Solomon (Biblical Studies)

Introduction

According to the Bible, Solomon was the third king of a united Israel, reigning in the latter half of the 10th century BCE. The earliest traditions about his reign, concentrated in 1 Kings and in modified form in 1–2 Chronicles, portray him as a builder and organizer of a state who consolidated the gains of his father David. These texts depict him as a builder, administrator, patron of wisdom, and diplomat. According to the literary traditions about Solomon, these instruments of rule, common to ancient Near Eastern monarchs, allowed him to consolidate the power he inherited, although he was unable to pass it to his son. The inherent contradictions of his rule, at least in the literary account in 1 Kings 1–11, led to the ultimate failure of his program of remaking Israel. As a literary character, Solomon endures, in part because 1 Kings weaves together stories about him that render him a complex figure, capable of profound humility and wisdom, but ultimately susceptible to the blandishments of power and sexual gratification. His reign, according to 1 Kings, was in the final analysis a failure, and indeed the precursor of the failures of many of his successors. Later accounts of his reign are often more generous, with the Chronicler (who wrote during the 5th or 4th century BCE) recasting Solomon’s reign as primarily a religious revolution marked by the building of the glorious Temple in Jerusalem. During the same period, the editors of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs connected their works to Solomon as the royal patron of wisdom. Later traditions, including those in the Qur’an, transformed Solomon from the tyrant in 1 Kings to a sage or even a wizard of great power. The literary Solomon has thus become a vessel into which successive generations can pour its fascination—and frustration—with power.

General Overviews

The biblical stories of Solomon serve as raw materials for several uses, including the reconstruction of Israel’s early history (especially the origins of the monarchy), the later history of ideas about kingship and social life, the evolution of Israelite religion, the literary techniques of narration and historiography, and even the ideological exploration of human nature and behavior. Scholars of the text may focus on one or more of these concerns, using for each different sets of questions, different methods, and thus reaching different results; in other words, what one sees depends, in part, on what one is looking to find. It is helpful, then, to begin with broad overviews of the problems at hand. Thus Brueggemann 2005 offers a character sketch (not quite a biography) of Solomon as portrayed in biblical texts, understanding the story primarily as an ironic depiction of power gone wrong and thus as a parable of sorts. Lasine 2001 takes a similar approach, with a very high degree of suspicion toward political leaders in general and an emphasis on the ruler as head of a police state. A more subtle view of royal power appears in Hamilton 2009, Lux 2005, Stager 2003, and some of the articles in Handy 1997. From a more rigorously historical point of view, Dietrich 2007 argues that the stories of 10th-century BCE monarchs contain a significant historical kernel and are not late fictions. This view, of course, is controversial, and it is difficult to be as confident as many of the authors of a previous generation were (see the essays in Ishida 1982), but Dietrich has made a strong case that must be taken seriously. In many publications, including Finkelstein and Silberman 2006, Finkelstein has argued against such a view, reassessing the archaeological evidence (dating much of the material ascribed to the 10th-century rulers David and Solomon to their 9th-century Omride successors) and calling into question the biblical stories.

Brueggemann, Walter. Solomon: Israel’s Ironic Icon of Human Achievement. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Traces the stories about Solomon from their pre-Deuteronomistic sources to Second Temple Jewish texts (including the New Testament). Brueggemann argues that the Solomon stories, whatever their historicity, fed Israel’s imagination about what a powerful leader should be. However, according to Brueggemann, the many ironies in Solomon’s story make him a problematic leader.
Find this resource:
Dietrich, Walter. The Early Monarchy in Israel: The Tenth Century B.C.E. Translated by Joachim Vette. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Tracing the development of the Bible’s stories about kings from the earliest sources (now embedded in 1–2 Samuel) to the biblical books themselves, Dietrich argues that some of the stories are dated close to the time of the events they describe. His approach identifies a series of ideologies within the text, providing evidence for the development of Israelite ideas rather than grounds for dismissing the stories as fiction.
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel, and Neil Asher Silberman. David and Solomon: In Search of the Bible’s Sacred Kings and the Roots of the Western Tradition. New York and London: Free Press, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Distinguishes historical from legendary material in the stories of David and Solomon. The “cosmopolitan” Solomon stories portray foreigners favorably while depicting the king’s reign as one of peace, artistic splendor, and prosperity. The authors debunk many erroneous assumptions about the archaeology of the 10th century BCE, arguing for a minimalist approach to the evidence while acknowledging the historicity of Solomon himself.
Find this resource:
Hamilton, Mark W. “Solomon.” In The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Vol. 5. Edited by Katherine Doob Sakenfeld, et al., 317–326. Nashville: Abingdon, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A survey of the key literary, historical, and religious issues surrounding the reign of Solomon, including a useful comparison of the three extant biblical depictions of his reign (1 Kings, 3 Reigns [the Greek translation and revision of 1 Kings], and 1–2 Chronicles). The main archaeological issues also receive attention.
Find this resource:
Handy, Lowell K., ed. The Age of Solomon: Scholarship at the Turn of the Millennium. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A major collection of articles by many authors on the historical and literary issues surrounding Solomon’s reign. This work offers a snapshot of the state of the discussion in the late 1990s and should be the beginning point for a consideration of the problems still facing scholarship today.
Find this resource:
Ishida, Tomoo, ed. Studies in the Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays: Papers Read at the International Symposium for Biblical Studies, Tokyo, 5–7 December, 1979. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Fifteen of the seventeen essays (by as many authors) in this volume study aspects of Israel’s life during the 10th century BCE. Most take the position that the reigns of David and Solomon marked a renaissance period of extensive literary activity. Scholarly confidence in this overall view has eroded, but the essays offer useful analysis of the trade, literature, religion, and politics in the period.
Find this resource:
Lasine, Stuart. Knowing Kings: Knowledge, Power, and Narcissism in the Hebrew Bible. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A literary-critical study of the Saul, David, Solomon, and Job stories, emphasizing royal narcissism and unaccountability. Lasine discusses ancient Near Eastern royal stories but primarily focuses on a deconstructivist reading strategy of the Israelite stories. The work raises many interesting questions; however, its understanding of royal gathering and use of knowledge seems anachronistic, and its focus on royal irresponsibility is one-sided.
Find this resource:
Lux, Rüdiger, ed. Ideales Königtum: Studien zu David und Salomo. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This collection of essays on David and Solomon draws important connections between their reigns, as well as illustrating major differences in the presentations of their biographies by the Literary Presentations: Deuteronomistic History.
Find this resource:
Stager, Lawrence E. “The Patrimonial Kingdom of Solomon.” In Symbiosis, Symbolism, and the Power of the Past: Canaan, Ancient Israel, and Their Neighbors from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palaestina. Edited by William G. Dever and Seymour Gitin, 63–74. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that archaeological and textual evidence points to a patrimonial kingdom centered in Jerusalem during the 10th century BCE, indicating a reality behind the Bible’s portrayal of Solomon’s rule. The kingdom was considered an extension of the royal family’s estate.
Find this resource:
Biblical Commentaries

Understanding the Solomon narratives demands a wider comprehension of their literary setting within biblical books. Careful study of the biblical texts as coherent units with agendas and aspirations into which their depiction of Solomon must fit provides the foundation for any work on the biblical figure himself. Contemporary scholarship differs on the nature of the biblical material, with works such as Cogan 2000, Japhet 1993, and to some degree, Sweeney 2007 and Mulder 1998 treating the material as historiographically valuable (with some allowances for embellishments of various kinds), whereas the focus on purely literary questions may sometimes lead to a more cautious, or even skeptical, approach to the historical reality behind the biblical stories, as seen in Long 1984 and DeVries 1988.

Cogan, Mordechai. I Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 10. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Has a high view of the historicity of some stories about Solomon, while dating others to the later Israelite/Judahite monarchy. Cogan’s attempts to anchor 1 Kings 1–11 in archaeological contexts provide a starting point for such an inquiry.
Find this resource:
DeVries, Simon J. 1 and 2 Chronicles. Forms of the Old Testament Literature 11. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Chronicler’s careful reworking of his sources into a coherent literary presentation different from theirs is the subject of this commentary, which shows how the smaller units work together as a whole.
Find this resource:
Japhet, Sara. I & II Chronicles. Old Testament Library. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Against an earlier trend to dismiss the Chronicler’s views of Solomon as purely legendary, Japhet shows that the Chronicler has carefully edited 1 Kings to offer a different, corrective picture of Solomon’s reign and that even those later apologetic corrections of its source may rely on earlier traditions. Japhet rehabilitated Chronicles as a meritorious literary work in its own right.
Find this resource:
Long, Burke O. 1 Kings: With an Introduction to Historical Literature. The Forms of Old Testament Literature 9. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A form-critical analysis of 1 Kings, and thus the Solomon stories, with an emphasis on their literary structure and shaping. Long is less interested in historical questions than in understanding how the book works as a narrative with many parts.
Find this resource:
Mulder, Martin J. 1 Kings. Vol. 1, 1 Kings 1–11. Translated by John Vriend. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 1998.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Mulder thinks of 1 Kings 1–2 as an “overture” to the reign of Solomon—not a succession narrative, but a story of the consolidation of power leading to the focus on royal wisdom in chapters 3 through 11. He is skeptical of finding layers of material in these chapters.
Find this resource:
Sweeney, Marvin. I & II Kings: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Sweeney argues that the Solomon stories in 1 Kings are part of a larger complex beginning with 1 Samuel 1, all of which defends the Davidic dynasty and addresses questions alive in the reign of Solomon himself. Thus, most of the narrative dates to that period.
Find this resource:
Historical Issues

