The Building of the First Temple: A Study in Redactional, Text-Critical and Historical Perspective (Forschungen Zum Alten Testament)

"What can we say about 1 Kings 6-8 that attributes the construction of the temple in its full glory to Solomon? Peter Dubovsky approaches these texts from the diachronic point of view by investigating evidence gathered from the ancient Near East demonstrating that temples were often changed. He analyzes biblical texts indicating that the first temple underwent some important changes. This result leads to the final step of his investigation: he offers a minimalist version of a chronological development of the first temple and ventures to offer a more nuanced model. This conclusion, on the one hand, should be ultimately confronted with the results of archaeological excavation once they become available; on the other hand, this study can point to some nuances that only a text can preserve and no archaeologist can ever unearth." --jacket copy Cover Preface Table of Contents Abbreviations Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Previous Studies on the Temple 1.2 The Premise of This Study 1.3 Precursors of This Project 1.4 The Design of This Project Chapter 2: Restoration of Temples in the Ancient Near East 2.1 Inscriptions from the West 2.2 Mesopotamian Inscriptions 2.2.1 The Emashmash Temple in Nineveh 2.2.2 Esarhaddon’s Reconstruction of Cult Places The reconstruction of Esharra in Assur The reconstruction of Esagil in Babylon Other temples Theological justification 2.2.3 Neo-Assyrian Letters 2.3 Conclusions Chapter 3: Did the Preexilic Temple Change? 3.1 Methodological Premises 3.2 Temple Repairs Literary analysis of two narratives The extent of the repairs Conclusion 3.3 Natural Disasters Conclusion 3.4 Despoliation of the Temple Storehouse or storeroom? Was the treasury altered? Conclusion 3.5 Religious Reforms in Judah and the First Temple 3.5.1 Jehoiada and Joash The temple stratum of 2 Kgs 11 Conclusion 3.5.2 Ahaz’s Reform 3.5.2.1 Ahaz’s New Altar Was the new altar condemned or approved? What kind of altar did Ahaz commission? Why was this altar important? Conclusion 3.5.2.2 Other Changes in the Temple Removal of Bronze Objects Installation of a pavement 3.5.2.3 Crux Interpretum Scribal error or abbreviation? Removed, surrounded, reoriented, or transferred? The meaning of ‏השׁבת מיסך The royal entrance Possible interpretations of 2 Kgs 16:18 3.5.2.4 Synthesis: Ahaz and the Architecture of the Temple 3.5.3 Hezekiah – Manasseh, Amon – Josiah 3.5.3.1 Hezekiah’s Reform 3.5.3.2 The Reforms of Manasseh and Amon Changes in the temple furniture Two courts Conclusion 3.5.3.3 Josiah’s Reform Literary style of the account Houses, chambers, and gardens 3.5.3.4 Conclusion 3.6 Specific Architectural Changes 3.6.1 Temple and Palace Gates in the Book of Kings Temple and palace gates in the time of Jehoiada and Joash Jotham’s gate 3.6.2 The Temple Complex in Jeremiah Gates Chambers Courts Conclusion 3.6.3 The Temple Complex in Ezekiel Gates Courts Rooms Conclusion 3.7 Synthesis Motives for the changes Who was credited with alterations to the temple? What changes were made? Was the temple itself rebuilt? 3.7.1 Four Periods in the Architectural Evolution of the Temple Archaeological evidence and the history of the temple 3.7.2 Conclusion Chapter 4: Stratigraphy of the Text (1 Kgs 6–8) and Stratigraphy of the Temple 4.1 Methodological Notes 4.2 Architectural Terminology 4.2.1 Old and New Names for the Innermost Part of the Temple The inner house The Holy of Holies 4.2.2 Architectural and Theological Dimensions of hekal Nave or temple: Architectural note or theological statement? Why was the house identified with the hekal? Cultic meaning Theological meaning The hekal