kingdoms, northern and southern...303 kingdoms, northern and southern of samuel and kings. in the...

303 Kingdoms, Northern and Southern

of Samuel and Kings. In the past scholars fromWellhausen (1871) to McCarter (1980) found nu-merous instances where a corrupt or edited readingof the HB could be emended with the LXX. Morerecently, attention has been paid to the possibilityof using the LXX, including its Latin witnesses, asdocumented evidence in literary and redaction criti-cal studies on Samuel-Kings (Trebolle; Schenker;Hugo).

Bibliography: ■ Hugo, P., Les deux visages d’Élie (Fribourg/Göttingen 2006). ■ McCarter, P. K., I Samuel (AB 8; NewYork 1980). ■ McCarter, P. K., II Samuel (AB 9; New York1984). ■ Trebolle, J., Centena in libros Samuelis et Regum(Madrid 1989). ■ Schenker, A., Älteste Textgeschichte der Kö-nigsbücher (Fribourg/Göttingen 2004). ■ Wellhausen, J., DerText der Bücher Samuelis untersucht (Göttingen 1871).

Tuukka Kauhanen

See also /Kings (Books); /Samuel (Books andPerson)

Kingdoms, Northern and Southern/Israel, People of; /Kingdoms of Israel and Ju-dah

Kings (Books)I. Hebrew Bible/Old TestamentII. New TestamentIII. JudaismIV. ChristianityV. LiteratureVI. Visual ArtsVII. MusicVIII. Film

I. Hebrew Bible/Old Testament

1. Content and Structure. A single work in twoparts, 1–2 Kings has three sections: the reign of Sol-omon (1 Kgs 1–11), the divided kingdom (1 Kgs 12–2 Kgs 17), and the kingdom of Judah alone after Is-rael’s fall (2 Kgs 18–25). Each section has its ownstructure. Solomon’s reign is built around thebuilding and dedication of the temple (1 Kgs 5–8).The division of the kingdom after Solomon is ex-plained as punishment for serving other gods intro-duced by his many foreign wives.

For the divided kingdom, the account alternatesbetween Israel and Judah with each king dated bythe regnal years of his counterpart in the otherkingdom. The opening and closing regnal formulasfor each king furnish a framework for any narrativeset during that king’s reign. The kings are evalu-ated religiously. The kings of Judah are all de-scended from David and judged by his standard;eight out of nineteen are righteous. The kings ofIsrael are all judged evil for perpetuating the “sinof Jeroboam” by maintaining the royal shrines thathe established at Dan and Bethel. The principle of

304

cultic centralization that Jerboam violated was notinstituted until the composition of Deuteronomy inthe late seventh century, some 300 years after Jero-boam. Still, it provides the explanation for Israel’sfall in 722 BCE and for Judah’s survival until 586BCE. A prophecy – fulfillment scheme further sup-ports the etiology. The promise to David of an en-during house (dynasty) explains Judah’s continua-tion under Davidid rule despite Solomon’s apostasy(1 Kgs 14 : 29–39) and evil kings (1 Kgs 15 : 2–3;2 Kgs 8 : 19). In contrast, the overthrow of each ofIsrael’s royal houses is foretold by prophets in ora-cles that use the same language to predict theslaughter of the potential male heirs and their non-burial (1 Kgs 14 : 7–18; 16 : 1–4; 21 : 20–24; 2 Kgs9 : 7–10).

The third main section dealing with the remain-ing kings of Judah follows the order of their reigns:Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Jehoahaz, Je-hoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah. The accounts forHezekiah and Josiah are the longest, reflecting theauthor’s interest in their religious reforms. SecondKings ends with Jerusalem’s destruction and the ex-ile of Judah in 587/586 BCE followed by noticesabout Gedaliah’s brief tenure as governor and Je-hoiachin’s release from Babylonian prison in ca.562 BCE.

2. Date and Composition. The book of Kings hasbeen the main theater for debates on the date andcomposition of the Deuteronomistic History. Nothdated the Dtr History to 562 BCE. European schol-ars have tended to maintain this as the primary edi-tion (DtrG[Grundschrift]) of Kings, while perceiv-ing, with Smend, a series of subsequent Dtr layersfocused on prophecy (DtrP) and law (DtrN). NorthAmericans have generally followed Cross in posit-ing an earlier, Josianic edition (Dtr1) – or an evenearlier Hezekian one – as predecessors of the exilicwork (Dtr2). Some recent scholars have begun toquestion the thesis of a Dtr History, arguing thatits constituent books had independent origins. Buta revised Dtr History theory yields a more cogentpicture (Römer).

Official archives and prophetic tales seem to bethe two main sources behind Kings. The regnal for-mulas that provide the book’s structure refer to“Book of the Annals of the Kings of Israel/Kings ofJudah,” and annals are well attested for other an-cient Near Eastern kings. Still, no annals have beenfound for any king of Israel or Judah. Religiousevaluations in the regnal formulas would not derivefrom annals but are the work of the Dtr author ofKings. Thus, while Dtr may well have used officialsources of some kind, their exact nature remainsunclear.

The prophetic stories do not all appear at thesame level of writing. The antidynastic oracles arewell integrated into the Dtr framework. Thus, in1 Kgs 14 : 1–13, the answer to the inquiry of Jero-

Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception vol. 15 © Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, 2017

Authenticated | [email protected] Date | 12/4/18 2:03 AM

305 Kings (Books)

boam’s wife about her sick son is delayed by theoracle against the dynasty, and in 2 Kgs 9 : 1–10, theprophet disobeys the order to flee after anointingJehu in order to deliver the oracle against the royalhouse. In both cases, Dtr used older prophetic sto-ries as the forum for his etiological oracle againstthe sitting dynasty. Most of the prophetic tales inKings, though, are post-Dtr additions. This in-cludes the legends about Elijah, Elisha, and otherprophets in 1 Kgs 17–2 Kgs 13, except for Elijah’soracle in 1 Kgs 21 : 20–24* (Rofé; McKenzie: 81–100).

3. History. Kings is our only ancient biblical sourcefor the history of Israel’s and Judah’s monarchy (theauthor(s) of Chronicles used Kings and is thereforenot independent.) The etiological purpose of Kingsand the place of prophets in it show that its interestis primarily theological rather than historical. Thus,despite Omri’s historical importance, shown inarchaeological remains and extrabiblical sourceswhere Israel is known as the “house of Omri,”Kings devotes but a single, non-formulaic verse tohis reign (1 Kgs 16 : 24). The account of Ahab’s reign(1 Kgs 16 : 29–22 : 40) is much longer, but is mostlyabout Elijah and Jezebel with little on the king’saccomplishments. Some of Kings’ historical data arecontradicted by other sources: (1) The battle storiesin 1 Kgs 20; 22 depict Ahab as weak militarily andat war with Aram (Syria), while contemporary Assy-rian inscriptions portray him as a formidable ally ofAram. In Kings, these two chapters are out of placeand originally concerned a much later king. (2) Incontrast to 2 Kgs 9, where Jehu assassinates thekings of both Israel and Judah, the Tel Dan inscrip-tion credits its author, probably King Hazael, withthose slayings. Did Hazael exaggerate for propa-ganda effect or is Kings mistaken in its descriptionof Jehu’s religious zeal? (3) The account of Sen-nacherib’s invasion in 2 Kgs 18 differs from the As-syrian version not only in outcome but also in hav-ing Sennacherib invade twice. This is likely theresult of the combination in Kings of different ver-sions of the same event. Thus, historical informa-tion in Kings must be judiciously balanced againstliterary and theological considerations.

