Two notebooks for the historiographer of Samuel and for the historiographer of Chronicles

Koot van wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)

Visiting Professor

Department of Liberal Education

Kyungpook National University

Sangju Campus

South Korea

Conjoint lecturer of Avondale College

Australia

           The affinity between 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles is so striking that if one ignores it, important information will be lost. There are doublets of the same event in both books. A number of them exist.

           It appears that two different scribes operated with very similar detail in two different periods. The one scribe, the royal scribe, wrote in the palace of the kings David and Solomon, and especially after David’s death in 970 BCE while the other scribe wrote in 586 BCE and can be called the military scribe of Joab.

           What we are trying to do here is to do the work that Julius Wellhausen was supposed to do and never did.

           A closer look reveals that there are five slips operating in the scribal activities between the two books. Slips are unfortunate mishaps during the process of dictation, writing, copying, reading, listening, speaking and also memory. It is normal in modern times and normal in Ancient times. They existed in cuneiform doublets and they also existed here in the Hebrew literature of the Classical period.

           It is just an assumption but it is probably better to assume that the scribe of David and Solomon would take time and effort in writing, editing, copying and reading of the text. The texts and documents were easily available to him. He operates in a professional calm environment. Not so for the scribe in the Babylonian exile setting. The empires grabbed cuneiform “books” for their libraries and would have stolen the Hebrew scriptures was it not for those priests who hid them very carefully. A historiographer scribe of the year 586 BCE who wants to write a Book on the life of David and do not have access to Samuel, for whatever reason, will have to rely on what is available in the form of notebooks, dairies, reports, anecdotes, documents from the court of David or the royal scribe(s) and from the archive of the military like those of Joab and probably his reporter and scribe. When the king gives a command to Joab the royal scribe will report that the king told Joab and when Joab received the message, the military scribe of Joab will report that he received the command from David. He will also report what the commander did to fulfill the command from king David. His report will be viewed from the perspective of Joab and the royal scribe’s report will be from the perspective of the palace. This is what we have in reality in 2 Samuel 11:1 in comparison with 1 Chronicles 20:1. What is not in 1 Chronicles 20:1 but clearly in 2 Samuel 11:1 are the words “David sent Joab and his servants with him and all Israel” whereas in 1 Chronicles 20:1 there are words that are not in Samuel: “and Joab led out the power of the army.” Of course there is no conflict or reason for panic. Harmonization is the key. Both are correct. The one focus is from above and the other focus from below. Joab did what David asked and very forcefully, is what the administrative scribe of the military reported about Joab. There is an intention by the scribe of this verse in 1 Chronicles not to bring David into the picture. It will become clearer soon. It is the Babylonian exile and Israel reflects upon the glorious days of their glorious king David. But in this chapter, the Chronicler scribe of 586 BCE is not going to spill out the Davileaks that was sensational gossip (yet the truth) in the days of Solomon 970 BCE of what David did with Uriah the Hittite’s wife Bathseba. The 970 BCE royal scribe told the events with colorful detail not missing any underwear. But the 586 BCE Babylonian setting scribe is not caught up with sensationalism. It is realism of suffering and pain and how can they sing the Lord’s song in a strange land. They bitterly wept under the willows on the Euphrates. The tragic was due to their sins and forsaking the Torah of the Lord. That is what 2 Samuel 11:2-27 is all about: the Davileaks, the spiritual fall of David. The Chronicler of 586 BCE decided that there is no space for gluttoning over the sins of David in Babylon while they are suffering of their own sins. He left it completely out. He focused rather on Joab and his abilities.

           When a nation becomes embarrassed of its history, it tries to hide it by omitting what was previously populist sensationalism as court scandals. The Chronicler of 586 BCE is using “Adam-leafs” to hide their favorite king’s sins. Whereas Davileaks were popular in Solomon’s court, Davileaks were taboo in Babylon later.

           Is the scribe of the Chronicle wrong in hiding the Davileaks sins of David? No. Is the scribe of Samuel wrong in the inclusion of the Davileaks? No. In both cases the Holy Spirit led men to pen down the Word of God albeit from two different focus points.