TEXT [Commentary]

5. Solomon establishes his rule (2:13-46)

13 One day Adonijah, whose mother was Haggith, came to see Bathsheba, Solomon’s mother. “Have you come with peaceful intentions?” she asked him.

“Yes,” he said, “I come in peace. 14 In fact, I have a favor to ask of you.”

“What is it?” she asked.

15 He replied, “As you know, the kingdom was rightfully mine; all Israel wanted me to be the next king. But the tables were turned, and the kingdom went to my brother instead; for that is the way the LORD wanted it. 16 So now I have just one favor to ask of you. Please don’t turn me down.”

“What is it?” she asked.

17 He replied, “Speak to King Solomon on my behalf, for I know he will do anything you request. Ask him to let me marry Abishag, the girl from Shunem.”

18 “All right,” Bathsheba replied. “I will speak to the king for you.”

19 So Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak on Adonijah’s behalf. The king rose from his throne to meet her, and he bowed down before her. When he sat down on his throne again, the king ordered that a throne be brought for his mother, and she sat at his right hand.

20 “I have one small request to make of you,” she said. “I hope you won’t turn me down.”

“What is it, my mother?” he asked. “You know I won’t refuse you.”

21 “Then let your brother Adonijah marry Abishag, the girl from Shunem,” she replied.

22 “How can you possibly ask me to give Abishag to Adonijah?” King Solomon demanded. “You might as well ask me to give him the kingdom! You know that he is my older brother, and that he has Abiathar the priest and Joab son of Zeruiah on his side.”

23 Then King Solomon made a vow before the LORD: “May God strike me and even kill me if Adonijah has not sealed his fate with this request. 24 The LORD has confirmed me and placed me on the throne of my father, David; he has established my dynasty as he promised. So as surely as the LORD lives, Adonijah will die this very day!” 25 So King Solomon ordered Benaiah son of Jehoiada to execute him, and Adonijah was put to death.

26 Then the king said to Abiathar the priest, “Go back to your home in Anathoth. You deserve to die, but I will not kill you now, because you carried the Ark of the Sovereign LORD for David my father and you shared all his hardships.” 27 So Solomon deposed Abiathar from his position as priest of the LORD, thereby fulfilling the prophecy the LORD had given at Shiloh concerning the descendants of Eli.

28 Joab had not joined Absalom’s earlier rebellion, but he had joined Adonijah’s rebellion. So when Joab heard about Adonijah’s death, he ran to the sacred tent of the LORD and grabbed on to the horns of the altar. 29 When this was reported to King Solomon, he sent Benaiah son of Jehoiada to execute him.

30 Benaiah went to the sacred tent of the LORD and said to Joab, “The king orders you to come out!”

But Joab answered, “No, I will die here.”

So Benaiah returned to the king and told him what Joab had said.

31 “Do as he said,” the king replied. “Kill him there beside the altar and bury him. This will remove the guilt of Joab’s senseless murders from me and from my father’s family. 32 The LORD will repay him[*] for the murders of two men who were more righteous and better than he. For my father knew nothing about the deaths of Abner son of Ner, commander of the army of Israel, and of Amasa son of Jether, commander of the army of Judah. 33 May their blood be on Joab and his descendants forever, and may the LORD grant peace forever to David, his descendants, his dynasty, and his throne.”

34 So Benaiah son of Jehoiada returned to the sacred tent and killed Joab, and he was buried at his home in the wilderness. 35 Then the king appointed Benaiah to command the army in place of Joab, and he installed Zadok the priest to take the place of Abiathar.

36 The king then sent for Shimei and told him, “Build a house here in Jerusalem and live there. But don’t step outside the city to go anywhere else. 37 On the day you so much as cross the Kidron Valley, you will surely die; and your blood will be on your own head.”

38 Shimei replied, “Your sentence is fair; I will do whatever my lord the king commands.” So Shimei lived in Jerusalem for a long time.

39 But three years later two of Shimei’s slaves ran away to King Achish son of Maacah of Gath. When Shimei learned where they were, 40 he saddled his donkey and went to Gath to search for them. When he found them, he brought them back to Jerusalem.

41 Solomon heard that Shimei had left Jerusalem and had gone to Gath and returned. 42 So the king sent for Shimei and demanded, “Didn’t I make you swear by the LORD and warn you not to go anywhere else or you would surely die? And you replied, ‘The sentence is fair; I will do as you say.’ 43 Then why haven’t you kept your oath to the LORD and obeyed my command?”

