The Davidic covenant in 1 and 2 Chronicles: A new theme for an old song

It is impossible to reach ullimaie finality or consensus concerning any Old Testament hook. This study represents an attempt to come to grips with the controversies surrounding 1 and 2 Chronicles. In an attempt to determine the reason(s) fo r the ongoing and the never-ending debate concerning the historical accuracy, the date, the authorship and the identity o f the socalled Chronicler, a study has been made o f the historically true picture o f the historic period or the date o f origin usually ascribed to this work, namely the fin a l days o f the Persian Empire. In the second place the manner in which a picture o f the Davidic history is presented by this book, has been studied in conjunction with but one o f the theologies discernible in I and 2 Chronicles, namely that o f creation and re-creation (in the sense o f form ation and re-formation'renewal) and election and re-election. The out­ come o f this study has resulted in the form ulation o f the hypothesis presented in this paper, namely that the origin o f the confusion surrounding I and 2 Chronicles should be sought in the fa c t that time has relegated to oblivion the method by which this work was created, namely that o f midrash or group exegesis which evolved during the so-called Kallah months or the months o f assembly, namely A dar and Elul. D uring these months all men assembled to discuss matters o f mutual importance pertaining to the past, the present, and especially to the re-institution o f their own norms and values in the ye t unknown future. (In this study the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (1984) fo rm ed the main literary source.)


I. Introduction 1.1 General
To a far greater extent than any other book in the Old Testament, 1 and 2 Chro nicles appear to present to the superficial reader as well as to the scholar, a mynad o f faces.The result of this frustrating confusion is even greater confiision, because this apparent mayhem has (and will continue to do so) provided scholars and students with the irresistable opportunity to ascribe a multitude of divergent and related aims to the author/authors of this work.In Chronicles historical facts manage to manifest in many different ways, therefore the continual attempts of eminent scholars earlier even as De Wette (1806Wette ( /1971) ) and Torrey (1896: 51-65), to account for this multi-faceted presentation of history, have so far been to no avail.In fact, in their desire for consensus, many scholars have only succeeded in experiencing variety as confusion.
Japhet avers in her book The Ideology o f the Book o f Chronicles and Its Place in Biblical Thought (1989b;2-8), that the emphasis o f the research on Chronicles has reverted from a historical true picture to a picture o f history, and in order to understand the spiritual worid of the Chronicler, the work should be examined on its own terms without any attempt to harmonize it with any predetermined ideo logical structure.With reference to this pronouncement of Japhet, the multi faceted manifestation of history and the ensuing confiision, the premise of this paper is that the picture o f history, the historical true picture and the ideologies and/or theologies presented by Chronicles, are confusing only because in the course of time they have become artificially integrated and interlocked when the method or system by which this work was originally developed, was relegated to the oblivion of forgotten history.

General
According to my operational approach, 1 and 2 Chronicles represent the results of exegetical conclusions of group exegetical debates which had their embryonic be ginnings during the so-called Kallah month discourses that originated in exile.While the postulate is that the compilation of this work should be understood as an on-going process, yet undoubtedly certain periods in time inspired a greater ef fort to plot the future in terms of the past: perhaps during the decline o f the Per sian Empire or even during the height of the Hasmonean empire.Other periods (for instance during the height o f Persian rule) demanded the need to adopt and to fuse certain aspects of colonial rule with traditional folk rule and in this respect 1 Chronicles 23-26 is an excellent example.
Therefore, should the many-sided and of^en conflicting historical picture of the declimng years o f the Persian Empire be taken as that pomt in history when it was considered essential to conclusively interpret the past in terms of fiiture secular leadership, then the historical true picture at that particular moment in time of the Persian colony Yehud, becomes of paramount importance According to Albright (1934:21) and Finkelstein (1974:72-76)  Despite attempts to depict the post-exilic Judaean community as an exclusive group of people who approached every aspect of their lives from a religious point of view, scholars like Finkelstein (1974:77-79) inter alia aver that the Jews o f the Restoration period, like every other generation at every other point in history, were entangled in and confronted by a web of contradictions and conflicting pat terns o f real life.It is difficult to ascertain whether these Jews were satisfied with the role o f the cultic officialdom which the Persian bureaucracy favoured, or whether they were aggressively preparing for a speedy resurrection of the old Davidic monarchy in the aftennath of the collapse of the Persian empire.However, witiiout any doubt 1 and 2 Chronicles' interpretive ideological picture o f history reflects the historical true picture as well as all the confiised thouglits, feelings and expectations of the people of Yehud at certain moments in their history, intricately interwoven with a concern for the future.According to this postulate 1 and 2 Chronicles represent the result of ideological fiituristic exegetical discus sions of various groups over an unknown period of time, but discussions which actually commenced during the Kallah month assemblies while still in exile.It is this intricate picture which have been causing mayhem among scholars for very many centuries.