First Kings 9–11, the oldest version of the Solomon story, describes his reign as one of major domestic and foreign achievements, including the building of a temple in Jerusalem, the domination of Syria and Transjordan, the building of public works in key cities (Megiddo and Gezer), and the rationalization of taxation and redistribution in ways that favored Judah and co-opted the older system of twelve tribes with discrete territories. How much of this presentation is accurate? Scholarship during the first seventy-five years of the 20th century generally accepted the overall picture of Solomon’s reign presented in 1 Kings, even if it allowed for an exaggeration or outright legend (as with the Queen of Sheba story). Excavations at Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazor seemed to confirm the biblical picture, with the Israelite monumental structures at those sites being assigned to the 10th century BCE, based on the Bible’s evidence. Popular-level maps often depicted a Davido-Solomonic empire stretching to the Euphrates, and scholars spoke of a Solomonic renaissance, a period of literary activity that produced the Yahwist source of the Pentateuch, some of the proverbs of the book of Proverbs, and the great narratives of David and Solomon themselves. Since then, however, this optimistic picture has been challenged from many directions. The archaeological data, first of all, has come to seem less certain, with the dating of both the major sites and the pottery allegedly characterizing their era seeming less certain, and many archaeologists (notably Israel Finkelstein and his students) arguing that most of these occurred half a century or so later. Second, the biblical evidence itself seems to some scholars to be more hyperbolical than prior generations believed, and the so-called Solomonic renaissance has disappeared as a scholarly construct, with the dates of its literary products again being in dispute. Still, against the “minimalist” view of the evidence, many scholars have found a significant historical kernel in the biblical evidence. For example, some of the literary shaping of the material that appears to some to be evidence of fictionalization actually reflects the practices of the early- to mid-1st millennium BCE and thus does not speak to dating or historical (un)reliability. Moreover, the archaeological evidence is still in dispute, with the dating of key sites (especially the monumental structures in the cities attributed to Solomon’s building endeavors) less than clear. Students must therefore use the scholarship available with great care. Archaeological reports and assessments predating the 1990s are primarily interesting for evidence of the history of scholarship.

Israelite Kingship in Its Ancient Context

The stories of Solomon arose in a world in which kingship was a longstanding social practice, dating back several millennia. (See the Oxford Bibliographies article Kingship). Thus the intellectual ideas of the ancient world, in which kings drew their legitimacy from the divine realm and, in turn, symbolized the gods even in their own body (Hamilton 2005), underlay Israel’s understandings of kingship, even when the mode of response to the monarchy was critique or condemnation. Wyatt 2010 places Israelite kingship within a larger political context, as well. Similarly, administrative practices of the region shaped those of Israel, as shown in Mettinger 1971 and Fox 2000, and even religious practices. Proper understanding of the Solomon stories presupposes understanding of these broader historical realities. Helpfully, Ahlström 1982 offers a serious historical grounding for any consideration of the ancient texts because one must not merely read the texts in light of modern or postmodern prejudices against social structures but must also consider the options available to the actors and those recording their actions.

Ahlström, Gösta W. Royal Administration and National Religion in Ancient Palestine. Studies in the History of the Ancient Near East 1. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Viewing the nation as God’s territory, ancient kings functioned as the deity’s overseer. The building of cities, acropolises, temples, and palaces, as well as the administrative structures necessary to support them, bolstered the power of the king. The reigns of David and, especially, Solomon fit the common mold.
Find this resource:
Fox, Nili Sacher. In the Service of the King: Officialdom in Ancient Israel and Judah. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Reconstructs Israelite governmental administrative practices and functions based on titles that officials used in the Bible, drawing on epigraphic and comparative ancient Near Eastern evidence. Brings Mettinger 1971 up to date.
Find this resource:
Hamilton, Mark W. The Body Royal: The Social Poetics of Kingship in Ancient Israel. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Focuses on the body of the Israelite king as a network of signs embedded in a symbolic/ideological system.
Find this resource:
Mettinger, Tryggve N. D. Solomonic State Officials: A Study of the Civil Government Officials of the Israelite Monarchy. Lund, Sweden: Gleerup, 1971.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A classic study of the Israelite vocabulary of officialdom. Mettinger draws on ancient Near Eastern usage to describe the roles of the royal secretary, royal herald, “friend of the king,” majordomo, chief of the district prefects, and superintendent of the forced levy.
Find this resource:
Wyatt, Nicolas. “Royal Religion in Ancient Judah.” In Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Edited by Francesca Stavrakopoulou and John Barton, 61–81. London and New York: Clark, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Wyatt uses biblical and Ugaritic texts cautiously to reconstruct the ritual duties of the king, the ways in which the king was the object of ritual, the divinity of the king, the function of dead kings, and the royal dimensions of the asherah tree in the cult.
Find this resource:
Historical Syntheses

Histories of Israel constituted a recognizable literary genre beginning in the mid-19th century. Both Jews and Christians sought to ground their faiths in historical realia, often leading to the production of massive multivolume works that attempted to set the biblical material in a critical context. Kittel 1917 and Graetz 1922, as well as Robinson 1932, integrated archaeological evidence into the earlier presentations, which were essentially critical paraphrases of the biblical texts. In the 20th century, the balance between textual and nontextual evidence in histories of Israel shifted several times, with archaeological reconstructions increasingly taking the lead, and Assyriological and Egyptological evidence playing important roles as those disciplines matured. Thus Dever 2001, like Bright 2000, argues for the basic historicity of the Bible on the basis of archaeological evidence, whereas Lemche 1998 and Thompson 1999 disagree from the same bases. Intermediate positions appear in Noth 1959 and Miller and Hayes 2006. Ahlström 1993 uses archaeology extensively to correct and deepen the biblical evidence, placing Israel’s story in the context of the much longer history of Palestine. These syntheses are valuable because they place the reign of Solomon in larger historical contexts, illustrating the options available to both the rulers and those telling their stories.

Ahlström, Gösta. The History of Ancient Palestine from the Palaeolithic Period to Alexander’s Conquest. Edited by Diana Edelman. Sheffield, UK: JSOT, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Synthesizing archaeological and biblical evidence, the authors argue that, although the biblical accounts of Solomon exaggerate his achievements, those texts do reflect a historical reality. The broad scope of their work, moreover, allows one to discern the centuries-long historical patterns of which Solomon’s reign was a part.
Find this resource:
Bright, John. A History of Israel. 4th ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In earlier editions, a standard work synthesizing archaeological evidence with the biblical portrayal (in 1–2 Kings) of Israel’s history. Bright argued for a Solomonic renaissance, a view now largely discarded.
Find this resource:
Dever, William G. What Did the Biblical Writers Know & When Did They Know It? What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An immensely learned but highly polemical critique of the “minimalist” arguments against a state during the reigns of David and Solomon. Dever argues that the archaeological evidence points to monumental structures preceding the raid of Sheshonq and thus to a historical kernel to the stories of the 10th-century BCE kings.
Find this resource:
Graetz, Heinrich. Volkstümliche Geschichte der Juden. Berlin: Harz, 1922.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This three-volume work traces Jewish history from 1000 BCE to the 1800s. The chapter on Solomon paraphrases 1 Kings, emphasizing Solomon’s wisdom and peacefulness. Curiously, Graetz dates his reign about seventy-five years earlier than it could have occurred. His uncritical approach to the literary depictions of Solomon fit the pattern of 19th-century histories (an earlier edition of his book appeared in 1888). See pp. 70–84.
Find this resource:
Kittel, Rudolf. Geschichte des Volkes Israel. Vol. 2, Das Volk in Kanaan: Quellenkunde und Geschichte der Zeit bis zum Babylonischen Exil. 3d ed. Gotha, Germany: Perthes, 1917.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A classic history of Israel that was among the first to incorporate Assyriological and archaeological evidence into an analysis of the Bible. Kittel describes Solomon as an “oriental despot.”
Find this resource:
Lemche, Niels Peter. Prelude to Israel’s Past: Background and Beginnings of Israelite History and Identity. Translated by E. F. Maniscalco. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
With Thompson 1999, a key exemplar of the minimalist view of Israel’s history. Lemche situates the stories of Israel’s early history in the mid–Second Temple period, thereby calling their historical value into question. For him, the stories of Solomon are essentially fictions designed to give Israel a significant past.
Find this resource:
Miller, J. Maxwell, and John H. Hayes. A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. 2d ed. London: SCM, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Integrating textual analysis with archaeological data, the authors view the stories of Solomon’s troubled succession, relationships to foreign powers, commercial and administrative practices, and religious sponsorships as basically historical. Theirs is the most thorough recent statement of the maximalist view of the historicity of the Bible’s United Monarchy period.
Find this resource:
Noth, Martin. The History of Israel. 2d ed. Translated by Peter R. Ackroyd. New York: Harper & Row, 1959.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Drawing on the state of the archaeological art at the time, which attributed the major public works in Megiddo and Hazor to Solomon, Noth depicts Solomon as “the decadent successor” whose rule seems “outwardly brilliant” but ultimately futile (p. 216). The focus is on building projects and other empirically verifiable (at least in theory) activities rather than tales of intrigue or piety.
Find this resource:
Robinson, Theodore H. A History of Israel. Vol. 1, From the Exodus to the Fall of Jerusalem, 586 B.C. Oxford: Clarendon, 1932.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Robinson offers a paraphrase of 1 Kings integrated with then-current archaeological knowledge, portraying Solomon as an avid builder whose autocratic and spendthrift ways undid the successes of his father David. Robinson argues that Solomon’s districts indicate a preferential treatment for Judah, another source of the eventual dissolution of the kingdom owing to northern discontent. See chapter 11 (pp. 239–265).
Find this resource:
Thompson, Thomas L. The Mythic Past: Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel. New York: Basic Books, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The clearest statement of the minimalist view of ancient Israelite history, this work argues that most of the biblical material dates to the Hellenistic period and therefore contains little historically reliable material. Although the book has come to seem idiosyncratic, it does set forth the issues that a historian of the reign of Solomon (or ancient Israel in general) must consider.
Find this resource:
Archaeological Evidence