4. Text and Chronology. Where the Old Greek isextant in LXXB (1 Kgs 2 : 12–21 : 29) or can be recon-structed from the Old Latin, the text often variesmarkedly from the MT and is more coherent (Tre-bolle). The variants include lengthy Greek pluses(e.g., 1 Kgs 12 : 24a–z) whose origins are intenselydebated by scholars. The chronological data oftenvary widely as a result of the MT and OG followingdifferent systems (Miller, Shenkel). The Dead Seascroll fragments for Kings are sparse and do notvary much from the MT.

5. Theology. Kings’ theology resembles those ofDeuteronomy and the Prophets. YHWH is in con-trol of history. The destruction of Israel and Judah

306

was due to the failure to obey YHWH’s word in To-rah and prophetic revelation. No explicit hope forthe future is expressed. It is uncertain, but alsoopen. The remnant of Israel can only hope thatYHWH will act again on their behalf and learn fromthe past not to fall again into apostasy. The post-Dtr prophetic legends focus on the man of god aswonder worker independent of YHWH or withYHWH’s power assumed. Elijah is a new Moses(1 Kgs 19), and Elisha directs international politics.

Bibliography: ■ Cross, F. M., “The Structure of the Deuter-onomic History,” in Perspectives in Jewish Learning (Annual ofthe College of Jewish Studies 3; Chicago, Ill. 1968) 9–24;rev. “The Themes of the Book of Kings and the Structureof the Deuteronomistic History,” in id., Canaanite Myth andHebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cam-bridge, Mass. 1973) 274–89. ■ McKenzie, S. L., The Troublewith Kings: The Composition of the Books of Kings in the Deuteron-omistic History (VTSup 42; Leiden 1991). ■ Miller, J. M.,“The Omride Dynasty in the Light of Recent Literary andArchaeological Research” (PhD diss., Emory University,1964). ■ Noth, M., Überlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien (Darm-stadt 31967); ET: id., The Deuteronomistic History (JSOTSup15; Sheffield 1991). ■ Römer, T., The So-Called Deuteronomis-tic History (London 2005). ■ Rofé, A., The Prophetical Studies(Jerusalem 1988). ■ Shenkel, J. D., Chronology and Recen-sional Development in the Greek Text of Kings (HSM 1; Cam-bridge, Mass. 1968). ■ Smend, R., “Das Gesetz und dieVölker: Ein Beitrag zur deuteronomistischen Redaktions-geschichte,” in Probleme Biblischer Theologie, FS G. v. Rad (ed.H. W. Wolff; Munich 1971) 494–509. ■ Trebolle Barrera, J.,Centena in libros Samuelis et Regum: Variantes textuales y composi-ción literaria en los libros de Samuel y Reyes (Madrid 1989).

Steven L. McKenzie

II. New TestamentThere are only two quotations from the books ofKings in the NT, both in Rom 11. Paul is seekingto refute the idea that the inclusion of the Gentilesimplies that God has rejected his people. He beginsby citing his own background as an “Israelite, a de-scendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Ben-jamin” (11 : 1). This sounds like Paul is citing him-self as evidence that God has not rejected hispeople; but as Dunn notes, this would be somewhattrite. It is more likely that Paul is reminding hisreaders of his credentials to offer authoritative in-terpretations of Scripture and perhaps also to pavethe way for a comparison between himself and Eli-jah. He begins by asking whether they know theScripture where Elijah “pleads with God against Is-rael” (11 : 2) and then quotes from either 1 Kgs19 : 10 or 14 in the form, “Lord, they have killedyour prophets, they have demolished your altars, Ialone am left, and they are seeking my life” (11 : 3).This appears to be Paul’s own summary and departssignificantly from the language of the LXX. Heomits the first part of Elijah’s complaint (“I havebeen very zealous for the LORD, the God of hosts;for the Israelites have forsaken your covenant”) andthe final phrase (“to take it away”), adds a vocative



307 Kings (Books)

address “Lord” (perhaps taken from the earlier la-ment in 19 : 4), and reverses the order of killing theprophets and tearing down altars. Although Eli-jah’s words are undoubtedly a damning indictmentof Israel, the text does not specifically say that theyare aimed against (κατ�) Israel and this might re-flect Paul’s own situation.

The second quotation is a summary of 1 Kgs19 : 18 (“Yet I will leave seven thousand in Israel,all the knees that have not bowed to Baal, and everymouth that has not kissed him”), which Paul quotesin the form, “I have kept for myself seven thousandwho have not bowed the knee to Baal” (11 : 4). Hispoint is that at “the present time there is a rem-nant, chosen by grace” (11 : 5), just as there was inElijah’s day, and this should give rise to hope.There is debate as to whether the number 7,000 issignificant for Paul, perhaps as a symbol of “all Is-rael” (11 : 26), though it might simply be a detailfrom the text he is quoting. As Byrne notes, this isdifferent from the “remnant” idea in Rom 9 : 27–28, for “in the earlier passage, the existence of the‘remnant’ (�π�λειμμα, v.27) served simply to indi-cate the numerical diminishment of Israel accord-ing to the flesh, here the motif stands as a pledgeof the continuing fidelity of God” (Byrne: 330).

The story of Elijah saying to Ahab that “thereshall be neither dew nor rain these years, except bymy word” (1 Kgs 17 : 1) is referred to three times inthe NT. For James, it is an example of the principlethat the “prayer of the righteous is powerful andeffective” (Jas 5 : 16), though this is not a feature ofthe original account. In order to apply the story tohis readers, James says that Elijah was “a humanbeing like us” (�μ�ι�παθ�ς), though it is unclear ifthis is a reference to frailty (so NJB). Luke’s interestis that “when the heaven was shut up three yearsand six months, and there was a severe famine overall the land” (Luke 4 : 25), God sent Elijah to help awidow who lived outside of Israel (1 Kgs 17 : 8–24);this is followed by a reference to Elisha healingNaaman the Syrian (2 Kgs 5 : 1–5). In Revelation,John records a vision of two witnesses who willprophesy for 1260 days and “if anyone wants toharm them, fire pours from their mouth” and they“have authority to shut the sky, so that no rain mayfall during the days of their prophesying” (11 : 5–6). It is interesting that all three of these passagesrefer very specifically to three and a half years,whereas 1 Kgs 18 : 1 speaks only of “in the thirdyear of the drought.” It would appear that, by NTtimes, this was an established tradition, perhapsdrawn from the half-week of Dan 7 : 25.

