\JSOT 30 (1984) 85-93]

THE LITERARY STRUCTURE OF THE

CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON NARRATIVE
Raymond B. Dillard
Westminster Theological Seminary,
Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia PA 19118, USA
Although the subject has been investigated over a much longer
period and was formally recognized also in antiquity, there is a sense
in which the last ten years of biblical scholarship could be called 'the
decade of the chiasm'. Palistrophic or chiastic structures have been
identified in the narrative, poetic, and prophetic literatures of the Old
Testament.
1
The debate around the identification and validity of
chiastic structuring as a literary device in the ancient Near East is
embroiled in much larger issues; after taking a brief look at the
broader vista, we will explore the Chronicler's presentation of
Solomon
2
as a chiastic narrative, and will look at some possible
implications for interpretation.
A. Broader questions
The confluence of several competing streams, each representing
differing tools for biblical interpretation, has produced some turbulence
in biblical studies. The traditional diachronic
3
orientation of most
higher criticism is in tension with other emergent tools that demand
attention; linguistic structuralism, discourse grammar, and literary
appreciation have in common a synchronic approach to biblical
materials: texts are explained 'as they are' and as their parts inter-
relate, irrespective of their presumed development.
4
Naturally these
two approaches have yielded and will continue to yield competing
analyses of the same data.
The discussion of chiasm as a narrative level structure is at the
center of this larger debate. Other eddies swirl about the proper
methodologies for identifying such structures and how to assess the
inevitable role subjectivity plays in literary critical judgments.
86 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (1984)
Occasionally after reading an article suggesting a chiastic structure
for a given passage, one is left with the feeling that it was all done
with mirrors, that the labels had been sufficiently doctored as to yield
the desired results. Given episodes A and B, the simple act of asking
'what do they have in common' is almost certain to yield a label from
some common aspect of human experience; done with sufficient
frequency and plausibility, the result is a chiasm, far removed from
anything the original author may have dreamt or intended. Some
means of control is essential; a set of agreed upon axioms as to what
constitutes a valid pairs is indispensable.
The key to identifying chiastic structures is repetition. Verbal
repetition takes pride of place as the most easily substantiated
evidence. However, repetition can itself be considerably more diverse
than verbatim correspondence; it can include catchwords, phrases,
literary forms (e.g., speech vs. narration, poetry, fable, etc.), themes,
theological vantage, geographical location, main characters, and yet
other categories.
5
Of course, not all repetition in Hebrew narrative is
chiastic. Where repetition is frequent, however, the analyst must at
least ask if the narrative has been constructed with a chiastic
architecture; if the narrative shows repetition, does it also show the
necessary inversion, balance, and climactic centrality?
6
At some
point the frequency and nature of the parallelism may constrain the
conclusion that 'statistical probabilities against accident are over-
whelming'
7
and that the author has definitely and deliberately used
palistrophe as a structuring device.
B. The Solomon Narrative in Chronicles
The Chronicler's presentation of Solomon is a good place to test
some of these questions.
8
Unlike many Old Testament narratives, 2
Chronicles 1-9 is not a 'dramatic' narrative, i.e. there is no over-
arching issue which must be resolved to release the suspense or
tension built up in the account. Dramatic narratives ordinarily have
a 'bell curve' contour: they proceed from the aperture and staging
through several episodes which build up the tension in the narrative
to that moment of'peak' tension at which denouement is begun; the
denouement winds down ordinarily through several episodes which
unravel the tension generated by the pre-peak build-up, and finally
concludes with an epilogue or postscript. Narratives having such a
bell curve must have a certain degree of parallelism: the issues which
DILLARD The Chronicler's Solomon Narrative 87
caused the tension must be resolved in the second half of the story,
i.e. a certain amount of repetition is inevitable.
9
Due to the inherent
repetition such dramatic narratives could easily be metanalyzed
incorrectly as chiastic. For such narratives to be judged as chiastic,
the analyst must show more than simply the presence of repeated
items, but also a deliberate sequential inversion and balance
maintained in both sides of the narrative. Since the Chronicler's
presentation of Solomon is not in the form of a dramatic narrative,
the repetition which does occur is not immediately suspect as the
inherent result of the bell curve of drama.
The Chronicler's account of Solomon is also an interesting testing
ground due to the fact that Radday, who probably has done more to
investigate the device in biblical Hebrew narrative than any other
scholar, has concluded that Chronicles could not be chiastic since at
the time of composition chiasm was no longer in vogue.
10
Looking at
the Chronicler's narrative of Solomon provides the opportunity to
test Radday's hypothesis that chiastic structures are found only in
earlier biblical materials and that the more formally chiastic a
narrative is, the earlier it is.
