Another Contribution to the Succession Narrative Debate (2 Samuel 11–20;1 Kings 1–2)

Abstract

The segment of the biblical history of the monarchy which narrates events leading to the succession of Solomon to the throne of David in 1 Kings 2, known as the Succession Narrative or Court History, continues to generate inconclusive debate as to its extent, its relation to the historical work of which it is a part, and its ideology. On this last point, its characterization of the principal actors and its realistic narration of events have led some commentators to conclude that its author is expressing a basically negative view of David, Solomon, and the institution of monarchy. After arguing for limiting the extent of the Succession Narrative to 2 Samuel 11–20 and 1 Kings 1–2, the present article disputes two of the most prominent interpretations of the text: that of W. Dietrich, who reads it as containing a basically negative Grundschrift of early date rewritten some two centuries later to present a favourable view of the principals; and that of J. Van Seters, for whom it is a late post-exilic composition, informed by an anti-messianic ideology and inserted into the Deuteronomistic History to present a decidedly negative view of David and Solomon. This article concludes that the Succession Narrative is a homogeneous and coherent text and that it is in no sense an indictment of David, Solomon, and monarchy in general.