who had held court positions as early as the days of David’s reign in Hebron. Also, the fact that members of these rival parties opposed each other to…