11
The following outline approximates the literary structure the
Chronicler used in presenting his Solomon; though it could be
broken down into smaller units, each of the headings will be
described below:
A. Solomon's wealth and wisdom (1.1-17)
(Trade in horses, 1.14-17)
B. Recognition by gentiles / dealings with Hiram (2.1-16)
(Yahweh's love for Israel, 2.11)
C. Temple construction / gentile labor (2.17-5.1)
(Gentile labor, 2.17-18)
(Completion of temple, 5.1)
D. Dedication of temple (5.2-7.10)
1. a. Summons -*
b. Sacrifice I
c
-
A
\ 5.2-14
e. Music I
d. Glory cloud J
88 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (1984)
2. Solomon speaks to the people (6.1-11)
a. Exodus (6.5)
b. Choice of Jerusalem (6.6-11)
2'. Solomon speaks to God (6.12-42)
a. Promises to David (6.16-17)
b. Eyes open; hear and forgive (6.18-42)
. d'. Glory cloud
c\ Music
b'. Sacrifice
a'. Dismissal
y 7.1-10
D\ Divine response (7.11-22)
2". God speaks to Solomon (7.12-18)
b. Eyes open; hear and forgive (7.13-16)
a. Promises to David (7.17-18)
2'". God speaks to the people (7.19-22)
b. Choice of Jerusalem (7.19-21)
a. Exodus (7.22)
C. Other construction / gentile labor (8.1-16)
(Gentile labor, 8.7-10)
(Completion of temple, 8.16)
B\ Recognition by gentiles / dealings with Hiram (8.17-9.12)
(Yahweh's love for Israel, 9.8)
A'. Solomon's wealth and wisdom (9.13-28)
(Trade in horses, 9.25-28)
A/A': Solomon's wealth and wisdom. Thematically 1.1-14 and
9.13-24 both deal with the broad subject of Solomon's kingdom: his
consolidation of rule within (1.1, 13) and the recognition of his rule
without (9.13-14,22-24). More narrowly both are concerned with his
wealth and wisdom.
The strongest connection between these two sections is the nearly
verbatim repetition of the information about Solomon's trade in
horses and the repetition of the aphorism comparing cedar with
sycamore and silver with stone (1.14-17; 9.25-28). This passage
occurs in its full form only once in the deuteronomic history of
DflLLARD The Chronicler's Solomon Narrative 89
Solomon (1 Kgs 10.26-29; cf. 4.20,26 [MT 5.1,6]). The Chronicler's
repeating the passage early in his history is a clue to his structural
intent. Since the Chronicler omitted the material used in Kings to
show the fulfillment of God's promises to Solomon (1 Kgs 3.16-
4.34)
12
, the repetition of this material at this point constitutes that
fulfillment.
B/B': Recognition by gentiles / dealings with Hiram. The Chronicler
has rather extensively rewritten the correspondence with Hiram of
Tyre
13
. At first glance this material may not appear intrinsically
paired with the visit of the queen of Sheba, but the Chronicler has
given a clear indication of his intention to parallel the two accounts
by inserting a separate small utterance into Hiram's letter to
Solomon in which Hiram attributes Solomon's rule to Yahweh's love
for Israel (2.11). The identical wording is found in the queen's praise
(9.8), though it occurs only once in the parallel history (1 Kgs 10.9).
The parallel between the two sections is reinforced by the fact that
references to Solomon's maritime ventures with Hiram bracket the
account of the queen's visit (also in 1 Kgs 8.17-9.12), so that Hiram,
who is a focal character in 2.1-16, is also kept to the fore in 8.17-9.12.
C/C: Temple and other construction / gentile labor. These
sections are united around concerns with Solomon's building activities;
both emphasize his use of gentile labor (2.17-18; 8.7-10). Though
8.10 is concerned with non-cultic construction, the section is linked
to 3.1-5.1 by a description of the ceremonial provisions Solomon had
made for the temple (8.12-15). The earlier section ended with a note
regarding the treasuries and the statement that the work was finished
(5.1), and the counterpart ends with a similar note (8.15-16). Unless
the Chronicler intends to associate 8.16 and 5.1, 8.16 appears
thoroughly out of place; it re-introduces the subject of actual
construction and completion of the temple, well after that narration
was already completed.
14
D/D'\ Dedication and divine response This section is the most
convoluted in its general structure. One immediately notes the
doubled report of the appearance of the glory cloud and its effect on
the ministering priests (5.2-14; 7.1-10); both sections speak of
sacrifices and musical accompaniment. It is tempting to explain these
two accounts genetically, i.e., by appeal to redaction criticism: since
7.1-3 is unique to Chronicles, this would be designated the Chronicler's
account; since 5.11,14 parallel 1 Kings 8.10-11, this could be judged
the insertion of a later redactor influenced by the order in Kings.