The archaeological evidence for the reign of Solomon is highly controversial. Earlier archaeologists attributed major public structures in Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (see 1 Kings 9:15–20) to him, arguing for a view of his reign that basically corresponded to that in the Bible. More recently, reexcavations of those and other sites, combined with the lack of monumental inscriptions from the 10th century and rising skepticism about the historicity of 1 Kings (e.g., how reliable are its florid summaries of Solomon’s achievements?) have led to a vigorous debate about the archaeological evidence. Finkelstein, et al. 2008 is but one of many articles by the authors arguing for a lower dating for many of the artifacts and strata previously dated to the 10th century BCE. Faust 2010, Mazar 2007, and Ben-Tor 2000 are representative of those authors arguing for precisely the opposite case, with each claiming that the work of Finkelstein and his supporters does not rest on careful reasoning or use of evidence. The issues at stake are fundamental, because the disappearance of monumental architecture for Solomon would lead to a more modest appraisal of his reign than that in 1 Kings, even if no one disputes the existence of the man himself. A good model of how the discussion should occur appears in Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000, part of a multivolume report on the new digs at Megiddo. The authors are cautious in their use of evidence and recognize the uncertainty that still prevails. Meanwhile, Mazar 2009 argues for a substantial governmental presence in Jerusalem itself, perhaps giving added credence to a maximalist view of Solomon’s reign. Mazar’s work signals an obvious problem facing contemporary scholars: Jerusalem, Solomon’s capital and in some ways, according to the Bible, his greatest legacy, is not open to excavation at precisely the point of his major constructions, the Temple Mount. Remains of Solomon’s palace and temple, if they exist at all, must rest beneath the platform built by Herod, now the Haram ash-Sharif, one of Islam’s holiest sites. Finally, archaeology always works by drawing on sociology, art history, epigraphy, and other disciplines. Barako 2009, Joffe 2002, and Schmitt 2004 offer ways of integrating archaeological data in sociological theory. Although the uncertainty surrounding the dating of strata makes such global theorizing very challenging, the attempt must be made in order to render essentially silent artifacts voluble.

Barako, Tristan J. “Solomon’s Patrimonial Kingdom: A View from the Land of Gilead.” In Exploring the Longue Durée: Essays in Honor of Lawrence E. Stager. Edited by J. David Schloen, 5–15. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
According to the Bible, the Transjordanian region of Gilead became Israelite as part of the tribe of Manasseh and was then transformed into a district in Solomon’s patrimonial kingdom. Barako argues that remains from er-Ramtha and other sites that could be ancient Ramoth-gilead in the Plain of Irbid fit such a model. If so, this evidence would corroborate the historicity of Solomon’s political organization.
Find this resource:
Ben-Tor, Amnon. “Hazor and the Chronology of Northern Israel: A Reply to Israel Finkelstein.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 317 (February 2000): 9–15.
DOI: 10.2307/1357481Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the key site for the 10th century BCE in Israel should not be the heavily damaged Jezreel, but the well-preserved Hazor, which points to a centralized Israelite state. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Faust, Avraham. “The Large Stone Structure in the City of David.” Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 126.2 (2010): 116–130.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Archaeologists have recently debated the date and use of the large stone stepped structure in Jerusalem. Against arguments that the structure is from the late Iron II period, Faust follows Eilat Mazar (Mazar 2009) in arguing that the structure was built during the Iron I period. It must have been in use during the reign of Solomon and thus indicates a significant urban settlement in Jerusalem during his era.
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel, Alexander Fantalkin, and Eliezer Piasetzky. “Three Snapshots of the Iron IIA: The Northern Valleys, the Southern Steppe and Jerusalem.” In Israel in Transition: From Late Bronze II to Iron IIa (c. 1250–850 B.C.E.). Vol. 1, The Archaeology. Edited by Lester L. Grabbe, 32–44. New York and London: Clark, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Arguing that full-fledged kingdoms emerged in Judah only around 800 BCE and disputing Eilat Mazar’s claim to have found the palace of David and Solomon (see Mazar 2009), the authors argue that the transition from Iron I to Iron II came at the end of the 10th century BCE, partly in response to trade with arid regions and the need to administer that trade.
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel, and David Ussishkin. “Archaeological and Historical Conclusions.” In Megiddo III: The 1992–1996 Seasons. 2 vols. Edited by Israel Finkelstein, David Ussishkin, and Baruch Halpern, 576–600. Tel Aviv: Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Megiddo is a major site for understanding the origins of the Israelite state. The authors debate the date of Stratum VA–IVB, which may be either from the Solomonic empire (10th century BCE) or from the later Omride dynasty (9th century BCE). They agree, however, that the large gatehouse of Stratum IVA is not Solomonic and therefore that earlier reconstructions of his reign as a time of large-scale building must be reconsidered.
Find this resource:
Joffe, Alexander H. “The Rise of Secondary States in the Iron Age Levant.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 45.4 (2002): 425–467.
DOI: 10.1163/156852002320939311Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the new states that arose in Syria-Palestine after 1200 BCE did not create new governmental techniques but rather new ethnic and symbolic identities. The formation of peer states began in Phoenicia and cascaded out as elites imitated each other. All indications in the material record are that the states of David and Solomon did not develop full-fledged ideologies or their material expression. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Mazar, Amihai. “The Spade and the Text: The Interaction between Archaeology and Israelite History Relating to the Tenth-Ninth Centuries BCE.” In Understanding the History of Ancient Israel. Edited by H. G. M. Williamson, 143–171. Proceedings of the British Academy 143. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
DOI: 10.5871/bacad/9780197264010.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In a defense of the traditional chronology, according to which urbanization in Israel dates to the 10th century BCE (not the 9th century BCE), Mazar examines the archaeological evidence at Hazor and Megiddo (the major sites) and surveys known evidence for Israel’s neighbors Phoenicia, Aram, and the Transjordanian states. He concludes that David’s polity was short-lived, but real.
Find this resource:
Mazar, Eilat. The Palace of King David: Excavations at the Summit of the City of David; Preliminary Report of Seasons 2005–2007. Translated by Ben Gordon. Jerusalem: Shoham, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 10th-century BCE stratum of Jerusalem contained a large public building (the Large Stone Structure), which Mazar identifies as the palace of David and Solomon. If correct, the identification would add credence to the biblical presentation of those monarchs. Part of the confusion of dating derives from the structure’s relationship to the Stepped Stone Structure abutting (and partly underlying) it.
Find this resource:
Schmitt, Rüdiger. “Die frühe Königszeit in Israel: Anmerkungen zur aktuellen Diskussion um die niedrige Chronologie in Palästina/Israel.” Ugarit-Forschungen 36 (2004): 411–430.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Reviews Finkelstein’s many articles arguing for a Low Chronology that would date the rise of the Israelite state to the 9th century BCE and thus find the Solomon stories mostly unhistorical. Schmitt argues that the ceramic record does not unequivocally support a lowering of dates and that such artifacts as the fragmentary Jerusalem cult stand, seals, and other finds provide evidence of a state ideology in Israel by the 10th century BCE, probably under Egyptian influence.
Find this resource:
Textual Evidence

Historical reconstruction of Solomon’s reign must also consider the literary evidence preserved in the Bible. Most studies have focused on material that seems untainted by ideological concerns, such as lists of officials, boundaries of districts, or officials. Thus Alt 1964 and Ash 1995 consider 1 Kings 4, the former affirming and the latter questioning the historical value of the text. Na’aman 2001 offers a more cautious view, believing the text to be a slightly garbled version of an original archival document. Other specific issues include Solomon’s building projects (see Archaeological Evidence), notably his “House of the Cedars of Lebanon.” Against scholars who argue that the building is a late fiction based on Persian models, Weippert 2003 shows a more plausible context for the report in 1 Kings on Neo-Assyrian architectural practices. On a broader scale, several scholars have sought to assess the historicity of the texts about Solomon. Blakely 2002 thinks through the reality that the extant texts may not portray a single, coherent vision of the monarch, whereas Hendel 2005 notes, sensibly, that the texts we have are not history, but history’s aftereffects. We may use these texts as raw material for our reconstructions, but they have an integrity of their own, illustrating Israel’s interest in one of its early kings. Knoppers 1997 also considers how modern reconstructions have increasingly dispensed with the historical Solomon, preferring the textual king instead.