The Kallah month system
According to Kravitz (1973:194) the so-called Kallah month discourse system initiated during the exile, entailing the assembly of all men (students and common people alike) during the months of Adar before Passover and Elul before Rosh Hashanah in order to discuss issues o f crucial importance to the community.There is no suggestion that it was a prerequisite that the same group of men should or would automatically meet on every occasion.Because o f the changing fellowship o f these meetings, every debate reflect the views, the feelings and the ideologies of that unique group of interested men who, at a particular moment in history, discussed a certain issue(s).At the same time their own varied expe riences of the past and their expectations o f the future would of necessity in fluence a group's interpretation of history at the moment o f their meeting.While this variety in interpretation and expectation, in ideology and theology, caused the development of the bias concerning reliability, it also became the principal force in the debate concerning the many inferred discrepancies and/or secondary in sertions.

The selection and the interpretation o f traditions and traditional themes in history
While it is accepted that 1 and 2 Chronicles like all other Bible manuscripts, suf fered different kinds and degrees of amendments at different points in time after the original, albeit unknown date of composition, it is evident from the version currently extant, that the power vested in the antecedence of traditions (Kegler, & Augustin, 1984;Nel, 1991;1992:342-357) was greatly valued in the compilation of this book, primarily because o f the firm, yet instinctive belief that traditions imply experiential truths (c f Knight, 1990:174-276).This interpretive and selec tive use of particular historical traditions resulted in the development o f a number of diverse recurring themes within an all-encompassing principal motif of a theocratic rule.Furthermore, it is clear that these exegetes regarded a theocratic form of government as the only feasible polity with the inherent strength and adaptability able to guarantee the re-institution as well as the continued survival of the Southern Kingdom.While passages like 1 Chronicles 23-26 inter alia suggest that at certain moments in time a change in circumstances caused other themes and sub-themes to be considered as being of equal or of greater impor tance, unquestionably the most crucial of these recurring themes concern the con tinuous re-affirmation o f the original covenant between God and the Davidites on the one hand and between the Davidites and the non-cultic and non-regal people on the other hand.At the same time the Davidic covenant as well as the mo narchal history was expected to re-affirm the manner in which this covenant was embedded within a theology o f creation and re-creation, election and re-election.The all-embracing major theme identifiable in 1 and 2 Chronicles is, therefore, God's creative activity (c f in particular 1 Chr.1:1-9:1, 2 Chr.36:22-23) bonded within a secular polity of theocratic rule.

A polity and a theology
According to 1 and 2 Chronicles a theocracy or a rule of God infers two core components, namely the God who rules and a people who is ruled (Nel, 1991).While God is the constant core component, unique, unchangeable, the chosen people, the second core component, consist of three integrated, yet separate, ele ments: secular leadership, cultic leadership and the non-regal non-cultic people (from now on referred to as the Benjaminites).
Because there can be no theocracy without God as ruler and without a people to be ruled, all the identifiable recurring themes and/or sub-themes revolve around and/or form an integral part o f an idealistic image o f a fiiture post-exilic society re-established within that particular land promised to the patriarchs and ruled by a scion of the original David at the behest of God (c f inter alia Williamson, 1977: 130-131, also Wifall, 1974:95-107)..  Skrijlig 28(3) 1994:429-444 Although Chronicles, P, Ezra and Nehemiah, all demonstrate a concern for the need to define the community (c f Williamson, 1977:132 inter alia).Chronicles contain certain presuppositions concerning the formation and the structuring o f a people and of a state all revolving around one main theme: God who is universal created all people.All twelve tribes, therefore, were from the beginning, still are and always will form an integral part of Israel.However, an inherent part of God's eternal and unceasing acts o f formation (creation) and renewal (re-crea tion) is his infinite ability to elect and to re-elect without ever renouncing or re linquishing any minute part of his own creation.Tlierefore, the men and the wo men of the Southern Kingdom are his chosen people (c f in particular 1 Chro nicles 1-9).Within this concept.Chosen People, the Kallah exegetes have incor porated their most cnicial perspectives of the creative and re-creative aspects of God's Being and o f his activities in general.Therefore, the theology elucidated in this work, presents an intennittent pattern o f creation, renewal and election (c f Nel, 1991:46-47): God creates universally > God elects Abraham and his descendants > God creates/fonns the Abraham tribe > God elects Jacob/Israel and his descendants > God creates/forms All Israel > God elects three tribes to fulfil three diverse, yet integrated functions > God elects one of his creatures, namely Cyrus, to re-establish the post-exilic core of returnees from the ranks of which God would eventually re-create/re-form his Chosen People.