15
If
90 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (1984)
one allows that the Chronicler has staged the material in a chiastic
fashion, a redaction-critical explanation would not be necessary: the
two appearances of the glory cloud are one and the same, repeated for
structural necessity.
16
The two theophanies frame two speeches by Solomon, one to the
assembled people (6.4-11) and one in the dedicatory prayer (6.14-42).
Though many years have elapsed in the interval,
17
the Chronicler's
version of the divine response to Solomon's prayer is also twofold:
part to Solomon ('you' is singular, 7.12-18) and part to the people
('you' and other personal referents are plural, 7.19-22). As can be
noted from the outline, the themes in each part of the divine response
correspond to themes in Solomon's speeches, but in reverse order as
would be expected in a chiastic outline: D2 corresponds to D2'"
while D2' corresponds to D2".
The center of a chiasm is ordinarily the peak moment of dramatic
tension or the central interest of the writer. Scholars have long
recognized the centrality of cult in Chronicles, and that the Chronicler
has written his accounts of David and Solomon largely in terms of
their involvement with the temple.
18
Though the Chronicler is so
concerned with the temple, his actual account of its construction is
considerably shorter than that found in the parallel account.
19
His
account does not focus on the building itself, but rather on the
dedicatory addresses of Solomon and the divine response. In
Chronicles particularly these speech materials constitute the 'charter'
for the remainder of the Chronicler's historiography; the author will
seek again and again to demonstrate the realization in Israel's history
of the principles announced in Solomon's prayer and in God's
response. This is especially clear in that most famous passage in
Chronicles, 2 Chr 7.14, a passage unique to Chronicles and overtly
articulating the 'theology of immediate retribution' which will guide
his subsequent assessment of Israel's history after the schism.
20
These speech materials in the center of his account of Solomon
constitute the 'spectacles' through which the Chronicler would
assess the past.
C. Other Chiastic Structures in Chronicles
The argument for viewing the Chronicler's Solomon narrative as a
chiasm would be enhanced if it could be shown that the author in all
probability also used the same device as the scaffolding for other
DILLARD The Chronicler's Solomon Narrative 91
narratives. Hugh Williamson has used chiasmus as a powerful
heuristic tool in two difficult passages in Chronicles. In addition to
the coronation account found at the beginning and end of 1 Chronicles
11-12, Williamson noted that other features were paired in the
chapters; the resultant pattern has at its center the earliest period at
which David began to attract support (at the stronghold, 1 Sam. 22.1-
5; 23.14; 24.1), followed by the Ziklag period (1 Sam. 27.6; 29-30),
and assembling military personnel at Hebron to encompass the full
extent of Israel at David's coronation:
21
A. David's coronation at Hebron, 11.1-9
B. Support for David at Hebron, 11.10-47
C. Support for David at Ziklag, 12.1-8
D. Support at the stronghold, 12.9-16
D\ Support at the stronghold, 12.17-19
C. Support for David at Ziklag, 12.20-23
B'. Support for David at Hebron, 12.24-38
A'. David's coronation at Hebron, 12.39-41
Williamson's use of chiasm as an explanatory model also brings
the genealogy of Judah in Chronicles from disjointed disarray to a
sample of studied symmetry.
22
It appears then that the Chronicler was familiar with chiasm and
did make use of it.
23
Whatever speculation scholars may indulge in
regarding the history of redaction of the individual pieces and sources
the Chronicler had at his disposal, in several extended pericopes
there remain the traces of a unitary purpose and of contrivance in
structure that most naturally comport with a single author of
considerable skill and genius.
NOTES
1. The level of interest in chiasmus in recent years is demonstrated by
the publication of a collection of essays edited by John Welch, Chiasmus in
Antiquity (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1981). Beyond the extensive biblio-
graphy provided there, see also the following: S. Berg, The Book of Esther:
Motifs, Themes and Structure, SBL Dissertation Series, 44 (Missoula:
Scholars Press, 1979) and G. Wenham, 'The Coherence of the Flood
Narrative', FT 28 (1978), 336-48.
2. The Chronicler's distinctive presentation of Solomon has itself been
92 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (1984)
the object of considerable study, especially in the last decade: P.R. Ackroyd,
'History and Theology in the Writings of the Chronicler', CTM 38 (1967),
501-15; R.L. Braun, 'The Message of Chronicles: Rally Round the Temple',
CTM 42 (1971), 502-14; id., 'Solomon, the Chosen Temple Builder: the
Significance of 1 Chronicles 22,28, and 29 for the Theology of Chronicles',
JBL 95 (1976), 581-90; H.G.M. Williamson, 'The Accession of Solomon in
the Books of Chronicles', VT 26 (1976), 351-61; R.B. Dillard, 'The
Chronicler's Solomon', WTJ 43 (1980), 289-300.