Alt, Albrecht. “Israels Gaue unter Salomo.” In Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel. Vol. 2. By Albrecht Alt, 76–89. Munich: Beck, 1964.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In this classic article, Alt argues that 1 Kings 4:7–19 contains a list of places accurately delineating the boundaries of Solomon’s administrative district (cf. Ash 1995). The list is one of the best pieces of evidence for 10th-century BCE realities, demonstrating how a state interfered with traditional tribal structures in order to create new realities.
Find this resource:
Ash, Paul S. “Solomon’s? District? List.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 67 (1995): 67–86.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that 1 Kings 4:7–19, the list of districts in Solomon’s kingdom, is old because it lacks coherence, uses non-Yahwistic place names, and garbles names beginning with ben- (“son of”). However, it does not offer direct evidence for Solomon’s bureaucratic innovations, contrary to earlier views. The internal politics of that reign thus remain unknown.
Find this resource:
Blakely, Jeffrey. “Reconciling Two Maps: Archaeological Evidence for the Kingdoms of David and Solomon.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 327 (August 2002): 49–54.
DOI: 10.2307/1357857Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The tripartite pillared structures in Israel during the 11th and 10th centuries BCE were near the borders of the Israelite kingdom and thus provided commercial and political centers at Tell Abu Hawan, Tel Qasile, Tel Masos, Tel Malhata, and Tel Hadar. The placement of these buildings reflects a deliberate political strategy consistent with the work of a state. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Hendel, Ronald S. Remembering Abraham: Culture, Memory, and History in the Hebrew Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
DOI: 10.1093/0195177967.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The stories of Solomon should be understood as effects of history, rather than an objective description of it. The succession stories show that his claims to the throne were controversial. These are epic texts, and thus they fit historical material into a mythic intellectual framework. The stories reveal Solomon as a complex figure and reflect on his reign as a way of understanding their present. See chapter 5, pp. 75–94.
Find this resource:
Knoppers, Gary N. “The Vanishing Solomon: The Disappearance of the United Monarchy from Recent Histories of Ancient Israel.” Journal of Biblical Literature 116.1 (1997): 19–44.
DOI: 10.2307/3266744Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Traces the consensus of earlier scholarship that archaeology revealed a United Monarchy for the time of David and Solomon and the breakdown of that consensus under reevaluation of archaeological and literary evidence. Knoppers shows that a new consensus is emerging, according to which an Israelite state did begin in the 10th century BCE, even if biblical notions of a Solomonic empire seem exaggerated. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Na’aman, Nadav. “Solomon’s District List (1 Kings 4:7–19) and the Assyrian Province System in Palestine.” Ugarit-Forschungen 33 (2001): 419–436.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Noting that the list of Solomon’s officials are embedded in a later text and may not reflect 10th-century BCE realities, Na’aman argues that the list was probably written in the late 8th century based on a group of names found in the royal or temple archives. He examines each district, noting the historical and linguistic problems associated with the list.
Find this resource:
Weippert, Helga. “Das Libanonwaldhaus.” In Saxa Loquentur: Studien zur Archäologie Palästinas/Israels: Festschrift für Volkmar Fritz zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by Cornelis G. den Hertog, Ulrich Hübner, and Stefan Münger, 213–226. Münster, Germany: Ugarit-Verlag, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The description of Solomon’s palace in 1 Kings 7:2–5 has occasioned much skepticism. However, Weippert draws on Assyrian parallels that portray royal pergolas with cedars extending beyond the tops of the structures’ walls to argue that Solomon’s “House of the Cedars of Lebanon” was such a building. This proposal makes sense of the biblical text and dates it to an earlier time.
Find this resource:
Literary Presentations

Solomon’s story appears in two large-scale versions (1 Kings and 1–2 Chronicles) and in allusions in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs (books whose authors associated their work with him as the patron of learning). These literary presentations vary in important ways, with the later texts sanitizing the complex portrait of Solomon in 1 Kings. Still, the Deuteronomistic version of his life, contained in 1 Kings 1–11, gave the literary character named Solomon (whose resemblance to the real man is the subject of historical reconstruction) its basic contours.

Deuteronomistic History

First Kings 1–11 portrays Solomon as David’s successor and a king who dominated his world. Renowned for wisdom, honored for piety, and feared for administrative and military skill that sometimes verged on tyranny (depending on one’s point of view), Solomon appears in Kings as the sort of king that Israelite readers of the late preexilic or early postexilic periods might desire. However, the Deuteronomists’ final analysis is that he was an idolater whose foreign marriages led him astray. His splendid achievements went nowhere, ending soon after his death, except in the memories of subjects. Older scholars often sought to distinguish pro- and antimonarchic strains in this material, yet such an endeavor obscures the fact that the final compilers of the work, wrestling with their multiple sources and their own reflections on Israel’s intervening experiences, had a mixed view of Solomon, which continues to this day.

Overarching Issues

A number of issues confront the reader of 1 Kings 1–11. First is the relationship between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint, which often differ in significant ways. The latter’s rearrangement of the former (van Keulen 2005) demonstrates the ongoing fascination with the character. Second, the text’s overall approach to its subject leads Seibert 2006 and, in a different way, Hays 2003 to suspect a certain narratival untrustworthiness, either in the form of satire (Seibert 2006) or outright critique (Hays 2003); that is, it is not clear that the narrator is being entirely straightforward, even in praising Solomon. These views are debatable, but worth serious consideration. Third, the use of major themes from elsewhere in the Bible, notably the exodus (Frisch 2000) and the king as wise man (Parker 1992), although hardly surprising given the importance of those themes to Israel’s religion, raises important issues about how to understand the literary shaping of the Solomon traditions. The editor(s) of the work are reading his story through the lenses of other ideas. It is important to discover which ones were in play and why. And fourth, the development of these chapters is the subject of continued study. A source-redaction model like that of Wälchli 1999 or Särkiö 1994 are slightly different ways of thinking about the evidence. Geoghegan 2003 offers a different view, or rather locates the redactions earlier in time. The book may also be seen as the creation of an editor, of whatever date, using bits and pieces rather than extensive sources spanning multiple stories.

Frisch, Amos. “The Exodus Motif in 1 Kings 1–14.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 25.87 (2000): 3–21.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Exodus story figures overtly in many parts of the Solomon narrative (notably his prayer in chapter 8), as well as more subtly throughout it. Appeals to the nation’s foundation traditions help support the basic coherence of these chapters. Parallels between Solomon and Pharaoh, as well as between Moses and Jeroboam, are extensive and important. Frisch traces these parallels with care in order to illustrate his argument. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Geoghegan, Jeffrey C. “‘Until This Day’ and the Preexilic Redaction of the Deuteronomistic History.” Journal of Biblical Literature 122.2 (2003): 201–227.
DOI: 10.2307/3268443Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the oft-repeated formula “until this day” demonstrates a redaction of Joshua-2 Kings during the reign of Josiah, thus arguing against a later dating for the material. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Hays, J. Daniel. “Has the Narrator Come to Praise Solomon or to Bury Him? Narrative Subtlety in 1 Kings 1–11.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 28.2 (2003): 149–174.
DOI: 10.1177/030908920302800202Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that much of the Solomon narrative is deliberately ironic, portraying Solomon as a moral failure while seeming to extol his achievements. For example, by praising Solomon’s military might, the text hints at the prohibition of such in Deuteronomy 17:14–20, creating a thorough critique of the king without seeming to do so. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Parker, K. I. “Solomon as Philosopher King? The Nexus of Law and Wisdom in 1 Kings 1–11.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 17.53 (1992): 75–91.
DOI: 10.1177/030908929201705305Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Reflecting the Bible’s overall view that rulers must obey the law (in contrast to the Platonic ideal), 1 Kings 1–11 portrays Solomon as the ideal king when he keeps Torah and a failure when he does not. For Parker, the background of the text’s evaluation of Solomon is its understanding of the Torah of Moses in some form. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Särkiö, Pekka. Die Weisheit und Macht Salomos in der israelitischen Historiographie: Eine traditions- und redaktionskritische Untersuchung über 1 Kön 3–5 und 9–11. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that these chapters about the story of Solomon embed five layers of redaction (DtrH, P, N, N2, S). However, historically valuable (i.e., early) material appears in several of the layers. The stories are thus not folktales, but examples of early historiography. It would follow from this that several Israelite circles preserved and modified stories about Solomon.
Find this resource:
Seibert, Eric A. Subversive Scribes and the Solomonic Narrative: A Rereading of 1 Kings 1–11. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 436. New York and London: Clark, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The stories in 1 Kings about Solomon contain many contradictory assessments of him. Seibert argues that the seemingly positive ones are in fact ironic, intended to subvert Solomon’s reputation by portraying him as tyrannical, petty, and impious. This approach, although not entirely convincing, raises important questions about the intentions and methods of the biblical editors.
Find this resource:
van Keulen, Percy S. F. Two Versions of the Solomon Narrative: An Inquiry into the Relationship between MT 1 Kgs. 2–11 and LXX 3 Reg. 2-11. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 104. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The ancient Greek translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, contains a version of the Solomon stories deliberately rearranged from the version in the Masoretic Text (MT). The LXX readings were designed to present a more favorable picture of Solomon as well as to eliminate potential confusion by placing thematically related material together rather than leaving them scattered through the text, as in the MT.
Find this resource:
Wälchli, Stefan. Der weise König Salomo: Eine Studie zu den Erzählungen von der Weisheit Salomos in ihrem alttestamentlichen und altorientalischen Kontext. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that 1 Kings 3–11 contains at least three layers, the latter two Deuteronomistic, for the reign of Solomon. This source-redaction model of understanding the text posits a dialogue among the textual layers on the fitness of Solomon for rule (pro-Solomonic and anti-Solomonic viewpoints). The oldest material comes from the royal court, whereas the later editorial work refashions its sources into a more nuanced view of the king.
Find this resource:
Individual Motifs