The core component Chosen People
In Chronicles all recurring themes and sub-themes concerning the core com ponent, Chosen People, revolve around an idealistic image o f the construction of a model society.According to 1 and 2 Chronicles God rules his chosen People who can only function as a nation should there be an integrated interaction of the three different elements that constitute this core component: secular leadership, cult and cult ofTicials and the non-cultic, non-regal people governed and directed by secular and sacral leadership.C f Nel (1991:63-65) who explains this concept diagrammatically as follows: An important aspect of this work is that the word creation is never mentioned (cf. Bibha Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 1984), yet the creative and the re-creative aspects of the Being o f God form an imphcit component of 1 Chronicles 1:1-7:40, espe cially when God is portrayed as the Creator-God o f all humankind.1 Chronicles 1:1-9:1 read in conjunction with 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 constitute an allencompassing framework of continuous formation/creation and renewal/re creation, election and re-election.The result of this presentation is a selective interpretive version of particular aspects o f the monarchal history o f the Davidites and their era.
God is portrayed as the Creator-God who is constantly engaged in the neverending act of formation/creation, re-formation/re-creation, election and re-election, yet in Chronicles the triad election, formation/creation, re-creation/renewal are not understood as unique or isolated acts of God, but they form an integral part of the quintessence o f God.The concept all Israel or deli neates the distinctiveness and diversity of a nation, but at the same time the ge nealogies introduced by Adam emphasize the imiversality o f God as the Creator-God.The creative and the elective aspects of the Being of God are emphasized by the use of particular nomenclature like children o f God, all Israel, Israel.
According to Chronicles' version of the creation of humankind and nationhood in 1 Chronicles 1:1-9:1, the inherent universality of God's creative abilities is embodied within Adam.Therefore, 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 forms an apt ending when God employs one of his creatures, albeit not one of his Chosen People, to re-form/re-create the people and the land of Judah.This highly interpretive ren dition of the tradition according to which the nation o f the Southern Kingdom comprised in essence three o f the twelve major tribes of Israel (Judah, Levi, Benjamin c f 1 Chr.2:3-4:23;'6; 8) should not, however, be regarded as a mere repetition of facts.Neither is it a true picture of history.It is, in fact, the expo sition o f a unique theology implying that according to Go' d 's choice, every tribe should fulfil a particular pre-determined role, a defined function, within the con text of the newly created People or nation of the Southern Kingdom: The However, in 1 and 2 Chronicles the concept Chosen People embodies a dicho tomy: religious and political.Politically, preference is given to a monarchy, but within an all-encompassing theocratic rule the definitive interpretation of the meaning of the concept nation also comprises the formation of a sublime gather ing o f chosen people.In this interpretive view of the Davidic dynasty as a theo cracy, the two core components are so intricately interrelated and integrated, that the envisaged restoration of the Southern Kingdom manifests as the re-establishing or the re-creative power of God.Wifall's (1974:95-107) theory that in post-exilic times the Davidic lineage was still deemed essential in order to be accepted as a legitimate leader of the people.Wifall's tlieory not only serves as an explanation o f the role of the post-exilic Davidites in Judah, it also provides us with a possible explanation for the Chronicler's unique interpretive use of the role of the Davidic kings as a paradigm for secular leadership integrated with a theology of forniation/creation and renewal/re-creation, election and re-election (cf inter alia 1 Chr.1:34; 2:1-55),

