AUTHOR

The books of 1 and 2 Kings were originally one book in the ancient Hebrew manuscripts. They are the account of Israel and Judah from the final days of King David to the fall of Jerusalem under Nebuchadnezzar in 597/6 BC. They both comprise one complete narrative and exhibit the same literary characteristics. From a contemporary perspective, they are the closest to what we would call “history” in the modern sense, but with important differences noted below. The Septuagint (LXX) first divided the book into two books, possibly because the Greek text required more space than the Hebrew. Various Greek and Latin manuscripts divide the text at different points, showing that there was no tradition of two books of Kings and that the division was made arbitrarily. The LXX gives 1 and 2 Kings the titles “Third and Fourth Kingdoms,” respectively. The compilers of this ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible evidently considered Samuel and Kings as one narrative split into four parts. Hebrew manuscripts, however, are unanimous in keeping Samuel and Kings as two separate books.

The authorship of 1 and 2 Kings, their literary style, and the principles used in their composition are linked together. The author or authors do not identify themselves, but the books consistently evaluate each king based upon the same moral criterion: How faithful was the king to the law of Moses, and especially to the requirements of the law as recorded in the book of Deuteronomy? If we assume a single author—as is most likely, given the books’ consistent historiography—then the author lived during or after the final events recorded in the book, that is, during or after the seventy years of Israel’s exile.

So who wrote the books of Kings? Jewish tradition (Talmud: Baba Bathra 15a) attributes the books to Jeremiah, because 2 Kings 24:18–25:30 is repeated in Jeremiah 52. Certainly the focus upon the kings’ faithfulness to the Lord (or lack of it) fits a concern evident in Jeremiah. Against this conclusion is the fact that the account in Kings of the deportation and imprisonment of Jehoiachin (2Kg 24:8-17) appears to have been written from Babylon, whereas Jeremiah was in Egypt at that time. We assume that the author (or authors) lived sometime during the final years of Judah since that is the time when the narrative ends. He presumably lived during the exilic period of Israel’s history, and so would have been either contemporaneous with or younger than Jeremiah.

Because there are verbal differences between the parallel passages of 2 Kings and Jeremiah, these suggest that both were copied from a larger common written source, perhaps the book of Deuteronomy since the list of phrases and expressions common to 1 and 2 Kings and Deuteronomy is extensive. This fact has led to a theory that Kings was edited by the same group of priests that edited Moses’s sermons into Deuteronomy. But there is a fundamental difference between the two books. Deuteronomy presents the lessons history teaches us (“Learn from your parents’ mistakes in Egypt and in the wilderness!”), while the books of Kings are much more concerned about the covenant and how closely the king and people followed it.

PURPOSE

Why were the books of Kings written? The answer lies in another question: What kind of historian was the author and what principles of composition and historiography did he use? The author’s purposes are revealed in the choices he made in the selection and arrangement of the events he chose to narrate, as well in explicit editorial comments made about those events.

Stepping back and looking at the sweep of the narration, we see a special emphasis upon David’s last days and Solomon’s achievements as kings. Then, beginning with Jeroboam I (1Kg 12:25) of Israel, the northern kingdom, the author moves on to cover events contemporaneous with Jeroboam. He continues to narrate reigns in Judah until the death of Asa. After Asa, the author alternates his narration between the northern and southern kingdoms. This pattern shows the author’s purpose: to compare and contrast the two kingdoms in light of God’s plan for Israel and how well they followed the Deuteronomic ideal for kings and kingdoms. The narration of each individual king has a similar literary pattern: (1) correlation of the date of the reigns of the two kingdoms: the name of the ruler, age at accession to rule, length of reign, name of the ruler’s mother; (2) the author’s theological assessment of the ruler: Did he follow the law of Moses or not? The literary pattern varies depending upon dynastic changes, especially frequent in the northern kingdom.

POLITICS AND HISTORY

What can we deduce from the author’s choices in crafting his narration? First, the books of Kings present a different picture of Israel than one gets from contemporary records of other nations. For example, Omri is given only seven verses (1Kg 16:21-27) for his reign and accomplishments, but he was mentioned in Assyrian documents and was one of the most “important” rulers of the northern kingdom in terms of political and economic achievements. But the author of 2 Kings dismisses Omri as unimportant. Hezekiah is given three chapters (2Kg 18–20), but the reign of Jeroboam II—accounted by many as a true golden age for Israel—is told in just eight verses (2Kg 13:13; 14:16,23,27-29; 15:1,8).

From a political standpoint, Omri and Jeroboam II are important figures, but they are treated in just a few short verses. On the other hand, the short ministries of Elijah and Elisha comprise nearly one third of the books. The author’s purpose is not to present a complete history of Israel but to emphasize certain events to support a specific interpretation of that history. He wanted to show how the kings led the nations to obedience to the Mosaic law or, more frequently, led them away from obedience and how God dealt with the nation and individuals as a result. He selected events and details that were relevant to that purpose. The books of Kings are the author’s reflection on the history of the monarchy. The human king of a theocracy had responsibilities laid out in Deuteronomy. The author is concerned to show how it worked out in accordance with the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy.