Among the many stories about Solomon, a few have gained special notoriety. The king’s encounter with the two prostitutes, the subject of much Western art, raises important questions about rhetoric and self-display, both for the characters (Aletti 1999) and for the narrator (Garsiel 2002). Likewise, the controversial nature of kingship, with its opportunities for either abuse or dramatic displays of justice, generates stories such as those of Solomon’s ruthless seizure of power, his diplomacy with Egypt, and his building of the Temple. Thus, Olley 2003 notes the widespread influence of the temple-building story on the entire depiction of Solomon’s reign, whereas Willis, et al. 2011 examines ways in which the text deals with the possibility that Solomon usurped his throne. (In fact, a usurper would have been more anxious than most to legitimize his rule by doing something splashy, such as building a new temple.) Similarly, the repeated emphases on Solomon’s incomparability (Knoppers 1992) show awareness on the editor’s part of the relationships of individual stories about kings—and Solomon in particular—to a larger idea called “kingship.” In addition, as Rösel 2009 in his study of the Greek text of 3 Reigns notes, at least some versions of the story include associations of the king’s piety with older theological ideas and images. In sum, many of the stories about Solomon seem to reflect a certain anxiety about his rule, with the praise of him both dampening and fixing that uncertainty in the minds of readers.

Aletti, Jean-Noël. “Le jugement de Salomon 1 R 3, 16–28: La sagesse et ses enjeux.” In Toute la sagesse du monde: Hommage à Maurice Gilbert, s.j., pour le 65e anniversaire de l’exégète et du recteur. Edited by Françoise Mies, 313–337. Brussels: Lessius, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Traces the interplay of voices in the story of Solomon’s judgment of the two prostitutes as ways of describing the intersection of divine wisdom with human needs and desires. Aletti offers a careful literary analysis of the conversations in the text, illustrating the negotiated nature of wisdom.
Find this resource:
Garsiel, Moshe. “Revealing and Concealing as a Narrative Strategy in Solomon’s Judgment (1 Kings 3:16–28).” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 64.2 (2002): 229–247.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the story of Solomon and the two prostitutes poses a riddle but leads the reader to its solution. The plaintiff in the case is the true mother, but this fact becomes clear in spite of her eloquence, not because of it. Her politeness and sincerity mark her as the truth-teller, although the reader has doubts.
Find this resource:
Knoppers, Gary N. “‘There Was None Like Him’: Incomparability in the Books of Kings.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 54 (1992): 411–431.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Deuteronomistic History describes three kings (Solomon, Hezekiah, and Josiah), as well as Moses, as incomparable, in part because of their associations with the Temple. The exilic editor of the work used these incomparability formulae to help readers distinguish between good and evil.
Find this resource:
Olley, John W. “Pharaoh’s Daughter, Solomon’s Palace, and the Temple: Another Look at the Structure of 1 Kings 1–11.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 27.3 (2003): 355–369.
DOI: 10.1177/030908920302700305Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that 1 Kings 1–11 is organized in three intertwining chiasms (ABB’A’ patterns) that allow postexilic readers to relativize the importance of the Temple and to find in Solomon’s story both warning and hope. The main themes are references to Pharaoh’s daughter, the structure of 6:38–7:12, the themes set forth in Yhwh’s speeches to Solomon, and parallels to other texts. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Rösel, Martin. “Salomo und die Sonne: Zur Rekonstruktion des Tempelweihspruchs I Reg 8,12f.” Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 121.3 (2009): 402–417.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Greek version of Solomon’s dedicatory speech (3 Reigns 8:53–54) shows the translator’s own expansion of a Hebrew text aiming at a fresh theological appraisal of Solomon’s Temple. The text associates the Temple with solar imagery and portrays Yhwh as the builder, rather than Solomon. These theologically motivated alterations show some connections to the theology of the Leontopolis temple built by Jews during the Hellenistic period.
Find this resource:
Willis, Joyce, Andrew Pleffer, and Stephen Llewelyn. “Conversation in the Succession Narrative of Solomon.” Vetus Testamentum 61.1 (2011): 133–147.
DOI: 10.1163/156853311X551466Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The report in 1 Kings 1–2 of the succession of Solomon in order to justify a series of controversial acts, including his supplanting of his brother Adonijah. The multiple traditions woven together in the text reflect several points of view; however, prior to their incorporation in the present narrative, many of these traditions must have regarded Solomon to be a usurper, based on an examination of the conversations within the narrative. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Chronicles

The Chronicler significantly revises the story of Solomon from his source in 1 Kings (but see Talshir 2000), omitting the coup d’état opening his reign, reducing notices of his oppressive policies, and shifting all administrative innovation to the reign of his father David. As Japhet 1989 notes, the reworking of the tales of the two kings follows the same ideological principles (but see the qualifications of Kalimi 2005), and, indeed, the principles probably extend to other kings as well (Endres 2003). Japhet 1989 also notes that the transference of some achievements, especially the planning of the Temple, to David partially undercuts Solomon’s reputation, even while underscoring the continuity of the Davidic dynasty’s policies. Mitchell 2002 has added the idea that the Saul stories also underlie some aspects of Solomon’s stories. If so, the Chronicler would be creating a vision of a single monarchy whose contours appear in its earliest exemplars, as well as in its religious heroes, as discussed in Throntveit 2003. Moreover, the connections may go even further afield, to the stories of Moses and Joshua, as discussed in Williamson 1976. The Chronicler legitimizes Solomon’s rule by emphasizing his role as temple builder (hence, completer of David’s vision), sage, and just ruler, as seen in Braun 1976. Yet, what does the Chronicler mean by “temple”? Van Seters 1997 rightly points out that priestly visions of sanctuaries (especially P’s Tabernacle) also inform the Chronicler. Moreover, the book’s view of its own time is decidedly reserved, characterized by an assumption that the earlier sanctuary, and thus the earlier sign of divine presence, was somehow superior to that of the present (i.e., the Persian period).

Braun, Roddy. “Solomon, the Chosen Temple Builder: The Significance of 1 Chronicles 22, 28, and 29 for the Theology of Chronicles.” Journal of Biblical Literature 95.4 (1976): 581–590.
DOI: 10.2307/3265573Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
These chapters on the choice of Solomon as future ruler state the Chronicler’s view that Solomon was the model king. The author achieves this effect by employing the concept of “rest” (related to founding of a single, national sanctuary), connecting Solomon’s succession to Joshua’s, and underscoring divine choice (Hebrew: bāḥar) of the king as his father’s heir. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Endres, John C. “Theology of Worship in Chronicles.” In The Chronicler as Theologian: Essays in Honor of Ralph W. Klein. Edited by M. Patrick Graham, Steven L. McKenzie, and Gary N. Knoppers, 165–188. London and New York: Clark, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Chronicler portrays four kings (David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat, and Hezekiah) as leaders in worship, emphasizing the links between kingship and liturgy. Solomon’s prayer, in particular, undergirds the practices of the later kings. The resulting rich theology of worship invites Israel to join in joyful praise of a gracious God.
Find this resource:
Japhet, Sara. The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and Its Place in Biblical Thought. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1989.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The most influential commentator of 1–2 Chronicles in contemporary scholarship, Japhet offered an early summary of her analysis of the Chronicler’s key ideas about Yhwh, the worship of Yhwh, the people of Israel, and kingship. The Solomon story figures prominently in all of these major themes, allowing the Chronicler to develop his ideas about exemplary leadership and thus the ideal Israelite polity.
Find this resource:
Kalimi, Isaac. The Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History in Chronicles. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the literary techniques that Chronicles uses to rewrite its sources. For the Solomon story, the Chronicler often resorts to summaries, inclusio, chiasmus, repetition, and inversion (among other strategies) to fashion a coherent narrative. These literary devices often color the text more than the Chronicler’s theological or political agendas do, which Kalimi sees as secondary to narrative artistry.
Find this resource:
Mitchell, Christine. “Transformations in Meaning: Solomon’s Accession in Chronicles.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 4 (2002): 1–20.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that 1–2 Chronicles’ portrayal of the dual coronation of Solomon imitates the stories of Saul’s coronation in 1 Samuel. The two characters thus become parodies of each other. The intertextual relationships of the two texts illustrate the creativity of the Chronicler in refashioning his sources into new narratives illustrating his key ideas about Israel’s earliest monarchs.
Find this resource:
Talshir, Zipora. “The Reign of Solomon in the Making: Pseudo-connections between 3 Kingdoms and Chronicles.” Vetus Testamentum 50.2 (2000): 233–249.
DOI: 10.1163/156853300506332Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The accounts of Solomon differ in both 3 Kingdoms (the Greek translation of 1 Kings) and 1–2 Chronicles from that in 1 Kings MT (Masoretic Text) and from each other. Thus, Talshir disputes the idea that all three rely on an earlier edition. The literary relationship of these documents reveals the ongoing reworking of the Hebrew text of 1 Kings. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Throntveit, Mark A. “The Relationship of Hezekiah to David and Solomon in the Books of Chronicles.” In The Chronicler as Theologian: Essays in Honor of Ralph W. Klein. Edited by M. Patrick Graham, Steven L. McKenzie, and Gary N. Knoppers, 105–121. London and New York: Clark, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that 2 Chronicles portrays Hezekiah both as a second David and as a second Solomon in order to stress the desirability of national unity. The Chronicler portrays the reigns of the two older kings as a single period (thus creating the idea of the “United Monarchy”). This historiographical decision affects the entire structure of the work.
Find this resource:
van Seters, John. “The Chronicler’s Account of Solomon’s Temple-Building: A Continuity Theme.” In The Chronicler as Historian. Edited by M. Patrick Graham, Kenneth G. Hoglund, and Steven L. McKenzie, 283–300. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Chronicler’s portrayal of Solomon’s Temple draws on 1 Kings, the description of the Tabernacle in Exodus 25–40, and the temple of the Chronicler’s own time. The book seeks to show continuity between the first and second temple, although it also emphasizes the superior splendor of the first. Chronicles also seeks to place temple building in the context of the Mosaic law, creating an ideology of worship.
Find this resource:
Williamson, H. G. M. “The Accession of Solomon in the Books of Chronicles.” Vetus Testamentum 26.3 (1976): 351–361.
DOI: 10.1163/156853376X00510Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Like Braun 1976, Williamson independently argues that the Chronicler deliberately links the succession of Solomon to that of Joshua. However, Williamson goes on to argue that Solomon’s reign complements that of his father, rather than equals it, just as Joshua’s activities augment those of Moses. However, Solomon, who completes the Temple, in some respects surpasses David, who could not. The Chronicler also knew the entire Pentateuchal narrative and drew on it for his work. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Other Biblical Texts