The question of whether John the Baptist is Eli-jah is both affirmed (Matt 11 : 14) and denied (John1 : 21) in the New Testament, though these passagesare drawing on Malachi rather than the books ofKings. However, many scholars have suggested thatthe description of John’s clothing in Mark 1 : 6

308

(“Now John was clothed with camel’s hair, with aleather belt around his waist”) is an allusion to2 Kgs 1 : 8, where the description, “A hairy man,with a leather belt around his waist” is enough totell the king that the prophecy of his death comesfrom none other than “Elijah the Tishbite.” Othersfind the link tenuous and suggest that Mark is sim-ply referring to John as a prophet and ascetic.

David and Solomon are mentioned in Stephen’sspeech concerning the building of the temple (Acts7 : 45–47), beginning with a reference to David’s de-sire to build a house for God (1 Kgs 8 : 17) and thento Solomon, who actually built it. There follows astatement that “the Most High does not dwell inhouses” (Acts 7 : 48) and a quotation from Isa 66 : 1,which could imply that Stephen thinks the wholeenterprise was a mistake. Indeed, it is interestingthat Luke traces Jesus’ genealogy through Davidand Nathan (Luke 3 : 31) rather than David and Sol-omon (Matt 1 : 6–7); thismight suggest that he in-tends a criticism of Solomon (see Doble: 181–207).However, Solomon is well aware that “even heavenand the highest heaven” cannot contain God,“much less this house that I have built” (1 Kgs8 : 27) and so it is probably a critique of what thetemple has become rather than of Solomon himself.

There are two further references to Solomon inthe Gospels. The first is an illustration of God’s carefor the world, asserting that not even “Solomon inall his glory” was clothed like the “lilies of thefield” (Matt 6 : 28–29). The second is a judgementon the scribes and Pharisees who insist on seeingsigns, whereas the “queen of the South … camefrom the ends of the earth to listen to the wisdomof Solomon” (Matt 12 : 42). This is a reference to thequeen of Sheba’s visit in 1 Kgs 10 : 1–10.

We have already noted Elisha’s healing of Naa-man the Syrian, and it is probable that the feedingmiracles in the Gospels have been influenced by2 Kgs 4 : 42–44, where Elisha feeds a crowd of onehundred people with twenty barley loaves. Note thefollowing parallels (1) a man/boy has a small num-ber of loaves; (2) Elisha/Jesus commands that it beused to feed a large crowd; (3) the question is raisedas to how such a small quantity can feed so many;(4) the command is reiterated and the people arefed; (5) there is some left over.

Lastly, we might mention the reference in thebook of Revelation to the battle of Armageddon(16 : 16). There have of course been many attemptsto understand this reference, but as the author tellsus that it is a Hebrew name, our starting pointshould probably be Mount (Har) Megiddo. This isthe place where King Josiah died in battle (2 Kgs23 : 30); it is remembered as a place of mourning(Zech 12 : 11).

Bibliography: ■ Allison Jr., D. C., The Intertextual Jesus: Scrip-ture in Q (Harrisburg, Penn. 2000). [Esp. 142–56] ■ Beale,G. K./D. A. Carson (eds.), Commentary on the New Testament



309 Kings (Books)

Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich. 2007).■ Byrne, B., Romans (Collegeville, Minn. 1996). ■ Dunn,J. D. G., Romans 9–16 (WBC 38B; Dallas, Tex. 1988). ■ Do-ble, P., “Something Greater than Solomon: An Approach toStephen’s Speech,” in The Old Testament in the New Testament(ed. S. Moyise; Sheffield 2000) 181–207.

Steve Moyise

III. Judaism

1. Chronicles. Most scholars consider the biblicalbook of Chronicles to be the first Jewish text tomake use of Kings as a source (for an alternativeview see Auld who claims that Kings and Chroniclesare contemporaneous and depend on a commonsource). Composed between the 5th and 3rd centu-ries BCE, Chronicles retells the story of the Judeankings by lifting many passages directly, omittingmany others entirely, incorporating material notfound in Kings, and refocusing the narrative on Da-vid, Solomon, and the temple cult. If Kings placesthe blame for catastrophe primarily on the sins ofthe kings of Israel and Judah, Chronicles adopts theprophetic view that the sins of the entire nationbrought about its ultimate downfall. While Kingscarefully alternates between the reigns of the kingsof Israel and Judah in order to represent the simul-taneity of events in the two kingdoms, Chroniclesabandons this scheme and deals with the breakawayregime in Israel only to the extent that it affects thelegitimate kingdom of Judah. Thus the prophetictales of Elijah and Elisha, whose confrontationswith northern monarchs constitute the heart ofKings, do not appear in Chronicles, and most kingsof Israel are not mentioned by name. Even kingAhab of Israel, whose apostasy and pursuit of Elijahare a major target of Kings (1 Kgs 16 : 29–33; 18 : 1–21 : 29), comes into play only in relation to his alli-ance with Jehoshaphat of Judah (1 Kgs 22 : 1–39;2 Chr 18), while Jehoshaphat’s reign in Chroniclesis expanded to four chapters (2 Chr 17–21).

2. Ben Sira. The early 2nd-century BCE book ofBen Sira, as the rabbis later called it, limns the ma-jor figures of Kings in its hymn praising but alsocritiquing famous ancestors (Sir 44–50) beginningwith Enoch and ending with the author’s own con-temporary, the high priest Simon. From Kings BenSira includes Nathan, David, Solomon, “foolish Re-hoboam,” Jeroboam, Elijah, Elisha, Hezekiah, Isa-iah, and Josiah, but concludes his portrait of Josiahwith the note: “Except for David and Hezekiah andJosiah, all of them were great sinners, for they aban-doned the law of the Most High; the kings of Judahcame to an end” (49 : 4). Ben Sira relies on Kingsfor most of these descriptions, such as Solomon’swealth, wisdom, and foreign wives, but sometimesfollows Chronicles instead as in his attribution ofthe establishment of the temple service to David.Though Ben Sira was preserved in Greek in the LXXand thus not part of the Jewish canon, Hebrew

310

manuscripts of the text found in the Cairo Genizahindicate that it was valued in Jewish circles.

3. Josephus. In his Antiquities Josephus retells andexpands the tales of Kings aiming to show that thescriptures are trustworthy history and are sup-ported by non-Jewish evidence. Sennacherib’smovements surrounding his unsuccessful captureof Jerusalem are traced in non-biblical sources allthe better to support the strength of Hezekiah’sprayer in holding off the Assyrian threat. Josephus’editorial additions to the descriptions of the kingsstress not only their virtues and vices but also theworkings of divine reward and punishment. Solo-mon, for instance, receives more than 200 para-graphs dedicated not only to his wisdom but to hiscourage, temperance, and piety as well. Jeroboam,on the other hand, is portrayed as the exemplar ofwickedness. Yet Josephus also complicates charactershowing the evil king Ahab sincerely repenting andattributes the successful king Uzziah’s fall fromgrace and painful leprosy to his self-righteousnessand impiety. Josephus’ treatment of the prophetsoften downplays their miracles while underscoringthe fulfillment of prophecy in real historical time.So he emphasizes, for example, Elijah’s correct pre-diction of a drought but omits the tale of his walkacross the Jordan river and of the chariot that tookhim up to the sky.