God and monarch; monarch and God
According to certain scholars (Noordtzij, 1954:43-47;Roubos, 1983:11-12)   In Chronicles the hopes for the friture are based upon the experiences o f the past (Roubos, 1983:14); therefore'the history of the core component Elect People is wielded like an instrument to sanction the present and to secure the future.To fulfil this objective, historical facts are often ignored or re-interpreted when they do not conform to certain views or they are regarded as detrimental to any o f the elements of the core component Chosen People (inter alia the history of Judah and Tamar and o f David and Bathsheba; the role o f Benaiah in the founding of the Solomonic kingdom; Solomon's numerous foreign wives, etc).
Therefore, even though the interpretation of the Davidic monarchy portends to depend upon true historical data, the assembly of exegetes' unique employment of historiography characterizes them primarily as ideologists and only thereafter as historians, and then only as interpreters o f a particular history.Because of their pro-Davidic ideological interpretation of history by means o f a particular theology, the pre-exilic Davidic monarchs were stripped o f their humanity and turned into paradigms of good and bad rulers, but always within an all-embracing theological structure of continuous renewal and new beginnings.It is, therefore, The Davidic covenant in 1 and 2 Chronicles: A new theme fo r an old song________________ unnecessary to predetermine an ideological structure or an ideological struggle in 1 and 2 Chronicles.Ideology forms an inherent and an intrinsic part o f this book.

Evaluative criteria
The Kallah month exegetes formulated and applied various criteria to critically evaluate the various Davidic kings and their deeds, inter alia diverse rhetorical formulae concerning the royal lifestyle and the manner and place of royal burials (Nel, 1991:74-79).These rhetorical evaluative formulae should be seen as re presentative o f the perspectives, of the interpretive and evaluative abilities of that particular group o f men who assembled to judge and to weigh the quality of reign and the personal rapport o f every Davidic monarch with God.Their interpreta tion o f the interminable cycle of birth, coronation and death o f the various Da vidic kings emphasizes the exegetes' concept of the unceasing and eternally creative and re-creative acts of God.
Furthermore, the aim of these exegetes' unique evaluative interpretation o f the monarchal history of the Southern Kingdom, was of a dichotomous nature.In the first instance the community, depleted and drained of national pride and the belief in an independent future, had to be empowered with the assurance that a return to the same degree of greatness as enjoyed under the original David, need not re main a dream.What once has been, can and always will be re-newed, re-insti tuted, re-created.However, to achieve this ideal situation there is an important pre-condition: the Chosen People should at all costs and in all ways follow the precepts o f David, the first veritable theocratic ruler.Yet, at the same time it is imperative that the vicissitudes of David-Solomon's unfaithful successors are not forgotten.

The David-Solomon period
In their employment of the past to provide for the future, these exegetes divided the Davidic dynasty into two distinct poles or phases: The David-Solomon period.
The other Davidites.
David and Solomon are never judged, never evaluated.In their midrash or exe gesis o f the careers o f these two historical figures, the exegetes fused and inte grated the histories of the two monarchs into a monolithic unit with David as the designing and Solomon as the executive partner of this duo.As a result, although they became completely dehumanized, yet they are presented as the epitome of the ideal theocratic monarch or secular leader, the only veritable norm of excel lence considered acceptable.
In this unique exposition of the Davidic monarchy, David-Solomon's fused rule becomes the commencement p ar excellence of the immaculate theocratic rule.Yet, in the only reference to Solomon's single independent act, namely his decision concerning the situation o f a palace for the daughter o f the pharaoh (2 Chr.8:11), there is a disguised warning: even within the unblemished there is an inherent albeit latent possibility o f digression and deviation.
By means of evaluative formulae the remainder of the Davidic kings are divided into the following categories: Monarchs who ruled exclusively according to the injunctions o f God.
Monarchs who ruled according to the bidding o f God as well as foreign gods or idols.
Apostate monarchs who rejected God completely.
While continually referring to the standards set by David-Solomon, the history of their successors are interpreted and evaluated according to unambiguous themes, namely election, legitimacy and retribution as part of a theology of formation/ creation and renewal/re-creation.