Along with Kings and Chronicles, other biblical texts mention Solomon either in passing or at length. He appears in the superscription to Psalm 72 (probably because verse 1 refers to the “son of the king”) and, more importantly, in Proverbs, Ecclesiastes/Qoheleth, and Song of Songs (also called Song of Solomon). As Brueggemann 1990 argues, the latter connections both depend on and reinforce his reputation as a patron of wisdom, itself a common attribute of monarchs, at least in the ideal (Wälchli 1999). However, the three books later attributed to him refer to him in less than straightforward ways. For example, many scholars have found Qoheleth’s adoption of the Solomonic persona deeply ironic—although Koh 2006 has helpfully disputed this understanding—and Solomon’s function in the Song of Songs seems to be mostly as a foil to the more innocent male lover, as noted in Provan 2000 and, more broadly, in Crüsemann 2004. Even in Proverbs, in which Solomon functions almost as a doppelgänger for the fatherly sage of chapters 1 through 9, the contrast between the book’s advice to love the wife of one’s youth and Solomon’s own sexual life jar the reader (or at least the reader of the Bible as a whole; see Camp 2000).

Brueggemann, Walter. “The Social Significance of Solomon as a Patron of Wisdom.” In The Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Edited by John G. Gammie and Leo G. Perdue, 117–132. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
First Kings, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes all remember Solomon as a patron of wisdom and a sage. According to Brueggemann, this memory rests on the historical reality that Solomon supported wisdom that was ideologically emancipatory. His era marked a change in Israel’s self-understanding and social structure. The historical problems (cited in this section) with Solomon’s reign render some parts of Brueggemann’s analysis problematic.
Find this resource:
Camp, Claudia V. Wise, Strange, and Holy: The Strange Woman and the Making of the Bible. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 320. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that 1 Kings interprets Solomon as a figure related to both Woman Wisdom and the Strange Woman in the light of the imagery of Proverbs. The suppression of sexuality in Kings, as well as the portrayal of the Queen of Sheba, reflects such a literary strategy. Camp’s thesis, although arguably anachronistic, raises important questions about the literary artistry of the Solomon stories. See especially pp. 144–190.
Find this resource:
Crüsemann, Frank. “‘Für Salomo’? Salomo und die Interpretation des Hohenlieder.” In Das Manna fällt auch heute noch: Beiträge zur Geschichte und Theologie des Alten, Ersten Testaments: Festschrift für Erich Zenger. Edited by Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Ludger Schwienhorst-Schönberger, 141–157. Herders Biblische Studien 44. Freiburg, Germany: Herder, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Traces the interpretation of Solomon’s story and shows that texts such as the superscription of Psalms 72, Song of Songs 1:2–4, and Sirach 47:19–21 include some negative views of Solomon. Some texts in Song of Songs also depend on the treatment of kingship in Proverbs 31:1–9.
Find this resource:
Koh, Y. V. Royal Autobiography in the Book of Qoheleth. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 369. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 2006.
DOI: 10.1515/9783110923155Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Against most scholars, who argue that the royal persona in Ecclesiastes fades out after chapter 2, Koh argues that royal imagery is pervasive in the book in order to identify the author’s words with the past and to honor the monarchy. Koh also disputes the claims that the book is a satire on kingship (or even religion).
Find this resource:
Provan, Iain W. “The Terrors of the Night: Love, Sex, and Power in Song of Songs 3.” In The Way of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Bruce K. Waltke. Edited by J. I. Packer and Sven K. Soderlund, 150–167. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The text satirizes Solomon, contrasting his arrogance with the female lover’s desire for equality and deep love. The role of Solomon in the Song is controversial among scholars, but Provan makes a strong case for the book’s relatively negative view of the king, who contrasts unfavorably with the male lover of the work.
Find this resource:
Wälchli, Stefan. Der weise König Salomo: Eine Studie zu den Erzählungen von der Weisheit Salomos in ihrem alttestamentlichen und altorientalischen Kontext. Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament 8. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Traces the idea of the wise king in the ancient Near East (Isin dynasty, Hammurapi) and its use in the Solomon stories of 1 Kings, as well as the interpretive afterlife of these stories in other biblical texts and in Sirach. Wälchli argues that the use of tsedaqah (“righteousness”) and chokmah (“wisdom”) in these stories derived from Levantine political language legitimating rulers accused of usurpation.
Find this resource:
Temple Building and other Religious Aspects

First Kings presents Solomon as a temple builder, a common feature of royal administration in the ancient Near East, as discussed in van Pelt 1984, Hurowitz 1992, and Meyer 1993. This presentation seems to rest on a historical reality, because any fictionalized account would surely have assigned Israel’s greatest building to its greatest king, David, although Kings takes some pains to explain why David could not build the temple. Two aspects of temple building seem crucial here. First, because any temple is a symbol of the divine realm and a point for human interaction with that realm, religions attach many layers of signification and meaning to such spaces. Temples are not just buildings. They instantiate the most important values, beliefs, attitudes, and practices of a religious community, even if they also have more utilitarian functions, as discussed in Stevens 2006. The fact that Solomon built his temple according to widely used patterns in his era (Wightman 2007) illustrates the flexibility of Israelite religion (its willingness to borrow valuable ideas), as well as a strong internal need for a central sanctuary to reflect a newly united people. Second, 1 Kings (and 2 Chronicles) emphasize the prayer of dedication of the temple, as well as the architecture and interior design of the space. The prayer, as we know it, may have developed in several stages (Knoppers 1995) in order to allow for continuous theological reflection (Talstra 1993). Although theological development is not unidirectional, since later texts may take up older ideas (see Keel 2002), the prayer provides evidence of several stages of reflection on the divine–human relationship, on the fate of Israel and Judah, and thus on the nature of Yhwh, the nation’s deity.

Hurowitz, Victor Avigdor. I Have Built You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in Light of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 115. Sheffield, UK: Academic Press, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An important study noting that the stories of Solomon’s temple building in 1 Kings closely resemble Babylonian and Assyrian stories of royal construction of sanctuaries.
Find this resource:
Keel, Othmar. “Der salomonische Tempelweihspruch: Beobachtungen zum religionsgeschichtlichen Kontext des Ersten Jerusalemer Tempels.” In Gottesstadt und Gottesgarten: Zu Geschichte und Theologie des Jerusalemer Tempels. Quaestiones Disputatae 191. Edited by Othmar Keel and Erich Zenger, 9–23. Freiburg, Germany: Herder, 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Solomon’s dedicatory prayer for the Temple, especially in the Septuagint, uses solar imagery, reflecting the importance of the sun god in ancient Near Eastern religion. Keel sketches the integration of pre-Israelite Jebusite/Canaanite traditions into Israelite religion, concluding that Solomon’s prayer reflects Israel’s flexible portrayal of the divine personality.
Find this resource:
Knoppers, Gary N. “Prayer and Propaganda: Solomon’s Dedication of the Temple and the Deuteronomist’s Program.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 57 (1995): 229–254.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Knoppers argues that the chapter is a literary unity stemming from the 7th century BCE, the era of Josiah’s attempts to unify Israelites around a common sanctuary, theology, and monarchy. On this reading, the prayer sets in the reign of Solomon, at the founding of the Temple, later interpretations of it as a unifying factor for the nation.
Find this resource:
Meyer, Jan-Waalke. “Tempel- und Palastbauten im eisenzeitlichen Palästina und ihre bronzezietlichen Vorbilder.” In Religionsgeschichtliche Beziehungen zwischen Kleinasien, Nordsyrien und dem Alten Testament: Internationales Symposion Hamburg, 17–21 March 1990. Edited by Bernd Janowski, Klaus Koch, and Gernot Wilhelm, 319–328. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Israel inherited from its environment the basic forms of city planning: acropolis, ramparts, palace, and temple. The building projects attributed to Solomon, as well as those found at Arad and other sites in Israel/Judah, fit the regional pattern.
Find this resource:
Stevens, Marty E. Temples, Tithes, and Taxes: The Temple and the Economic Life of Ancient Israel. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
From Solomon to Herod, the temples in Jerusalem were economically significant. Construction and maintenance, the collection and distribution of goods and services, the selection and maintenance of personnel are all economic activities. Ancient temples functioned as storehouses for excess capital and the sponsor of the arts. Stevens does not minimize the religious aspects of temples in underscoring other dimensions of them.
Find this resource:
Talstra, E. Solomon’s Prayer: Synchrony and Diachrony in the Composition of I Kings 8,14–61. Translated from the Dutch by Gonni Runia-Deenick. Kampen, The Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examining Solomon’s prayer dedicating the Temple both synchronically and diachronically, Talstra argues that the original prayer drew on the dynastic promise in 2 Samuel 7. A later redactor added Petitions 1, 4, and 5 from liturgical texts. The postexilic edition changed the whole into a penitential prayer by adding Petitions 2 and 3.
Find this resource:
van Pelt, R. J. Tempel van de Wereld: De kosmische symboliek van de temple van Salomo. Utrecht, The Netherlands: HES, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Drawing on comparative evidence from the ancient Near East, the book argues that the Temple of Solomon was conceived of as a copy of the heavenly palace of the deity. The sanctuary was the place where heaven, earth, and underworld intersected to give meaning to the rituals occurring within it.
Find this resource:
Wightman, G. J. Sacred Spaces: Religious Architecture in the Ancient World. Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement 22. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This massive book describes ancient temples from around the world and offers typologies of them. The treatment of Syro-Palestinian temples shows that the one attributed to Solomon in 1 Kings looked similar to roughly contemporary structures in Ain Dara and Tell Tainat in Syria. All had three rooms, used a direct approach from entry to shrine, and apparently employed similar iconography. See especially pp. 144–197.
Find this resource:
Reception History