44 The king also said to Shimei, “You certainly remember all the wicked things you did to my father, David. May the LORD now bring that evil on your own head. 45 But may I, King Solomon, receive the LORD’s blessings, and may one of David’s descendants always sit on this throne in the presence of the LORD.” 46 Then, at the king’s command, Benaiah son of Jehoiada took Shimei outside and killed him.

So the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip.

NOTES

2:13 One day. The Hebrew simply reads wayyabo’ [TH935, ZH995] (and he came), a “Waw-consecutive imperfect” (concerning this terminology, see “Literary Style” in the Introduction), thus indicating a return to the main narrative. For the identity of Adonijah son of Haggith, see note on 1:5.

Have you come with peaceful intentions? This was a very appropriate query in light of Adonijah’s prior actions (1:5-10, 41-53); in essence, he had tried to usurp the throne. “Peaceful intentions” (shalom [TH7965, ZH8934]) conveys the concept of “completeness,” including prosperity, success, and especially one’s “welfare” (in the sense of personal safety and state of health; cf. HALOT 1507-1508). The word shalom has already appeared twice in 2:5-6, and it is notably used some nine times as a literary refrain in the Jehu narrative (2 Kgs 9:1-37; cf. commentary on 2 Kgs 9:14-29). Cogan (2001:175) suggests plausibly that the conversation recorded here took place soon after Solomon’s accession to the throne.

2:15 As you know, the kingdom was rightfully mine. Adonijah took the direct approach, probably to put Bathsheba on the defensive. This, however, would prove to be disastrous, as commentators point out that Bathsheba’s apparent agreement to Adonijah’s request may actually have set him up for future disaster (Cogan [2001:176] terms Bathsheba’s actions here and throughout the chapter as “artfully ambiguous,” just as they were in the previous chapter).

But the tables were turned . . . for that is the way the LORD wanted it. Cf. the commentary on 1:28-53. “The tables were turned” is lit. “the kingship has turned away” (wattissob [TH5437, ZH6015] hammelukah); the NLT nicely conveys the impersonal sense of the construction—implying, but not asserting, divine causality.

2:17 Abishag. See 1:1-4. She may now be reckoned as one of David’s concubines.

2:19 The king rose from his throne to meet her, and he bowed down before her. Sol­omon knew he owed his throne largely to his mother. Those who understandably complain about the “double standard” of male domination over females in traditional cultures, such as was and is still found in the Near East, sometimes fail to acknowledge the significant existence of the “power behind the throne” (cf. Laffey 1989:298). In this case, Bathsheba, the queen mother, was far more than an object of David’s passing fancy (see next note).

a throne be brought. A rather literal depiction of the importance of the queen mother, and perhaps illustrative of what R. K. Harrison (1970:187-189) has termed “the matriarchate,” where the ancestral inheritance can be reckoned through the female line (as it was, at times, in Egypt). Note also that the Judahite regnal formulas in Kings prominently feature the names of the queen mothers as well (see “Literary Style” in the Introduction).

2:22 How can you possibly ask me to give Abishag to Adonijah? Up to then Solomon had been most solicitous of his mother, but that certainly changed here! Many have seen marriage with Abishag here as akin to Absalom’s notorious cohabitation with David’s concubines back in 2 Sam 16:21-22. Both attest a public, rebellious stance against the crown. As Cross (1998:94) notes, asking for Abishag at this point would indeed qualify Adonijah for execution—“for stupidity.”

2:23 May God strike me and even kill me. It is notoriously difficult to translate Hebrew oath formulas into English (cf. NIV, “May God deal with me, be it ever so severely”). The concept is that if the speaker does not make good on the oath, may God do that and more to the speaker (Waltke and O’Connor [1990:679 n. 18], citing Joüon, term this a “self-curse or imprecation formula”); cf. 2 Kgs 6:31.

2:24 as surely as the LORD lives. In essence, this is another oath formula (Lambdin 1971:172). Waltke and O’Connor (1990:679) note that khay [TH2416, ZH2644] (life) + a name (here, “the LORD”), followed by a clause with ki [TH3588, ZH3954] (that), indicates the positive action (here, “Adonijah will die this very day”) sanctioned by the oath.