4. Rabbinic Literature. In rabbinic literatureKings as a book plays no specific role, but like theother books of the Early Prophets, receives volumi-nous commentary in the Middle Ages from exegetessuch as Rashi (1040–1105), David Qimḥi (1160–1235, Gersonides (1288–1344), and Isaac Abarbanel(1437–1508). The book’s characters and events,however, are frequently cited and interpreted inboth halakhic and aggadic material even if YalqutShim�oni (12th–13th cent.) is the only midrashic col-lection devoted to all of Kings. Elijah is an especialfavorite of the rabbis because of his superhumanknowledge. He can discover lost objects or thewishes of a dead person. As well, halakhic puzzleswhich cannot be solved are left “until Elijahcomes.” Essentially Elijah becomes rabbinized.Later he speaks to individual rabbis and can dis-close divine purposes and plans. In their stories ofroyal times, the rabbis integrate the Later Prophetsinto the history narrated in Kings even though inthe biblical text itself only Isaiah (and a single versereferring to Jonah son of Amittai) appears out ofall the classical prophets. Thus the rabbis anticipatemodern critical scholarship’s interest in setting theprophets in the historical context largely providedby Kings.

5. Medieval Judaism. Among medieval thinkersMaimonides (1138–1204) and Isaac Abarbanel areespecially concerned with kingship, and the booksof Kings play some part in their deliberations. ForMaimonides kingship is a central element of his fu-



311 Kings (Books)

turistic hope. In the “Laws Concerning Kings andWars” in his Mishneh Torah Maimonides takes Mo-ses and David as models of humility, which he seesto be the primary check on royal power. The justking, he says, is to serve his subjects and not wieldhis power over them. He refers to the advice offeredto and rejected by Rehoboam by the elders to be a“slave (�ebed)” to the people (1 Kgs 12 : 7) in favor ofthe bad counsel proffered by his contemporaries. Alegitimate king, according to Maimonides, followsthe Torah and fights the Lord’s battles. Here hecites the prophet Ahijah’s charge to Jeroboam uponhis appointment as king to “keep my laws and com-mandments” (1 Kgs 11 : 38). Abarbanel, on the otherhand, who lost his own position in the court of Por-tugal when the Jews were exiled, viewed kingshipskeptically. For him the biblical judges and pro-phets were faithful to God, but the sins of the kingsof Israel and Judah brought on the exile. In themessianic age, not monarchy, but judges will pre-vail.

As a scholar influenced by Renaissance trends,Abarbanel was also concerned about questions ofbiblical authorship, dating, and lexicography. Hewondered, for instance, why the prophecies of theLater Prophets were not incorporated into thebooks of the Early Prophets and instead made intoseparate books. He followed rabbinic tradition (bBB15ab) in attributing to Jeremiah the authorship ofKings, but also insists that Jeremiah intended tocreate an accurate history from the diverse sourcesthat he used. Abarbanel contrasts Kings withChronicles, in which the characters of David andSolomon are burnished with extra, non-historicalmaterial.

6. Liturgy. The most direct way in which the booksof Kings enter into the lives of Jews in the pews isthrough haftarah (prophetic) readings on sabbathsand festivals, which are linked on a lexical or the-matic level to the designated Torah portion of theweek. Although the selection of haftarah texts hasvaried widely over time and community and be-tween the annual and triennial cycle of Torah read-ings (see “Haftarah”), those from Kings now num-ber sixteen. Of those, six concern Solomon and theTemple and five the prophets Elijah and Elisha.While most haftarot come from the Later Prophetsand offer consolation, those from Kings mainlypresent historical or thematic parallels. Thus thestory of Elisha and the Shunammite woman (2 Kgs4 : 1–37) accompanies the Torah portion encom-passing Sarah’s miraculous conception and Isaac’sequally miraculous escape from sacrifice (Gen 18–22). Both portions focus on divine intervention toovercome sterility and death and thus celebrate to-gether the survival of the family against all odds.Unlike the Torah, which is read in sequence weekby week and repeated year by year, the narrativeof Kings thus enters the “synagogue Bible” only as

312

snippets of a select few sections. In Reform commu-nities, where the haftarah is not regularly read atservices, Kings is barely known.

Bibliography: ■ Auld, A. G., Kings Without Privilege: Davidand Moses in the Story of the Bible’s Kings (Edinburgh 1994).■ Castelli, S., “Kings in Josephus,” in The Book of Kings: Sour-ces, Composition, Historiography and Reception (ed. B. Halpern/A. Lemaire; Leiden/Boston, Mass. 2010) 541–60. ■ Dia-mond, J., “Maimonides on Kingship,” JRE 34 (2006) 89–114. ■ Fishbane, M., Haftarot: The Traditional Hebrew Textwith the New JPS Translation (The JPS Bible Commentary;Philadelphia, Pa. 2002). ■ Ginzberg, L., Legends of the Jews,7 vols. (Philadelphia, Pa. 1909–38). ■ Greenspahn, F. (ed.),Scripture in the Jewish and Christian Traditions (Nashville,Tenn. 1982). ■ Lawee, E., Isaac Abarbanel’s Stance Toward Tra-dition (Albany, N.Y. 2001). ■ Levenson, J. D., Resurrectionand the Restoration of Israel (New Haven, Conn. 2006). ■ Mai-monides, M., The Code of Maimonides, bk. 14: The Book ofJudges (trans. A. M. Hershman; YJS 3; New Haven, Conn./London 1949). ■ Millen, R., “Isaac Abravanel’s Concept ofMonarchy,” Shofar 10 (1992) 47–61. ■ Ravitzky, A., “Kingsand Laws in Late Medieval Jewish Thought,” in Scholars andScholarship (ed. L. Landman; New York 1990) 67–90. ■ Zet-terholm, K., “Elijah and the Books of Kings in Rabbinic Lit-erature,” in The Book of Kings: Sources, Composition, Historiogra-phy and Reception (ed. B. Halpern/A. Lemaire; Leiden/ Boston,Mass. 2010) 585–606.

Robert L. Cohn

IV. ChristianityIn the patristic and medieval Latin tradition, thebooks of 1–2 Kings were considered part of theSamuel–Kings sequence, commonly called 1–4 Re-gum, or, alternatively, 1–4 Regnorum in the LXXtradition (see “Kingdoms, Books of”). In his prefaceto his own translation of these books (the so-calledPrologus Galeatus), Jerome points out that a bettername for the books of Kings would be 1–2 Mala-chim, after the Hebrew tradition, rather than 3–4Regum. Notwithstanding, the latter nomenclatureprevailed throughout the Middle Ages.

The books of Kings contained descriptions ofseveral historical figures, such as Solomon, Elijahand Elisha, and Jezebel and Ahab, that spoke to theChristian imagination, and not just to exegetes, butalso to artists and poets. The stealing of Naboth’svineyard by King Ahab was the subject of a homilet-ical treatise by Ambrose of Milan (De Nabutho). Eli-jah came to epitomize monastic virtue, while Jeze-bel embodied evil woman. The building of theTemple by Solomon received an extensive allegori-cal commentary by the Anglo-Saxon scholar Bede,who had also commented on the building of thetabernacle by Moses. Following this tradition wereseveral medieval commentators, such as Andrewand Richard of Saint Victor, and the Premonstraten-sian abbot Adam of Dryburgh.