as the main hall of the temple 4.2.3 Conclusion 4.3 The yaṣiaʿ or Surrounding Structure 4.3.1 Unresolved Questions 4.3.2 Variants and Versions 4.3.3 Textual Strata Glosses in 1 Kgs 6:5 1 Kgs 6:7, 9 The oldest strata in 1 Kgs 6:5–10 1 Kgs 6:5b–6 and 8 4.3.4 Synthesis 4.4 The ulam 4.4.1 The ulam and the Temple in Ezekiel The ulam as a hall of the temple gates The ulam as a vestibule of the temple building 4.4.2 The ulam and the Temple in Chronicles 4.4.3 The ulam and the Palace in Kings 4.4.4 The ulam and the Temple in 1 Kgs 7 The ulam and the bronze columns 4.4.5 The ulam in 3 Kgdms 6:36 4.4.6 The ulam in 1 Kgs 6:3 The versions The compound preposition עַל־ פְּנֵי Redactional layers 4.4.7 Conclusion 4.5 Dimensions of the Temple 4.5.1 Height of the Temple 4.5.2 Layout of the Temple “Twenty cubits at the rear of the temple” (1 Kgs 6:16a) The transformation of the debir into the Holy of Holies (1 Kgs 6:16b) Where was the debir? 4.6 Cedar Temple or Stone Temple? A temple of undressed stone A temple paneled with cedar wood A temple of cedar wood Dressed stone Conclusion 4.7 Decoration of the Temple Engraved decorations Overlaying with gold Phases of the temple decoration 4.8 The Cherubs 4.8.1 Textual Witnesses 4.8.2 The Cherubs according to the Masoretic Text Ruptures in MT and textual strata Stratum A (1 Kgs 6:23–24) Stratum B (1 Kgs 6:25–27) Stratum C (1 Kgs 6:28) 4.8.3 The Cherubs according to Codex Vaticanus (B) 4.8.4 Location of the Cherubs 4.8.5 How Many Types of Cherubs? 4.9 Synthesis 4.9.1 Minimalist Proposal 4.9.2 Phases of the Temple: A Plausible Hypothesis Phase I: Cedar temple (corresponding to Period I) Phase II: Tripartite temple with side-rooms (corresponding to Periods II and III) Phase III: Urban temple (corresponding to Periods III and IV) Chapter 5: Conclusion Bibliography Index of References Old Testament Ancient Sources Index of Modern Authors Index of Subjects In this monograph Peter Dubovský explores the biblical and extra-biblical material in order to determine whether the pre-exilic temple underwent any reconstructions. The study of ancient Near Eastern material provides a background to how and why temples changed. The author's work is dedicated to the study of notes and comments spread over various parts of the Bible. He argues that there is enough evidence to prove that the pre-exilic temple of Jerusalem underwent important changes. What then can we say about 1 Kings 6-8 that attribute the construction of the temple in its full glory to Solomon? Thumbing through the commentaries on 1 Kings is sufficient to persuade even the most casual reader that the text is full of problems. The syntax is often incomprehensible, the grammar is unclear, and above all the different manuscripts disagree on the description of the first temple. Peter Dubovský's basic presupposition is that since the temple represented the most important building/institution in ancient Israel, it was only natural that the texts describing the temple underwent several redactions and were often glossed. He synthetizes the results and proposes a chronological development of the temple of Jerusalem as well as a minimalist version and also ventures to offer a more nuanced model. This conclusion, on the one hand, should be ultimately confronted with the results of archaeological excavation once they become available; on the other hand, this study can point to some nuances that only a text can preserve and no archaeologist can ever unearth. Was kann man über 1. Könige 6-8 sagen, die den Bau des Tempels in seiner vollen Pracht Salomo zuschreiben? Peter Dubovský nähert sich diesen Texten von einem diachronen Blickwinkel an, indem er Belege aus dem Alten Orient untersucht, die zeigen, dass die Tempel oft verändert wurden