2:25 Benaiah. This was the trusted captain of David’s bodyguard (see notes on 1:8, 38), by now surely quite advanced in age. This is the last chapter where he is mentioned, apart from the list of Solomon’s officials found in 4:4. Benaiah acts as Solomon’s executioner here and in 2:34, 46.

2:26 Abiathar the priest. See note on 1:7. He will be mentioned in the list of Solomon’s officials (4:4).

Anathoth. This was a Levitical city within the territory of Benjamin, not far from Jerusalem (Josh 21:18; cf. Cogan 2001:177 for possible locations). The prophet Jeremiah came from this town (Jer 1:1; cf. Jer 11:18-23). He was probably a priestly descendant of Abiathar (Thompson 1980:140), which would help explain his strong dissatisfaction with the priestly and royal hierarchy in Jerusalem.

2:27 So Solomon deposed Abiathar . . . thereby fulfilling the prophecy the LORD had given at Shiloh concerning the descendants of Eli. Concerning this prophecy, see 1 Sam 2:30-36. As DeVries (1985:39) has pointed out, “it is evident that kings had final authority over priests, not priests over kings” (which, by the way, stands in stark contrast to the limitations prophets placed on kings, as delineated in the commentary on 1:5-27).

2:28 Joab. See note on 1:7, and especially Seow’s comment that he and Abiathar represented David’s “old guard.” Be that as it may, what a sad ending we find here for this crusty, effective, blunt, but generally loyal leader.

sacred tent of the LORD. See the first note on 1:50.

grabbed on to the horns of the altar. Just like Adonijah did in the previous chapter—the literary parallelism is quite exact. (See the second note on 1:50, concerning the sanctuary this would afford.)

2:32 The LORD will repay him. As Wiseman (1993:79-80) points out, “[Joab’s] death was to be a divine retribution through judicial punishment.” Concerning the so-called Deuteronomistic retribution theology presupposed here, see “The ‘Sins of Manasseh’” under “Major Themes” in the Introduction. There I argue that already in the Ten Commandments, a retribution theology is to be found (as well as a focus on potential redemption for the offender over against mechanistic retribution for the offense).

2:33 blood. See second note on 2:5.

2:35 Benaiah . . . Zadok. For Benaiah, see note on 2:25, and the references cited there; for Zadok the priest, see first note on 1:8. On the lengthy Greek interpolation after this verse, usually termed a miscellany, see endnote 17 of the Introduction, and especially Gooding (1976), who sees the material as a midrashic arrangement of Solomonic material attesting his great wisdom, here especially in his building projects. (In the second miscellany inserted after 2:46, Gooding sees emphasis on Solomon’s wisdom in governmental administration and palace provisions.)

2:36 Shimei. On his identity, see the third note on 1:8; on David’s ignominious condemnation, see the note on 2:8-9. Once again, Shimei seems largely to be in the right here (cf. his acquiescence to Solomon’s harsh command in 2:38). Yet, in Solomon’s defense, he has so far acted more leniently than his aged father had wished back in 2:8-9.

2:39 three years later. The compressed chronology here should be noted; the author wanted to deal with the fate of each individual comprehensively without discussing events that occurred in the meantime.

King Achish son of Maacah of Gath. This was possibly the same Achish under whom David had sought refuge back in 1 Sam 21:10-15 (cf. 1 Sam 27:2), although he would have been quite elderly by this time. See Cogan (2001:179), who notes D. N. Freedman’s suggestion that the custom of papponymy (naming a grandchild after his grandfather) is at work here and this is the grandson of David’s Philistine patron. Cogan also cites parallels for the retrieval of runaway slaves from foreign countries; as he notes, sometimes provisions for such actions were included in state treaties. (On the probable location of Gath, Tell es-Safi, see second note on 2 Kgs 12:17 [18].)

2:41 Solomon heard that Shimei had left Jerusalem. Wiseman (1993:80-81) has plausibly argued that the narrator here implies that Shimei did indeed bring judgment upon himself by reneging on his earlier promise (2:38; cf. 2:42), but this last narrative fragment wrapping up the fates of those on David’s hit list nonetheless leaves a bitter taste in the reader’s mouth (see commentary below).

2:46 So the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip. This is quite likely the conclusion to the Throne Succession Narrative (see commentary below). Once again we find a miscellany of Solomonic material in the Greek text—see the references in the note on 2:35 for further study.