While episodic, homiletic treatments of thesetexts exist, no author in the patristic period wrotea continuous historical commentary on these books.Isidore of Seville offered a number of allegoriza-tions of these books that became standard interpre-



313 Kings (Books)

tations throughout the medieval period, namely theQuaestiones in Vetus Testamentum. The first continu-ous commentaries were written in the Carolingianperiod, by Angelomus of Luxueil, HrabanusMaurus, and Claudius of Turin. Other notable com-mentaries include those by Remigius of Auxerre,Andrew of Saint Victor, and Denys the Carthusian,the Postillae of Hugh of Saint Cher, and Nicholas ofLyra, and, in the early modern period, Cornelius aLapide and Jean Calvin.

One of the chief exegetical difficulties in thebooks of Kings involved the number of yearsreigned by the kings of Judah and Israel. The booksprovide many chronological indications concerningthe reigns of these kings, as well as statementsabout their synchronicity. These statements do notcompletely align, however, and at times they con-tradict each other. Jerome was aware of these dis-crepancies, and expressed concern about them inhis letter to the priest Vitalis (PL 22.676A). In the12th and 13th centuries, exegetes such as Andrewand Richard of Saint Victor, Peter Comestor, andPeter John Olivi devoted exegetical treatises to solv-ing these contradictions that are still discussed inmodern scholarship.

Bibliography: ■ Lemaire, A. et al., The Books of Kings: Sources,Composition, Historiography and Reception (Leiden 2010).■ Liere, F. van/F. T. Harkins (eds.), Interpretation of Scripture:Practice (Victorine Texts in Translation 6; Turnhout 2015).■ Sancto Victore, A. de, Expositio Hystorica in Librum Regum(CCCM 53A; Turnhout 1996).

Frans van Liere

V. LiteratureGiven its episodic nature, the books of Kings hasmore frequently been deployed and adapted inparts than as a whole, its evocative individual sto-ries being rendered for literary, typological, and po-litical purposes into numerous re-tellings. Theolog-ically, the covenant and the monarchs’ repeatedfailures of fidelity are the driving force of the books.However, no part of the Bible is more political, orcomes closer to an account of statehood, albeit atheo-centric statehood. Literary adaptations andquasi-literary paraphrase have often attended to thebooks’ unruly prophets, who prove so ready to chal-lenge, chastise and upbraid the kings, which, forsome readers, lends the book a distinctly anti-mo-narchical tinge. Responses have frequently been en-tranced by Elijah the Tishbite, a half-wild “hairyman,” fed by ravens and given to rage, respondingto Ahab’s idolatry and permissive court by challeng-ing, infuriating and at times destroying his pro-phetic enemies. The most iconic story of Kingsbrings Elijah back from exile to court in responseto the malevolence of Jezebel and Ahab, and theirmurder of the innocent Naboth.

Among the fullest, and not unliterary, attentionto the Kings is the detailed retelling of the historiesin Josephus’ Antiqiuties (bks. 8–9), with a major fo-

314

cus on Solomon’s temple and wisdom. Seder �OlamRabbah, the larger of the Hebrew chronologies, isthe basis of and key point of reference in the calen-drical traditions of later chronologers in both theJewish and Christian traditions. It relays the leg-ends and accretions around the various monarchs,while weaving in the prophetic reactions to them.These traditions of biblical chronology did notabate, but ran through from patristic to scholasticscholarship and on to its heyday in the 16th and17th centuries, in the detailed calculations of Jo-seph Juste Scaliger’s De Emendatione Temporum(1583), Dionysius Petavius’ Opus de doctrina tempo-rum (1627), James Ussher’s Annales veteris testamenti(1650), among others. For these writers, the preci-sion of the book of Kings was a key resource in be-ing able (nominally at least), to chart the worldfrom its beginning, through to Christ and beyond.

If it nevertheless remains the case that analysisof the books of Kings has tended to be piecemealrather than architectonic, a remarkable exception tothis is its post-Reformation political deploymentacross the 16th and 17th century, during whichtime it took on a febrile political currency in bothProtestant and Catholic exegesis, which attended toits chronicles as a set of tales fraught with constitu-tional cargo. These books, it seemed to many, werea devastating and sustained attack upon the institu-tion of kingship, so prone to corruption and idola-try. The ferment of the Reformation may have beentheological in its origins, but became endemicallypolitical and politicised. Literally hundreds of textsin early modern England and Northern Europe ana-lyzed how the kings were relevant to contemporarypolitics. By no means uniform, they range fromstoutly royalist defences of the uninterrupted suc-cession of kings, even when a dynasty was razed,to fierce exegetical republicanism which used thebooks, together with Judges and Samuel, to arguethat kingship had rendered itself an illegitimateform of government, that brought God and his pro-phets to despair. The French Huguenot writer,Guillaume de Saluste Du Bartas, produced a barn-storming and much-admired pair of works, the Se-maines (1578–84), the latter of which, La Seconde Se-maine (1584), retold the stories of Kings ingruesome and lurid fashion across two long poemsLe Schisme and La Decadence. Du Bartas was widelyadmired and imitated across Europe. Scottish andEnglish responses inaugurated a tradition of writ-ing paraphrases of the tales of Kings, in prose andpoetry, including Joseph Hall’s vast Contemplationsupon the Historie of the Old Testament (1612–26), whotransposed Judean and Israelite history with sub-tlety into political morality tales. Others inflectedtheir retellings to note quite how regularly thekings were pernicious. Hezekiah Woodward’s TheKings Chronicle (1643), for instance, re-told the talesas political catastrophe. However, the most fre-



315 Kings (Books)

quent and disturbing re-readings of the books ofKings were those many that relayed how frequentlyregicide and the destruction of kingly dynasties wasthe apparently quotidian fate of monarchs.

Here too, the exegetical tradition, was a Europe-wide phenomenon, tracing the frequent biblicalacts of regicide as political precedent for the over-thrown and killing of monarchs. From the radicalProtestant works, such as the anonymous Vindiciae,contra Tyrannos (1579) and George Buchanan’s DeJure regni apud Scotos (1579), through to the radicalJesuit, Robert Persons’ A conference about the Next Suc-cession to the Crowne of Ingland (1595), writers discov-ered in their scriptural reading how tenuous theright to the crown might be. The assassinations ofHenri III (1589) and of Henri IV (1610) in France,were felt by many to be all too closely linked tosuch scriptural rhetoric. Similarly, in the EnglishCivil War, biblical kingship was seen to embody allthe tyrannous qualities that contemporaries saw inCharles I, and later in Cromwell. From John Mil-ton’s Tenure of Kings and Magistrates (1649), to Ed-ward Sexby’s Killing Noe Murder: Briefly Discours’d inThree Quaestions (1657), the book of Kings providedthe common stock of political tales and constitu-tional language, quite different to the typologicalreadings of the patristic and scholastic era, albeitthis kind of reading lost its lustre and its currency,quite precipitously, at the dawn of the Enlighten-ment.