The principles that obedience brings blessing and disobedience brings disaster, and that God is active in the judging of individuals and nations on the basis of the covenant are used by the author as his criteria for evaluation of the kings of Israel and Judah. For example, the author consistently condemns kings for allowing the worship of Asherah, the Canaanite goddess of fertility on the “high places” (see 2Kg 17:9-10; Dt 16:21). The emphasis on Ahab’s reign is due to his marriage to Jezebel, a Phoenician princess, and allowing her to introduce the worship of Phoenician gods into Israel (1Kg 16:30-33). In contrast, the author reserves his unqualified praise only for Hezekiah (2Kg 18:3-7) and Josiah (2Kg 22:2) because they removed the high places and restored national worship to conform to Mosaic prescriptions. He gives qualified commendation to Asa (1Kg 15:11-14), Jehoshaphat (1Kg 22:43), Joash (2Kg 12:2-3), Azariah (2Kg 15:3-4), and Jotham (2Kg 15:34-35) for generally following Deuteronomic prescriptions, but explicitly complains about their failure to remove the high places.

WHAT SOURCES DID THE WRITER OF 1 AND 2 KINGS USE?

The books of 1 and 2 Kings are not completely original documents. The author may be described as a compiler of information about Israel’s kings who then evaluated each king according to certain religious and moral principles. The text itself mentions at least three sources. The first source is the Book of Solomon’s Events (1Kg 11:41), which contained contemporary events, biographical material, and extracts from the records in the temple archives. Scholars have assigned various parts of 1 Kings to this source: Solomon’s marriage with an Egyptian princess (1Kg 3:1), judgment of the dispute over a newborn infant (1Kg 3:16-28), lists of court officials (1Kg 4:1-6) and government administrators (1Kg 4:7-19,27), the treaty with Hiram of Tyre and preparations for building the temple (1Kg 5:1-18), construction of the temple (1Kg 6:1–7:51), the dedication of the temple (1Kg 8:1-66), additional relations between Hiram and Solomon (1Kg 9:11-14), the construction of terraces (1Kg 9:24), the wisdom of Solomon and the visit of the Queen of Sheba (1Kg 9:26–10:29), and possibly the story of two enemies of Solomon (1Kg 11:14-25).

The second source, the Historical Record of Israel’s Kings, records events from the time of Jeroboam I to Pekah (1Kg 14:19—2Kg 15:31) and is explicitly cited eighteen times as a source. It contained not only current events, but also official records of significant political happenings and other memorable events from each reign.

The Historical Record of Judah’s Kings is the third source used for much of the material in 1 Kings 14:29—2 Kings 24:5, covering events from Solomon’s son Rehoboam and the dividing of the kingdom into two parts until the reign of Jehoiakim. It is cited fifteen times as the author’s source. These are apparently extracts from court records of state archives in Jerusalem. Although this source is not explicitly mentioned, scholars have ascribed the reigns of Ahaziah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah to it; interestingly, their deaths and burials are not recorded, unlike the other kings of Judah. Some have also included Athaliah (2Kg 11:1), who usurped the throne and ruled for seven years, as well as the construction projects of Asa (1Kg 15:23), the wars of Jehoshaphat (1Kg 22:45), and the conduit of Hezekiah (2Kg 20:20).

There is the possibility that the author of Kings used other, unidentified sources. There are passages which are tightly composed and appear to stand on their own as literary units. While only speculation, these literary units might include court records of David (1Kg 1–2), three “cycles” of tradition for Elijah, Elisha, and Ahab: (1) the Elijah stories (1Kg 17–19; 21; 2Kg 1), which are very political and polemic; (2) the Elisha stories (2Kg 2–13), which focus more upon the needs of religious groups and individuals and the narratives of the wars against Mesha, King of Moab (2Kg 3:4-27).

The Elisha stories are integrated into the account of Jehoram, second son of Ahab, king of Israel. They are not in chronological order, and the name of the Israelite ruler is unmentioned (deliberately?), so it is not clear which of the Elisha stories actually occurred during the reign of Jehoram. Perhaps this reflects an attitude that the northern kingdom, Israel, had already been rejected by God because of their failure to respond in faith to the clear demonstration of the Lord’s reality and power by Elijah on Mount Carmel.

Some postulate an “Ahab source” (1Kg 20; 22:1-38), but in what way it is different from the Elijah source is difficult to say. The Ahab narratives exhibit a consistent antagonism to the Arameans (1Kg 20:42), but this is hardly grounds for distinguishing it from the Elijah source. The evidence simply does not allow it. Conclusions based upon this kind of “internal” evidence are subjective at best, and speculative at worst.

However, there is one further source that forces itself on our attention—the so-called “Isaiah source” (2Kg 18:1–20:20). So named because it is almost a word-for-word parallel to Isaiah 36–39; either the exilic author of 2 Kings quoted from this eighth century BC prophet, or both cited a common source. Since 2 Kings 20:20 refers the reader to the Historical Record of Judah’s Kings for further information about Hezekiah’s reign, it is possible, even likely, that this is the common source. However, 2 Chronicles 32:32 refers to the Visions of the Prophet Isaiah son of Amoz, and the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel as a source separate from the Historical Record of Judah’s Kings. While not completely certain, it is most likely the author of Kings copied his text from Isaiah directly.