The post-biblical development of Solomon’s story took surprising turns. The earliest reflections took their cues from the Bible itself, making Solomon a sage and temple builder. However, other aspects of the story also developed. Solomon became a sorcerer who owned a magic carpet and married the daughter of a man and a jinn. His encounter with the Queen of Sheba took on romantic qualities not suspected in 1 Kings (or at least not obvious). In the 19th and 20th centuries, Solomon’s expeditions to exotic lands took on new life as a source of the fantasy novel genre. And in music, his story inspired figures as great as Handel and Gounod. Although less prominent in the Western and Islamic imagination than his father David, Solomon truly figured as a man of significance for the ages.

Second Temple and Roman Period Texts

During the Second Temple period, the reputation of Solomon went through several stages, not all easily isolable. The Chronicler revised 1 Kings to rehabilitate Solomon’s image, and the editors/authors of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes adopted his persona as a literary device underscoring his patronage of wisdom. Later works included the Psalms of Solomon (late 1st century BCE), the Wisdom of Solomon (late 1st century BCE or a little later), and the Christian Odes of Solomon (2nd century CE). All of these works reflected the tendency of the time to associate contemporary productions with ancient heroes (compare the Enochic works, for example). Solomon functioned as the patron of piety and wisdom, although Solomon’s prowess as a magician and astrologer (a corollary of his nearly superhuman wisdom) fascinated textual scholars and, surprisingly, amulet makers and magicians of many periods, as shown in Torijano 2002. The Psalms of Solomon bridge the worlds of wisdom and apocalyptic (Burkes 2002, Wright 2007), allowing those singing them to find a place in a frightening world. Meanwhile, the Wisdom of Solomon, the best-known text bearing the royal name owing to the book’s placement in the Protestant Apocrypha or Catholic Deuterocanonical books, reflects the emphasis on wisdom as the road to personal integrity (Green 2003, Kolarcik 2008). The Odes of Solomon, primarily a Christian creation (Lattke 2009), witness to the ongoing fascination with the biblical figure as a sage and therefore a poet. However, the reputation of Solomon during Late Antiquity did not rest entirely on pseudepigrapha. Josephus 1950 offered his Roman audience a detailed description of Solomon, whom he commended as a ruler worthy of honor, despite his flaws. In doing so, Josephus interacted with an audience fascinated by the behavior of rulers as models for their own and as test cases for social life, as discussed in Hamilton 2006. (This is true, by the way, even of messianic reflections; not all Jews expected a Davidic messiah, and those who did often disagreed on whether he would be more Davidic or Solomonic, as discussed in Pomykala 1995.) In addition to such political ruminations, the prominence of the Temple, both before and after its reconstruction by Herod the Great, helped Solomon’s reputation survive. Most Second Temple texts compare the building of their time unfavorably with Solomon’s (Hayward 1996).

Burkes, Shannon. “Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Wisdom of Solomon.” Harvard Theological Review 95.1 (2002): 21–44.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Arguing that the book shares aspects of its worldview with both wisdom and apocalyptic texts, and thus cuts across modern genre expectations, Burkes examines such topics in the book as death, appearance vs. reality, the cosmos, epistemology, and wisdom as savior. The author concludes that the book, although sapiential in form, bridges the gap between wisdom and apocalyptic worldviews. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Green, Barbara. “The Wisdom of Solomon and the Solomon of Wisdom: Tradition’s Transpositions and Human Transformation.” Horizons 30.1 (2003): 41–66.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Traces the key characters in Wisdom of Solomon (Solomon himself, Sophia/Wisdom, the Cosmos, and the Just) and shows that the book pictures Wisdom as the agent of human transformation and giver of life. Green wrestles with the viability of the tradition, deciding that Wisdom of Solomon’s overall viewpoint makes sense.
Find this resource:
Hamilton, Mark W. “11QTemple 57–59, Ps.-Aristeas 187–300, and Second Temple Period Political Theory.” In Transmission and Reception: New Testament Text-Critical and Exegetical Studies. Edited by J. W. Childers and D. C. Parker, 181–195. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Second Temple period texts reflected on the limits of kingship. One of the primary biblical reference points was Deuteronomy 17:14–20, which may reflect at a high level on the reign of Solomon.
Find this resource:
Hayward, C. T. R., ed. The Jewish Temple: A Non-biblical Sourcebook. London and New York: Routledge, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An accessible collection of translated texts with commentaries and background notes from Hecataeus of Abdera, Aristeas, Ecclesiasticus (in Greek and in Hebrew versions), Jubilees, Philo of Alexandria, Josephus, and Pseudo-Philo. Interesting in its own right, the collection illustrates for the purposes of the study of Solomon’s reputation the ways in which these texts compared their own temple unfavorably with the original one.
Find this resource:
Josephus. Jewish Antiquities. Book 8. 9 vols. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray and Ralph Marcus. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1950.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Writing at the end of the 1st century CE, Josephus paraphrases the Solomon story in 1 Kings and 1–2 Chronicles, integrating contemporary Jewish interpretation and offering his own moral judgments on the biblical characters. Josephus portrays Solomon as a great monarch, pious, just, and mighty; his Queen of Sheba, a ruler of Egypt and Ethiopia. No hint of sexual encounter appears in Josephus’s version of that story.
Find this resource:
Kolarcik, Michael. “The Sage behind the Wisdom of Solomon.” In Scribes, Sages, and Seers: The Sage in the Eastern Mediterranean World. Edited by Leo G. Perdue, 245–257. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 1st-century CE text bearing Solomon’s name constructed an image of the sage that fuses biblical stories with Greek philosophical ideas. This last work, written to resemble wisdom texts in the Hebrew Bible, closely relates to the theology of Philo (so much so that Kolarcik wonders if Philo wrote the book). The choice of Solomon as the persona adopted by the author plays a final homage to the biblical ruler.
Find this resource:
Lattke, Michael. Odes of Solomon: A Commentary. Hermeneia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Written shortly after 100 CE, the forty-two odes bear strong resemblance to traces of Gnostic, Jewish, and Christian ideas, illustrating the religious complexity of the time. The Solomonic pseudonym should not mask their Christian character, however. Solomon seemed the model sage to early Christians. Lattke addresses the key literary, historical, and linguistic issues of the book in order to create a comprehensive interpretation.
Find this resource:
Pomykala, Kenneth E. The Davidic Dynasty Tradition in Early Judaism: Its History and Significance for Messianism. Atlanta: Scholars, 1995.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Notes the wide range of attitudes toward the Davidic dynasty, including Solomon, in Second Temple texts and thus the uneasy connection between the reputations of those kings and Jewish messianism.
Find this resource:
Torijano, Pablo A. Solomon, the Esoteric King: From King to Magus, Development of a Tradition. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 73. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Drawing on parts of the story of Solomon in 1 Kings, Jewish texts in the Second Temple period transformed him into a wise man and then as the possessor of esoteric, even magical, astrological, or exorcistic wisdom. This transformation of his reputation was part of Judaism’s response to contemporary Hermeticism and other movements.
Find this resource:
Wright, Robert B. The Psalms of Solomon: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text. New York: Clark, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The complex collection known as the Psalms of Solomon, from the 1st century BCE, reflects Jewish piety of the time. This critical edition and English translation provides the best available text of the work and provides an excellent starting point for its study.
Find this resource:
Medieval and Early Modern Texts and Art