Legitimacy, election, retribution
According to 1 Chronicles 1-9 election forms the crux of legitimacy.God created the monarchal rule and He elected the person of the king as well as the office of kingship and therefore office and office bearer are legitimate and authoritative.However, election and legitimacy do not warrant fidelity, but neither do they ex clude punishment.The realization and the admission of transgression and sincere repentance are without fail followed by exoneration.A king may die without repentance and without being exonerated, but his guilt is not transferred to his successor.Without fail the Davidic covenant is reconfirmed with the son's coro nation and a re-establishment, a re-creation of the original Davidic monarchy takes place.Therefore, every new king personifies a new beginning, a re-insti tution o f the original Davidic covenant.

The unremittingly faithful king
By means o f various evaluation formulae the Kallah month exegetes categorized the successors o f David-Solomon into three distinct groups: the unremittingly faithful, the partially faithfiil/unfaithful and the unremittingly unfaithful.
According to 1 and 2 Chronicles, the reigning king's rapport with God undoub tedly determined the type of Godly rule flmctional at a particular time.In all ca The Davidic covenant in / and 2 Chronicles: A new theme fo r an old song ses, however, the unremittingly faithful Davidic king is considered the immacu late norm o f judgment according to the formula: The king did what was right in the eyes of God and walked in the ways of David his father and he did not turn aside to the right or to the left (inter alia 2 Chr.34:2).
Although the religious biases of the king determine the influence of God within the society, the people remain dependent upon the rule of God.Within the immaculate relationship there is no leeway for any other god, idol or any other religious item (inter alia 2 Chr.34:3-7).God is the constant core component; He cannot be obliterated.Re-establishment, re-creation is without fail a certainty whether the theocracy manifests as a hierocracy, a pan-theocracy, an a-theocracy or a democracy.It could be concluded from a number of incidents which took place during the reigns of various kings, that an ongoing power struggle existed between the Da vidic monarchs and the hierocracy.In concurrence with all other forms of theocratic rule, in a pan-theocracy the religious biases o f the king determine the influence of God as well as that o f the other idols.The monarchy does not attempt to renounce the theocratic rule, yet neither does it function within or outside the parameters o f the theocracy.

The role o f the
The significance of a pan-theocracy operating within these parameters, is that the religious disposition of the Davidic monarchs without fail manifest a dichotomous character.The people are ruled by invoking the aid of the God o f David-So lomon as well as that o f any other god or idol regarded as justifiably acceptable or fashionable at that particular moment in time.In other words, at one point or another in their careers these kings all regarded the gods or objects they idolized as on a par with the God o f David-Solomon.Undoubtedly the most outstanding example in this respect is Chronicles portrayal o f M anasseh's reign (cf. 2 Chr.33: 12-20).
2 ) is yet another excellent example of the astute sense of historical data of the Kallah month exegetes.This passage contains an almost imperceptible referral to Solomon's solution regarding the most appro priate location for a palace for the daughter of the pharaoh.True historical data is used to introduce a moot issue affecting the past and the future.This passage un questionably reflects the first discordant note in the David-Solomon history by insinuating the embryonic commencement of a fiiture form of monarchal theo cracy, the pan-theocracy, with the fidelity of the monarch hovering between the only true God of the elect people and the false gods o f the infidels: faithful to no one god, yet forswearing no god.

The a-theocracy
Although the reigning monarch's rule displays a total disregard o f God, a certain degree of allegiance to other idols does exist: D iagram 4: The a-theocracy ________________________________________________________________________ H .W .Nel The apostate king 1 rules the 4p eople while GOD is ignored and eradicated by the apostate king as well as the elect people.
According to inter alia 2 Chronicles 21:6-7, 28:1-4, 33:22-24, 35:5b, 9b, 12-13, the Kallah month exegetes regarded certain kings as anti-Yahwistic or paganistic.It would appear as if, according to their interpretation and evaluation, all a-theocracies display two distinctive features: a nullification of the influence and the dictates of God, the total disregard of the core component elect people.
It is important that, although ruled by an apostate king, the people remain the cho sen people o f God dependent upon his rule.These apostate Davidites are to be held accountable for the destruction of the monarchy, the cult, the societal struc tures, should their repudiation of God deprive tlie core component.People, of their elect status as well as of their God.Without repentance and without penance there is punislunent.On the other hand, because God, the constant core compo nent of the theocracy, cannot be obhterated, re-election and re-creation are a cer tainty, even though it might even mean being exiled in a foreign country for an unknown period of time.