COMMENTARY [Text]

“Just the facts, ma’am,” was the comment police sergeant Jack Webb of Dragnet would give to the women he was interviewing concerning a crime. This was meant to cut off any extended extraneous or editorial comments by the interviewee. But, as scholars have been increasingly recognizing, “facts” are elusive things, and are rarely able to be understood apart from their contexts. Such is the case here. Accepting the “facts” of what we have just read in 1 Kings 2, how are we to understand them? Solomon, clearly promising to be an effective king from the outset of his rule, evidently began in nearly the exact way his aged father had counseled him. That much is clear. But what is the opinion of the narrator in regard to all this? Concerning this crucial question, scholars differ.

Recently, Friedman (1998) has suggested that there is a “hidden book in the Bible” (i.e., in the OT), and it consists largely of the “J” source in the Pentateuch (“J” is usually understood as the earliest of some four hypothetical sources underlying the first five books of the OT), various narratives in the books of Joshua, Judges, 1–2 Samuel, and especially the so-called Throne Succession Narrative of 2 Samuel that is traditionally understood to have concluded at this point in 1 Kings. The thesis is bold, sweeping, and, of course, open to criticism; but I think there is something to it, especially in Friedman’s sensitivity to the parallel traditions and the use of paronomasia (wordplay) found throughout these narratives. In any case, I think he is correct to see a major ending of biblical tradition signaled by the concluding words: “So the kingdom was now firmly in Solomon’s grip” (2:46). In my interpretation of Friedman’s thesis, I would note the audacious delight in God’s inscrutable ways found in narratives commonly assigned to J (see the commentary on 1:28-53 for examples), and the clear focus on the incredibly heroic and charismatic David in the narratives often designated “the History of David’s Rise” (roughly 1 Sam 16—2 Sam 5). But the Throne Succession Narrative (2 Sam 9–20; 1 Kgs 1–2) is a different matter. In this narrative, King David was already acting in clearly ineffectual ways, riven by doubt and indecision, and notoriously guilty of adultery and murder by proxy in the Bathsheba affair. This David was hardly heroic! And, to the point, neither was his son Solomon. I would understand the present narratives of 1–2 Kings as a subtle, but effective critique of these two personages, sadly affirming, among other things, Lord Acton’s dictum that “power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” (cf. also Seow 1999:35-36). This is precisely the sort of critique an Israelite prophet would make of a monarch or set of monarchs who exceeded the bounds of limited kingship as defined by the prophetic movement (see commentary on 1:5-27, and especially the work of Halpern cited there). Solomon sat on an uncontested throne, but there was no guarantee that Yahweh would allow him or his children to remain there indefinitely. (Could it not be that Tamar [see 2 Sam 13:1-22], the tragic daughter of David, was the author of the Throne Succession Narrative? This is rank speculation to be sure, but she would have been an educated noblewoman in David’s court with time on her hands [cf. 2 Sam 13:20b], and a very motivated and most effective eyewitness to all the shenanigans that took place there!)

As for Solomon’s new administration, he has three individuals killed: Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei. Solomon sadly acted in a manner similar to what one expects his father David would have advised (see 2:5). Adonijah’s fate (2:25) corresponds most closely with that of his notorious elder half brother Absalom (2 Sam 15–18). (On Adonijah’s “stupidity,” see note on 2:22.) Joab was killed “beside the altar” (2:31, 34). As Cogan (2001:178-179) points out, the altar offered no sanctuary for the willful murderer (cf. Exod 21:12-14). Seow (1999:33) thinks Joab “dared” Solomon and his “hatchet man” Benaiah to kill him there (“if anyone wants to kill him, it will have to be there, right by the altar in the sanctuary!”). In any case, Cogan notes that Joab was given the honor of being buried on his estate, in the family grave in Bethlehem (cf. 2 Sam 2:32). Shimei was also killed in a ruthless manner (2:46).

Solomon was to be reckoned as king both de jure and de facto (by legal right, and in actual matter-of-fact). Nonetheless, his insecurity in relation to the Benjamite house of Shimei (2:44-45) could not be ignored. Thus, we come to the conclusion that Solomon proved to be as ruthless as his aged father could have wished. And that, at least for the time being, qualified him uniquely as king on David’s throne “in the presence of the LORD” (2:45b).