Solomon’s story has long inspired storytellers and artists in many media. Among the more exotic traditions are those connecting Arabia and the Horn of Africa. The Queen of Sheba story reflects a historical reality at one level: Saba, known in the early 21st century as Yemen, was a significant civilization during the 1st millennium BCE, and its memory and influence spanned the Red Sea region. Thus, the medieval legends of the Ethiopian kings referred to their founder, Menyelek (or Menelik), as the son of the Queen of Sheba and Solomon (Budge 1932). A different set of traditions, probably deriving from rabbinic interpreters in Arabia, were added to the Qur’an (Elias 2009) and commented on, embellished, and deconstructed by later Muslim thinkers (Johns 1986). Among Jews and Christians in the western Mediterranean and northern Europe, the Solomon stories took additional directions. Scenes of conflict and suppressed sexuality were favorites among painters and sculptors, as shown in Bonnet and Xella 1996. During the early modern period, as political philosophy took on new urgency as a response to the rise of the nation state and the collapse of the various royal modi vivendi with the church, Solomon seemed to some major thinkers, notably Hugo Grotius, to be an interesting test case for royal power and its limits, as discussed in Bultmann 2008. Finally, perhaps the most fascinating development of the Solomon story occurred in association with Jerusalem. A city profoundly holy to three religions and their many, sometimes warring, sects, Jerusalem developed after the accession of Constantine into a giant monument to human memory. Priests, rabbis, and imams were eager to locate the tombs of David and Solomon (Hirschberg 1954) and to reconstruct the Temple Mount, which became Muslim after the 7th century and the site of both a great mosque (al-Aqsa) and a shrine linking biblical stories with those of the life of Muhammed (Gutmann 1976). The almost continuous stream of pilgrims to the city, accelerated after the Crusades, left in its wake travel narratives, prayers, and artistic representations of the city as far away as Ireland, as noted in Peters 1985. Solomon’s Jerusalem has become a key fixture in the imaginations of half the world. The beginnings of that shift appeared in the medieval period.

Bonnet, Corinne, and Paolo Xella. Great Biblical Characters: Illustrated Profiles of People in the Bible. Translated from the French by Sandra E. Tokunaga. Rome: Gremese, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The authors reproduce and describe a medieval miniature of Solomon’s coronation, as well as scenes of his judgment of the prostitutes by Guido Reni and Nicolas Poussin, and the meeting with the Queen of Sheba from Ghiberti’s doors of the Baptistery in Florence. With its overtones of sexuality and social tension, the last has been the most popular from Solomon’s life in art.
Find this resource:
Budge, Sir E. A. Wallis, trans. The Queen of Sheba and Her Only Son Menyelek: The Kebra Nagast. London: Oxford University Press, 1932.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Kebra Nagast is a 7th-century CE work in Ge’ez (Ethiopic) compiling many legends about early Ethiopian history and especially the connection between Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. According to the stories, their son Menyelek was the founder of Ethiopia and the ancestor of the former royal house (deposed in 1974). The stories have influenced Western art and literature, although their historicity is extremely dubious.
Find this resource:
Bultmann, Christoph. “Beyond the Vulgate: Hugo Grotius’s Erudite Response to the Biblical Representation of Solomon.” Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 120.1 (2008): 92–106.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 17th-century intellectual Hugo Grotius wrote extensive notes on 1 Kings 1–11, in which he commented on political power and its abuses. Bultmann traces Grotius’s scholarly work on these texts, illustrating both its undisciplined attention to the details of the biblical text and its profound interest in moral philosophy. Grotius was a major figure, and his study of Solomon as a model of kingship deserves further attention. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Elias, Jamal J. “Prophecy, Power and Propriety: The Encounter of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 11 (April 2009): 57–74.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although the reports in the Qur’an of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (named Bilqīs) assume that the reader knows the story, Muslim scholars from the 10th to the 13th centuries CE embellished the story by making her mother a jinn and describing her as an ideal ruler. She became the model convert to Islam, with Solomon as missionary. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Gutmann, Joseph, ed. The Temple of Solomon: Archaeological Fact and Medieval Tradition in Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Art. Missoula, MT: Scholars, 1976.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains articles on Solomon’s Temple as portrayed in art from various traditions: early Christian and Byzantine, Romanesque, Islamic, and Jewish Spanish Hebrew manuscripts. Media range from illuminated manuscripts (in all traditions) to architectural columns and doorways imitating those in the Temple.
Find this resource:
Hirschberg, Hayim Zeev. “קברי דוד ושׁלמה במסורת המוסלמית.” Eretz-Israel 3 (1954): 213–220.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Muslim traditions starting in about the 10th century CE located the tombs of David and Solomon on the western hill of Jerusalem. The tradition moved to Judaism and Christianity soon afterward, with the specific location gradually becoming connected to the Coenaculum. The traditions have no claim to historical accuracy but do reflect the three religions’ shared interest in locating holy sites, even if their interests in those sites often clashed.
Find this resource:
Johns, A. H. “Solomon and the Queen of Sheba: Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī’s Treatment of the Qur’anic Telling of the Story.” Abr-Nahrain 24 (1986): 58–82.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although the Qur’an often speaks of Solomon as a model of wisdom and prophecy (Suras 21, 27, 34, 38, etc.), especially showing interest in the encounter with the Queen of Sheba (Sura 27:15–44), Al-Rāzī explores the Qur’anic story as one depicting how a believing king can convert a pagan ruler. He rejects some legendary features (e.g., Solomon’s flying carpet).
Find this resource:
Peters, F. E. Jerusalem: The Holy City in the Eyes of Chroniclers, Visitors, Pilgrims, and Prophets from the Days of Abraham to the Beginnings of Modern Times. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Among the many ancient and medieval reports about Jerusalem are many legends attributing sites in the city to Solomon. These included stables, his tomb, the portico south of the Temple (actually built by Herod), and other structures. Egeria speaks of the Ring of Solomon and the horn with which Israelite kings were anointed as artifacts seen in the late 4th century CE, for example.
Find this resource:
Modern Media

The Solomon story has captured the imagination of modern composers and novelists. The king’s wisdom, often with a Gothic twist, fascinated Mark Twain and H. Rider Haggard, whereas the traditions of Solomon’s sexual encounter with the Queen of Sheba, seen also in Ethiopian royal traditions, has stimulated obvious interests from Gounod’s 1862 opera La Reine de Saba (which owed more to Wagnerian romanticism than to the Bible, as discussed in Huebner 1999, p. 178) to Levine’s dime novel (Levine 1980). The classic work of Heym 1997 uses the Solomon story to speak of tyrannical government and the powerlessness of the intelligentsia serving it, whereas Haggard 1885 introduced an entire genre of “lost world” novels best seen in the Tarzan or Conan stories. Bialik 2002 and Levine 1980 pick up the romantic theme (although at somewhat different levels of literary skill, with Bialik being one of the great writers of 20th-century world literature). And, finally, one of the great masters of baroque music, Handel, left his oratorio Solomon: An Oratorio (Handel 1999), which grandly portrays a king confident in his rule and inspiring to all who behold him. The Solomon story, although not as popular as that of David, has left its mark in modern arts.

Bialik, Hayyim Nahman. “הגדת שׁלשׁה וארבעה.” (“The Legend of the Three and the Four”) In Random Harvest: The Novellas of Bialik. Translated by David Patterson and Ezra Spicehandler, 227–286. Oxford: Westview, 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The last short story or novella of the great modern Israeli poet Bialik, this story is based on the medieval legends of Solomon, his daughter, and his displays of wisdom and human relationships. The story exists in two versions, the second of which Bialik used to talk about human existence in depth.
Find this resource:
Haggard, H. Rider. King Solomon’s Mines. London: Cassell, 1885.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A romance in which Allan Quatermain travels with friends to the African jungle in search of treasure. After numerous improbable and violent adventures, they find the secret chambers in which Solomon had buried treasure, but the booby traps in the “mines” create danger and even the death of some of their party. The very popular novel was also the basis of movies in 1937, 1950, 1985, and 2004.
Find this resource:
Handel, Georg Frideric. Solomon: An Oratorio. Melville, NY: Belwin Mills, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Written in 1748, the oratorio consists of three parts, the last of which concerns the Queen of Sheba’s entrance. Her theme is often played in concerts, although the oratorio as a whole has found less popular support than have Messiah or Samson.
Find this resource:
Heym, Stefan [Helmut Flieg, pseud.]. The King David Report. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This parable of ways in which both modern capitalism and Soviet-style socialism subvert human freedom describes the historical work of Ethan the Ezrahite. Solomon has charged him with the task of writing a history of the reign of David. Ethan finds truth telling too costly and resorts to subversive narrative to square his conscience with his assignment.
Find this resource:
Huebner, Steven. French Opera at the Fin de Siècle: Wagnerism, Nationalism, and Style. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Acceptance or rejection of Wagner’s influence marked French opera at the end of the 19th century. Themes of Gothic horror, tragic sexuality, and martial conflict colored the works of the era, including notably Gounod’s 1862 four-part opera La Reine de Saba, based on Solomon’s encounter with the Arabian monarch.
Find this resource:
Levine, Faye. Solomon and Sheba. New York: Marek, 1980.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A novel in which Solomon and the Queen of Sheba fall in love and discuss secret lore. Solomon appears here as an early Masonic sage whose tyrannical ways drove the queen back home. There she raised their son, who ruled much of Arabia and Africa as far away as Congo. The novel merges legends from many periods, topped off with a good bit of romance and adventure.