The democracy: the rule for the people by the people
According to their ideological exegesis of state rule, even within the purview of the theocracy, the monarchy is the preferred fomi of rule.However, 2 Chronicles 33:25 attests to the existence of a democracy within the parameters o f the theo cracy.The purpose of this democracy was not to replace the monarchy, but to re institute, to re-create the consummate monarchy a la David-Solomon.
According to 2 Chronicles 33:24 the bureaucracy of the apostate Amon executed a coup d'etat and the king died.Although the reason for the coup d'etat was the king's apostacy, the bureaucracy also sinned in its attempt to replace the pre ferred monarchal rule with an oligarchy.Because of the construction o f the core component Elect People, the other two elements were compelled to step in and take the necessary steps to save the monarchy as well as the composition of the core component Elect People.Therefore, the cult and the non-regal and non-cultic people rallied together and in turn seized the power from the oligarcliy and fornied a democracy.
The institution of this democracy did not anticipate any planned changc in the structure of rule.In compliance with the power vested in tlie inconstant theocra tic core component Elect People, the urgency of the prevailing circumstances compelled the non-regal and non-cultic element to step in and to take appropriate action in order to save the element Davidic kingship and to re-institute, to re create the theocracy.Therefore, the democracy remained functional only until the element Davidic kingship had recovered and an appropriate and a trustworthy candidate was ready to enter into the Davidic covenant in order to re-establish, to re-create and to restore the theocracy.According to 2 Chronicles 33:25 Josiah was the candidate-elect of the people.

Conclusion
The element Davidic kingship is an important example of what could be tenned futuristic ideological exegesis.The historical truth is that the Southern Kingdom originated as a monarchy.The interpretive exposition of this bona fide element of the past, is that God rules his Elect People, but the crucial point is the instrument God employs at any given time to effect his nile.Because God is the constant component of the theocracy, his nile is unchangeable.However, the composite, but diversified nature and the inherent inconstancy of the core component Elect People, influence the implementation of the nile of God.Their diversified nature and their inherent inconstancy allow the people to accept or to reject a particular form o f secular rule within the purview of the theocracy.In other words, accor ding to this hypothesis, the core component Elect People possesses the ability, but not the right to reject the rule of God.
Furthermore, although God chose the Davidites to rule his people (1 Chr.5:2), election does not imply instinctive fidelity.The inconstancy of the core compo nent Elect People not only affects the manifestation o f the theocracy, but it also affects the execution of the dogma of retribution which may even manifest as an exile.However, according to the interpretive portrayal o f Davidic kingship as found in 1 and 2 Chronicles, exile no longer equals retribution.Exile serves to communicate the constancy of God and his infinite creative and re-creative acti vities in the life o f the second core component of the theocracy, namely the Elect People. 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 attests to the fact that the exile failed to obliterate the Elect People.The end of the exile is therefore the beginning of a new era, but at the same time it represents the embryonic beginnings o f a newly re-established and re-instituted state with the possibility of a future re-institution of the con summate theocracy a la David-Solomon, because both core components of the theocracy came intact through the exilic experience: the constant God and the in constant people; the unchangeable, invincible God and the people, the weak link in the theocratic chain.
The debate concerning Chronicles as midrash has but just begun and at this point in time, publications concerning this topic are still virtually non-existent.How ever, 1 am o f the opinion that within the foreseeable future other scholars will also venture upon this terrain and that the results should prove to be highly rewarding.
inter alia the dis trict of Judah or Yehud formed part of the Persian satrapy west o f the Euphrates as a separate administrative unit with an autonomous internal administration.Yeliud consisted o f Jerusalem and the strip of surrounding land approximately forty six kilometers by thirty two kilometers and was governed by a Persian go vernor.Albeit a preference for the local priesthood instead o f the indigenous mi litary aristocracy fornied part and parcel o f Persian foreign policy, the nobles o f the Jews (the heads or leaders of families, clans, tribes) represented the Jews at the governor's court