The book of Kings has an extensive literary leg-acy too, albeit this involves the afterlives of particu-lar tales. The European tradition is rich, includingdramas such as Miguel Venegas, Tragoedia CuiNomen Inditum Achabus (ca. 1561), Juan Bonifacio (at-trib.), Tragaedia Jezabelis and Racine, Athalie (1691).Biblically-based drama was banned from the Eng-lish stage before the heyday of Tudor and Stuarttheatrical output, but the intertwined stories of Jez-ebel, Ahab and Elijah nevertheless has a long his-tory of literary transformations, the most potent ofwhich, though it is primarily allusive, is Lady Mac-beth, scolding her husband into theft and murderand the subsequent unmasking of the crime. Bibli-cal drama was quite strictly debarred on the Englishstage for a considerable time and Gwen Lally’s Jeze-bel: A Play (1912), was the first such scripturallythemed drama approved by the censor, featuring afeverishly jealous Ahab. What might be noted inmany of the early modern re-imaginings of Jezebelis that the sexuality we have come to associate withher is secondary. It is present, but present largelybecause of the elision with the NT figure called Jez-ebel (Rev 2 : 20) and subsequently with the whoreof Babylon (17 : 4), and the association is only bytypology and suggestion.

Nevertheless, this central sexualised legacy ofthe book of Kings is one that has dominated inter-pretation and the critical reception of Jezebel, from

316

Victorian moralistic retellings of fallen women,among which Wilkie Collins, Jezebel’s Daughter(1880) is the most interesting, through to theequally moralised Hollywood Jezebel as vamp, as inBette Davis’ Warner Brothers film of 1938, and in arich parallel afterlife in pulp fiction. In the retribu-tive universe of such narratives, she is invariablydoomed to some final comeuppance. She has inturn been appropriated to impressive feminist ends,as a figure of undaunted sexuality, whose tale isone of patriarchal oppression and suppression.Given that the Victorian-Hollywood figure is somesignificant distance apart from the figure of thebook of Kings, this more recent feminist manoeuveris, in many ways an appropriation of a misappropri-ation, but a powerful one nevertheless.

The complex interaction of males – YHWH,Ahab, Elijah – with the louche and loose figure ofJezebel, and the attribution of blame and malice,has often figured in retellings of this part of Kings,and not infrequently, Jezebel is given a better press.Tom Robbins, Skinny Legs and all (1990), has its her-oine sceptically deconstructing the biblical tale onwhich she is based and Margaret Atwood, both inThe Robber Bride (1993) and in The Handmaid’s Tale(1985) produced compelling Jezebelian typologies.The book of Kings remains among the lesser-knownportions of the Bible, but its reception is never-theless a potent and interesting one.

Bibliography: ■ Bodner, K., Elisha’s Profile in the Book ofKings: The Double Agent (Oxford 2013). ■ Conti, M. (ed.), 1–2Kings, 1–2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther (ACCS 5; Down-ers Grove, Ill. 2008). ■ Gaines, J. H., Music in the Old Bones:Jezebel Through the Ages (Carbondale/Edwardsville, Ill. 1999).■ Killeen, K., The Political Bible in Early Modern England (Cam-bridge 2016).

Kevin Killeen

VI. Visual ArtsLengthy, sequential pictorial narratives based onthe books of Kings (the biblical accounts of the livesof Samuel, Saul, David, Solomon, and the history ofIsrael and Judah until the Babylonian captivity) arerelatively unusual. Arguably the most impressiveexamples are found in medieval manuscripts. Theseinclude the magnificent frontispieces devised forSamuel or Kings in the grand “institutional” Biblesof the Middle Ages, for example the Carolingian Bi-ble of San Paolo fuori le Mura (ca. 870–75, Rome,Basilica of San Paolo fuori le mura MS lat. 1) andthe Winchester Bible (ca. 1160–75, Winchester, Cathe-dral Library MS 17; New York, Morgan Library andMuseum MS 619). In the 13th century, elite Frenchtastes for extensive biblical pictorial narratives gen-erated the extraordinary Kings cycles in the so-called Moralized Bibles of the 1220s–40s (Vienna,Österreichische Nationalbibliothek cods. 1179 and2554; Oxford, Bodleian Library MS Bodley 270b;Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France MS lat.11560; London, British Library MSS Harley 1526–



317 Kings (Books)

27; Toledo, Cathedral Treasury MSS 1-3; New York,Morgan Library and Museum MS 240) and the Mor-gan Picture Bible (ca. 1240–60, New York, MorganLibrary and Museum MS 638).

The above examples are exceptional. More of-ten, Kings were a component of monumental picto-rial cycles. The earliest known example comprisesthe Samuel and Elijah sequences interspersed in thebiblical cycle of the house synagogue of Dura Euro-pos, Syria (ca. 245–56 CE). Like all of the syna-gogue’s content, these depart from scriptural order,perhaps to highlight contemporary messianicthemes. Early Christian examples of materialgleaned from Kings, like the 4th-century Davidscenes on the wooden doors of San Ambrogio, Mi-lan, are clearly governed by typological concerns,even if the application of such frameworks is notsystematic. This is also the case for the 1, 3, and4 Kingdoms’ content described by Prudentius. In apoem of ca. 400, he provided a list of captions for aputative cycle of biblical paintings reminiscent ofthe murals known to have adorned the nave wallsof Old St. Peter’s, Rome (cf. Davis-Weyer: 25, 28–29). Kings imagery gradually became a cypher forsecular power: the David cycle in the Monastery ofMüstair, Switzerland, while typological, tacitly cele-brated Charlemagne, its patron, while the stainedglass devoted to Kings in Louis IX’s famous SainteChapelle in Paris (1239–48) pictured the monarch’sscriptural predecessors in contemporary terms.

Remarkably, the earliest extant illustrated bibli-cal codex was may have been a standalone book ofKings. Judging from its surviving folios, the 5th-century Quedlinburg Itala (Berlin, Staatsbibliothek,Cod. theol. lat. fol. 485) once contained some 100illustrations that modelled ideologies of Christianpower and entertained elites, not unlike an exqui-site set of silver Byzantine plates engraved with Da-vid’s battle against Goliath (629–30; now dividedbetween the Metropolitan Museum, New York andthe Museum of Antiquities, Nicosia) and the uni-cum that is the 11th-century Byzantine codex Vati-can Gr. 333. The 104 painted miniatures of the lat-ter cover 1–4 Kingdoms, as do the twelve repousséimages of the coronation chalice of Trzemeszno (ca.1180, Cathedral Treasury, Gniezno). The inscrip-tion on the chalice’s rim likens the king to David,Elijah, and Christ. Isolated Kings material mightalso evoke conflicts between regnum and sacerdotium.The ink wash sequence of David and Saul that pref-aces a manuscript of Peter Lombard’s Psalms Com-mentary (ca. 1163–70, Bamberg, StaatsbibliothekBibl. 59) allegorizes the contentious relationship ofEmperor and Pope. Visual orchestrations of David’slife also focused on his romantic pursuits, as on aMiddle Byzantine ivory “nuptial” casket (9th cent.,Palazzo Venezia, Rome, see fig. 10) or, on the otherhand, a series of David and Bathsheba tapestriespurchased by Henry VIII of England (Château

318

Fig. 10 Scenes from the life of David (10th/11th cent.)

d’Écouen Museum, Paris) thought to reflect Henry’swish to divorce his first wife.