3. The stereotypical diachronic explanation is offered in terms of the past
history of individual units. Things are explained in terms of how they came
to be. The analogy in general sciences would be to the sort of explanations
offered by evolutionary biology.
4. Scholars committed to operating from a synchronic viewpoint tend too
quickly to dismiss diachronic explanations as 'genetic fallacy'. A contemporary
scientific analogy would be the approach of ecology or environmental
biologyexplanations are offered not in terms of how a situation came to be
but in terms of the relationships operative at a given moment.
5. See the efforts to classify categories in the following: J. Dewey, 'The
Literary Structure of the Controversy Stories in Mark 2.1-3.6', JBL 92
(1973), 394-401; A. Di Marco, 'Der Chiasmus in der Bibel IV, Linguistica
Biblica 44 (1979), 21-70; D. Clark, 'Criteria for Identifying Chiasm',
Lingustica Biblica 35 (1975), 63-72.
6. These three items are generally accepted as pivotal for identifying
chiasm. See, for example, comments of various authors in Chiasmus in
Antiquity, ed. Welch, pp. 7, 10, 13, 51, 110.
7. Y. Radday, 'Chiasmus in Hebrew Biblical Narrative', Chiasmus in
Antiquity, ed. J. Welch (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1981), 111.
8. I had originally proposed a chiastic structure for the Chronicler's
Solomon narrative in the aforementioned article (note 2), pp. 299-300. Since
that time I have had the benefit of discussing the Chronicler's Solomon with
several doctoral classes in Chronicles. A former teaching assistant, now
lecturer in Hebrew at Westminster Theological Seminary, Mr J. Alan
Groves, wrote his 1983 Th.M. thesis on 'Chiasm as a Structuring Device in
the Old Testament Narrative', in which he examined the device in the
Solomon narrative in both Kings and Chronicles; I have profited considerably
from his labor, though the structure presented here is my own. For other
efforts to explore the Solomon narrative in Kings on chiastic lines, see B. Porten,
'The Structure and Theme of the Solomon Narrative (1 Kgs 3-11)', HUCA
38 (1967), 93-128, and Radday, op. cit., 62-63.
9. Examples where this would apply would include extended narratives
like Esther (cf. Radday, op. at., 54-57) or the flood narrative (cf. Wenham,
op. cit., 52.
10. Radday, op. cit., 52.
11. Radday, 51, 111.
DILLARD The Chronicler's Solomon Narrative 93
12. I have discussed these omissions as they are related to the overall
handling of Solomon in 'The Chronicler's Solomon', 291-92, 296, and the
note on 297.
13. The modifications here are among the most significant departures in
the Chronicler's account; see 'The Chronicler's Solomon', 296-98.
14. 2 Chr. 8.13-16a is an insertion into the parallel at 1 Kgs 9.25.
Vannuttelli's synopsis should have printed the last clause of 1 Kgs 9.25 so
that it was parallel to the last clause of 2 Chr. 8.16, as is done correctly in the
synopsis of ben David.
15. This is the approach taken, for example, by W. Rudolph, Chronikbcher,
HAT 21 (Tbingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1955), 211.
16. The flood narrative is commonly recognized to have two competing
chronologies separable for purposes of source analysis. Compare Wenham's
suggestion (pp. cit.) that the chronology used elapsed-time dating contains
double references to the same period, necessitated by the chiastic structure
of the passage.
17. In spite of the proximate juxtaposition of the prayer and the response
in both Kings and Chronicles, this second appearance came about thirteen
years later after the work on the palace had been completed as well (2 Chr.
7.11; 1 Kgs 7.1; 9.10).
18. See in particular the works by Braun and Williamson cited in note 2
above.
19. A variety of factors could account for his surprising abbreviation of the
account regarding the temple construction: (1) perhaps he felt the architectural
detail was irrelevant to the post-exilic community and its much more modest
structure (cf. Hagg. 2.1-9); (2) the Chronicler is widely recognized to rely
periodically on the reader's familiarity with the earlier history. We can only
swim in the realm of speculation about such a question.
20. See my forthcoming article in the Westminster Theological Journal,
'Reward and Punishment in Chronicles: the Theology of Immediate
Retribution'; see also Dillard, 'The Reign of Asa: an Example of the
Chronicler's Theological Method', JETS 23 (1980), 207-18.
21. H.G.M. Williamson, '"We Are Yours, O David": the Setting and
Purpose of 1 Chronicles 12.1-23', OTS 21 (1981), 164-76; see especially
pp. 168-70.
22. H.G.M. Williamson, 'Sources and Redaction in the Chronicler's
Genealogy of Judah', JBL 98 (1979), 351-59.
23. This contra Radday; cf. note 10. It is curious that Radday would so
readily close the book on chiasm; its presence extensively in Revelation
shows that it is alive and well in the New Testament as well.
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.