The
Davidic covenant in I and 2 Chronicles: A new theme fo r an old song________________ In die tribe o f Judah represents Davidic kingship (1 Chr.5:2).The tribe of Levi represents the cult and cultic leadership (1 Chr. 6).The tribe o f Benjamin (1 Chr.8) represents the collective non-regal and non-pnestly element of the core component Chosen People.Three individual tribes, Judah, Levi and Benjamin, are therefore responsible for all the social requirements and for all the essential societal functions within any nation, namely: state leadership, religion and religious leadership, The Davidic covenanl m I and 2 Lhromcles: A new theme Jor an ola song________________ a people governed by the state as well as by the cult.These individual functions are complementary and ancillary and cover the com plete spectrum o f national life; therefore they do not overlap.By means of their independent yet completive tribal functions, the different tribes form a nation when the act of election unites them into an integrated full-fledged nation, namely the Chosen People o f the Southern Kingdom, the second core component o f the theocratic rule instituted by God during his initial act o f Creation.
, an elem ent o f the core com pon en t C hosen P eople, as a norm o f excellen ce and o f future con d uct 3.1 General While in the northern kingdom of Samaria different dynasties ruled at various points in time, the southern kingdom o f Judali knew only the Davidic dynasty, except for a very brief period of time when the usurper Athalia ruled (2 Chr.22:9b-23;21).As a result the monarchal office and the person of the monarch be came inextricably intertwined in the reasoning o f the assembled men of Judali (cf inter alia 1 Chr.2:3-4:23; 5:2).The importance of Davidic secular leadership is underlined by the fact that most of the genealogies in 1 Chronicles 1-9 refer to tlie tribe o f Judah to which the Davidic dynasty belonged.Should 1 Chronicles 2:3-4:23 reflect a true post-exilic tradition, it endorses 1 and 2 Chronicles meant to impress upon the people that Davidic kingship should ________________________________________________________________________ H .W .Nel In die Skhflig 28(3) 1994.■129-4-44 ^ form the cardinal norm by means o f which all past, present and future national leaders ought to be evaluated.This unique interpretation of the monarchal history o f the Southern Kingdom transformed Davidic kingship into a historical paradigm to measure, sanction and to legalize contemporary leaders and their endeavours to restore the community within the purview o f what the exegetes regarded as the only ideal, yet viable polity, namely the theocracy.Therefore, although the monarchal history o f 1 and 2 Chronicles is enacted against the background o f a historical framework, the picture o f history suggested by the interpretive narration of certain events and o f the biographies o f certain of the Davidic kings, often deviates from the Deuteronomic version.
cult ofFicial(s) but always in the presence o f the reigning Davidic monarch.During the reign of a number of Davidites, circumstances necessitated the mani festation of the theocracy as a hierocracy.The most appropriate examples in these respects are.Even when the theocracy manifests as a hierocracy, the priestly rule may only be executed within the purview o f the Davidic monarchy and while a Davidite is purportedly the ruler.The extent o f the hierocratic rule always depends upon the person of the monarch and the substance of his faith.According to 2 Clironicles 8:14b the concept of a hierocratic rule was introduced during the reign of David and from that moment it would remain a dynamic force.In fact, 1 Chronicles 11:1-3 (the coronation of David in Hebron) corroborates this postulate.2 Samuel 15-29 (the coup d'etat and the coronation of Absolom) affirms that the nucleus o f the hierocratic rule must have existed even before the actual founding o f the monarchy (c f Nel, 1989:257-271 concerning the possible reasons for the establishment of the so-called Levitical cities and their role during the reigns o f the various monarchs).
o f the Davidic monarch who rules with the aid of God and idols elect people The Davidic covenant in I and 2 Chronicles: A new theme fo r an old song Certainly the most noteworthy examples in this respect are the history o f the usurper Athaliah (2 Chr.23) and that o f Uzziah (2 Chr.26:16-20), because in both instances the hierocratic party triumphed.Chronicles 29-31 and 2 Chronicles 34-35 Hezzekiah as well as Josiah defied the cult bureaucracy in an attempt to again recoup all forces o f go vernment in the hands o f the reigning monarch.Although the exegetes maintain their silence, 2 Chronicles 32:24-33 hint at a possible defeat for Hezzekiah.On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 34:32-33 attest to Josiah's resurrection of a consummate theocratic monarchy a la David-Solomon.