Owing to its attribution to David, the Psalterwas an important site for Kings material. An exten-sive David frontispiece cycle precedes the Psalms inthe Cistercian Bible of Stephen Harding (1109, Di-jon, Bibliothèque Municipale MSS 13–15). David se-quences were also integrated within “prefatory” cy-cles of devotional Psalters; in the Psalter of Basil II(11th cent., Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale MarcianaCod. Marc. gr. 17), scenes from David’s life suppliedthe Byzantine Emperor with models of pious rule.Occasionally, such cycles were integrated into thePsalm text at liturgical divisions, for example in theexquisite decorated initials of the Ingeborg Psalter (ca.1200, Chantilly, Museé Condeé MS. 9 olim 1695).Expenses incurred for the extensive, unfinishedKings cycle woven through the margins of an early14th-century English manuscript (New York PublicLibrary, Spencer MS 26) may have led to the ruin ofPrior John Tickhill, its patron. Two centuries later,the Flemish “Master of the David scenes” paintedan extensive David cycle in the margins of anotherchurchman’s prayer book, the Breviary of CardinalDomenico Grimaldi (ca. 1520, Venice, BibliotecaNazionale Marciana MS lat. I 99).

Artists of the Renaissance and Baroque periodsfrequently explored Kings, but favored anecdotalmoments over sequential narratives. The supremacyof David as a subject is evident across media; a se-ries of engravings of David and Goliath by the 16th-century Netherlandish artist Maerten van Heem-skerck, for instance, saw several printings. Denselyillustrated Kings sequences reemerged in the 19thcentury with the burgeoning taste for grand illus-trated Bibles like Gustave Doré’s English Bible of1866, while the œuvre of Marc Chagall re-envisionsKings from a modernist, Jewish perspective.

Bibliography: ■ Davis-Weyer, C. (ed.), Early Medieval Art300–1500 (Medieval Academy Reprints for Teaching 17; To-ronto, Ont. 2013). ■ Doré, G. (ill.), The Doré Bible Illustra-tions (ed. M. Rose; New York 1974). ■ Maguire, H., “TheArt of Comparing in Byzantium,” ArtB 70.1 (1988) 88–103.



319 Kings (Books)

■ Noel, W./D. Weiss (eds.), The Book of Kings: Art, War and theMorgan Library’s Medieval Picture Bible (Baltimore, Md. 2002).■ Swarzenski, H., “A Chalice and the Book of Kings,” in Es-says in Honor of Erwin Panofsky (ed. M. Meiss; New York 1961)437–45. ■ Weitzmann, K./H. L. Kessler, The Frescoes of theDura Synagogue and Christian Art (Washington, D.C. 1990).

Richard A. Leson

VII. MusicThe lives of kings, queens, and prophets from thebooks of Kings have inspired numerous works inmusic, among them 18th- and 19th-century orato-rios, motets, instrumental works, African AmericanSpirituals, and popular songs from the 20th cen-tury. Character portrayals include King Solomon,the prophet Elijah, King Ahab and his consortQueen Jezebel, the prophet Elisha, Queen Athaliah,King Hezekiah, and Nebuchadnezzar, King of Bab-ylon.

George Frideric Handel’s oratorio Solomon(HWV 67, 1748; rev. 1759), based on 1 Kgs 3–11 and2 Chron 1–9, and Josephus’ Jewish Antiquities, is awell-known work that recounts various episodesfrom King Solomon’s life, including the consecra-tion of the temple in scene 1/act 1, and in scene 2an extra-biblical conversation between Solomonand his unnamed Queen “from the Nile” followingtheir marriage (1 Kgs 3 : 1), it also includes referen-ces to the palace which Solomon was building(1 Kgs 3 : 11; 9 : 24). The next episode highlights thewisdom of Solomon (act 2) with a retelling of thestory of the two harlots who claimed the baby astheir own (1 Kgs 3 : 16–28). Act 3 features the Queenof Sheba, and the well-known sinfonia, “The Arrivalof the Queen of Sheba.” Other well-known worksinspired by the Queen of Sheba include the cantatafor women’s voices and solo soprano The Queen ofSheba by Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco (1953) (1 Kgs10 : 1–13), the opera Die Königin von Saba by KarlGoldmark (premiered 1875, The Queen of Saba)(1 Kgs 10 : 1–13) and the ballet Belkis, Queen of Sheba(premiered in La Scala, Milan 1932) by OttorinoRespighi.

Handel composed the coronation anthem, Zadokthe Priest (HWV 258), based on the account of theanointing of Solomon by Zadok the Priest (1 Kgs1 : 38–40), for the coronation of George II of GreatBritain. Arthur Honegger also included an instru-mental in Le Roi David (H. 37; 1923) entitled “Coro-nation of Solomon” (no. 26), followed by a workfor chorus and soprano solo entitled “The Death ofDavid” (no. 27) based on 2 Kgs 10–11. Other nota-ble coronation anthems on this theme include KingSolomon for chorus, narrator and orchestra by SirGranville Bantock for the coronation of George VIand Queen Elizabeth on May 6th 1937.

Settings of “Solomon’s prayer of dedication” forthe temple include the anthem “O Lord my God(Solomon’s Prayer)” by Samuel Wesley (1 Kgs 8 : 28,

320

30) and “Hear the Voice and Prayer of thy Servant”by Thomas Tallis (1 Kgs 8 : 28–30).

Works based on the narrative of King Ahab andhis wife Queen Jezebel are told in conjunction withthe story of Elijah in the oratorio Ahab by GeorgeBenjamin Arnold (1864) based on 1 Kgs 21–22, tell-ing of the story of Elijah and Naboth’s vineyard, thedeath of Jezebel and the defeat of Ahab at Ramoth-gilead. Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy’s well-knownoratorio Elijah, which was performed in 1846 at theBirmingham Festival (based on 1 and 2 Kings, thePsalms and Isaiah) comprises numerous episodesfrom the life of Elijah including the raising of thewidow’s son from the dead (1 Kgs 17 : 17–24) andthe contest between Elijah and the priest of Baal onMount Carmel (1 Kgs 18) in part 1. Towards the endof part 2 Elijah ascends to heaven in a fiery chariot(2 Kgs 2 : 11; Sir 48 : 1–16). African American Spiri-tuals “Elijah Rock” (2 Kgs 2 : 11–13) and “SwingLow, Sweet Chariot” (2 Kgs 2 : 11) were also inspiredby this episode.

Popular songs inspired by the story of the evilQueen Jezebel include “Jezebel” by Wayne Shanklin(1951) (2 Kgs 9) and “Jezebel” by Sam Beam/Ironand Wine (1974).

Works inspired by the Prophet Elisha includethe oratorio Naaman by Michael Costa (1864), Elishaby Richard Harris Peters (1895) and Eliseo, o sia iltrionfo di fede by Francesco Masciangelo to a librettoby Giacomo de Vincentiis (premiered 1849).

The character of the evil queen Athalia featuresin an oratorio Athalia (HWV 52) by Handel to a li-bretto by Samuel Humphreys. It tells the story ofAthalia who ordered the murder of all the males ofthe royal household, and her grandson Joash, whoescaped and remained hidden in the temple for sixyears (2 Kgs 11 : 1–3). The oratorio concludes withthe brutal death of Athalia, which is treated off-stage.

Events such as the siege of Jerusalem by the As-syrian King Sennacherib and the slaughter of theAssyrian army by the angel of death (2 Kgs 18 : 13–19 : 37) were retold by Modest Mussorgsky in a can-tata for mixed chorus and orchestra (The Destructionof Sennacherib), based on a poem of the same nameby Lord Byron, and in two oratorios by the samename Hezekiah by Philip Armes (1878) and later byJohn Truman Wolcott (1908), both based on the ac-count of the story from Isaiah (Isa 36–37).

The story of King Hezekiah also enjoyed a re-ception in music from the early 18th century, ina work for harpsichord entitled Hiskia agonizzante erisanato (Sonata No. 4) in Biblical Sonatas (BiblischeHistorien) (1700) by Johann Kuhnau based on 2 Kgs20, and in a dialogue motet Ezechia (date unknown)by Carissimi based on the account of the story inIsa 38.

The best known work based on the story of theBabylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar from 2 Kgs 24–



321 Kingship of God

25 features in the opera Nabucco by Giuseppe Verdi(1841) to a libretto by Temistocle Solera (1815–1878) based on the play Nabuchodonosor by AugusteAnicet-Bourgeois and Francis Cornu (premiered1836) and a ballet adapted from the play, Nabucco-donosor, ballo storico by Antonio Cortese (premiered1838). Although the opera libretto is based pri-marily on Jeremiah, it also derives from 2 Kings,2 Chronicles, Daniel, and the Psalms.

Bibliography: ■ Dowling Long, S./J. F. A. Sawyer, The Biblein Music (Lanham, Md. 2015).

Siobhán Dowling Long

VIII. FilmThe books of Kings start with King David on hisdeath-bed and end with the exile of his dynasty toBabylon. In between thirty-nine kings and onequeen, rule the people of the kingdoms of Israeland of Judah. Strangely though, few of these mon-archs have been portrayed on film. Even the deathof David is oddly absent; in films about him featur-ing only in The Story of David (dir. David LowellRich/Alex Segal, 1976, US/IT/DE) and the thirty-hour Rei Davi (dir. Edson Spinello, 2012, BR, KingDavid). Strangely rather than covering his death intheir 1997 film David (dir. Robert Markowitz, 1997,US), the Bible Collection only included the episode inSolomon (dir. Roger Young, 1997, UK/CZ/FR/IT/DE/US). Indeed David’s final days actually feature morein films about his most famous son.

Amongst the other rulers of Israel and Judah, itis Solomon that has proved to be the most popular,featuring in at least twenty-five productions. Theearliest, Pathé Frères film Le Jugement de Salomon(FR), goes back to 1904 covering the king’s famousintervention in a dispute between two mothers. Thesame story was adapted three more times in thenext eight years, and in practically all of the filmdepictions of Solomon ever since. However Solo-mon’s enduring popularity would appear to owe atleast as much to the popularity of the Queen ofSheba as it does to the man himself. Continuing thetradition of the biblical operas of the 19th century,Solomon’s meeting with Sheba’s ruler first ap-peared in cinemas in Pathé’s silent La Reine de Saba(dir. Henri Andréani, 1913, FR), and reachedAmerica when Betty Blythe took the role in Fox’s1921 Queen of Sheba (dir. J. Gordon Edwards, US).

It is no surprise, then, that the most famous ver-sion of the story also features the queen. Solomonand Sheba (dir. Henry King, 1959, US) suffered incomparison with star Yul Brynner’s earlier epic TheTen Commandments (dir. Cecil B. DeMille, 1959, US)and Ben-Hur (dir. William Wyler, 1959, US), whichdebuted that same year. Whilst it incorporatedother aspects of Solomon’s rule from the book ofKings (including the aforementioned “judgment”scene) it presented a largely fictional narrative bothriding roughshod over various fragments of Solo-

322

mon’s rule that are found in the text, whilst fillingout the sizeable gaps in the biblical narrative. Chiefamongst the embellishments is the scene where Sol-omon and the queen writhe together on the floorof a Sheban orgy whilst God strikes his temple witha lightning bolt. A more serious treatment occurredseven years later in a Turkish film Hazreti Süleymanve Saba Melikesi (dir. Muharrem Gürses, 1966, Solo-mon and the Queen of Sheba).

More recently the story of Solomon has beencovered both by Robert Young in Solomon & Sheba(1995, US), starring Halle Berry and Jimmy Smits,and 2010’s Persian film Molke Soleiman (dir. Shah-riar Bahrani, IR, The Kingdom of Solomon). Whilstseveral films have cast a darker skinned Shebaagainst a paler skinned Solomon, these roles werereversed in 2001’s modernized version of the storyBrooklyn Babylon (dir. Marc Levin, US/FR).

The closing chapters of 1 Kings and the openingof 2 Kings star Elijah and his sidekick Elisha, butfilmmakers have been strangely reticent to bringthese stories to the (big) screen. Even the one movieabout Elijah was actually named after his sworn en-emy. Sins of Jezebel (dir. William Castle, 1953, US)starred Paulette Goddard as the titular queen at thecenter of a love triangle between her husband Ahab,and his eventual successor Jehu. The portrayal ofElijah is somewhat bombastic, featuring little of thecharacter’s humanity that is so skillfully conveyedin Kings. The story was covered again five yearslater by The Living Bible’s Elijah a Fearless Prophet (dir.Edward Dew, 1958, US) and more recently in Elijah(dir. Derek Hayes, 1996, UK) from the Testament se-ries and the Brazilian O Desafio de Elias (dir. LuisAntonio Piá, 1997, The Challenge of Elijah).

Shortly after the deaths of Jezebel and Ahab,their daughter Athaliah seized the throne of Judah,an obscure story, but one which was included aspart of Pathé Frères’ early series of silent Biblefilms, Athalie (1910, dir. Michel Carré, FR). Aroundthe same time Gaumont released Le Fils de la Suna-mite (dir. Louis Feuillade, 1911, The Son of theShunamite, FR) the only real film about Elisha.

The remainder of 2 Kings featuring the gradualdeterioration of the divided kingdom is perhapsbest captured by Marc Connelly and William Keigh-ley’s 1936 film The Green Pastures (US). Instead ofportraying any ruler in particular, it condensesthem all into a single king who has set his faceagainst God and is persecuting the similarly genericprophet who speaks out against him.

Bibliography: ■ Campbell R. H./M. R. Pitts, The Bible onFilm: A Checklist, 1897–1980 (Metuchen N.J./London 1981).

Matt Page

Kingship of God/King, Kingship; /Kingdom/Kingship of God



kingdoms, northern and southern...303 kingdoms, northern and southern of samuel and kings. in the...

Documents