by
Damien F. Mackey
Our historical revision, if correct, has completely revolutionized Egyptian18th Dynasty studies. Queen Hatshepsut, we have identified with (following Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky) the biblical Queen of Sheba. And we have also followed Dr. Ed (Ewald) Metzler in identifying her father, Thutmose I, with King David (and also with the “Pharaoh” of I Kings 9:16), archaeologically of Late Bronze I (following Dr. Bimson). This means that the 18th Dynasty was ‘Israelite’, as according to Dr. Metzler, with pharaoh Ahmose corresponding to the biblical Ahimaatz, whose daughter Achinoam (or Achinaam), Metzler concluded, must correspond to Ahmose’s daughter (of quite similar name meaning), Ahhotep. The latter married Amenhotep I, or King Saul (Metzler). It needs to be carefully noted that Hatshesput herself was not the daughter of this Ahhotep, but of an apparently non-royal woman, Ahmose. The latter I shall attempt to identify biblically in this article.
The Thutmosides, in turn, were David-ides. Hatshepsut had married the son of Thutmose I (or David), Thutmose II (i.e. Solomon), whilst Thutmose III, the biblical ‘Shishak’, was the son of Thutmose II (Solomon) by a concubine, Isis (or Aset).
I further concluded that Solomon was also Senenmut (Senmut), thought by some to have been ‘the real power behind the throne’ of Egypt during the time of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III (until the latter became fully independent due to the deaths of Senenmut and Hatshepsut), and that Hatshepsut/Sheba was also the beautiful young virgin and nurse to an ailing King David, Abishag, from Shunem. Hatshepsut is also considered by some revisionists (e.g. Hyam Maccoby) to have been the sister-bride of the Song of Solomon, which fits both Metzler’s view that she was the half-sister of Solomon, and my view that she was Abishag from Shunem (though some would prefer to render ‘Shunammite’ in the Song of Solomon, or Song of Songs, as ‘Shulammite’, i.e. ‘of Solomon’). [Shunem was a very important place at this approximate time (see El-Amarna letters and perhaps also 2 Kings 4:8)].
Most recently I have wondered, if - in the light of a further conclusion of mine that Thutmose III may have been Nubian on his mother’s side, and hence was also the Kushite Neshi (Nehesy) who had led Hatshesput’s Punt expedition (thereby accounting for why Thutmose III himself seems to have taken so little part in this marvellous venture) - whether Solomon’s Egyptian bride, who describes herself as ‘I am black and beautiful’ (Song of Solomon 1:5), may also have had some Nubian blood in her veins. (See also note just below).
Whatever about that, I am now going to propose a further layer of identification to this most fascinating female personage, now as the biblical Tamar who was raped by her half-brother, Amnon, eldest son of King David.
Before that, though, just this note: I have found myself leaning towards a view favoured by Velikovsky, and strongly supported by some traditions, that ‘Sheba’ pertained to the queen’s name, rather than to her country or city (e.g. Sweeney) of origin/residence. However, I had forgotten about the suggestion of Dr. Eva Danelius (whose article I have never actually read) that ‘Sheba’ or ‘Seba’ (Saba) was also the name of a kingdom next to Ethiopia (i.e. Kush), that became known as Meroë in the days of Cambyses. The Bible in fact distinguishes the three: Egypt, Ethiopia and Seba (e.g. Isaiah 43:3). To identify this Seba as the home of the famous queen would be to add strength to the statement by Jesus Christ that she, ‘the Queen of the South’, had come ‘from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon’ (Luke 11:31), and it might also add weight to the supposition that she may have been black.
Amnon and Tamar
Before giving the biblical account of this story, this is how I think that Abishag (= Hatshepsut-Maat-ka-re) and Tamar may connect. I had previously imagined that King David had taken Abishag as his nurse in his very last years of old age. But now I think that it must have been somewhat earlier than this, and that the young woman was already performing this service for the king when his son Amnon conceived his desire for her and asked for her, as Tamar, to be brought to him to serve him in his illness (actually love-sickness), to nurse him, as she had been doing for the aged king. So David “sent home” (note), for Tamar to come to Amnon’s house, with disastrous results for the girl.
Here now is the biblical account of the rape of Tamar (2 Samuel 13:1-30), to which I add my own comments:
… Ab'sa-lom had a beautiful sister whose name was Ta'mar; and David's son Am'non fell in love with her. Am'non was so tormented that he made himself ill because of his sister Ta'mar, for she was a virgin and it seemed impossible to Am'non to do anything to her.
Comment: Recall that Abishag, too, was ‘beautiful’, and a ‘virgin’ (I Kings 2, 4), and we have already argued that she was a ‘half-sister’ of Solomon’s, who was in turn a brother of Amnon’s and Absalom’s. Dr. Metzler has also suggested that Amnon was an Egyptian name (he chose Amon-On). Recall also that another brother, Adonijah, had also desired this Abishag (I Kings 20:21). [Note also here that Adonijah calls the girl a ‘Shunammite’, which is thus unlikely to have meant ‘Shulammite’, ‘belonging to Solomon’, as some have proposed].
Having now an extra name for our female character, Tamar, and learning that her mother, common to both she and Absalom, was ‘Maacah, daughter of King Talmai of Geshur’ (I Chronicles 3:2), might seem only to add further complexities to an already fascinatingly complex subject.
But does it?
Perhaps, rather, it can help us.
Perhaps ‘Maacah’ may be an Egyptian name, Maat-ka-(re), or even Achimaatz (Ahmose, the name of Hatshepsut’s mother), abbreviated by the Jews to Maacah. And perhaps Tamar is another version of Maat-[ka]-re, the name changed around to distinguish her from her mother.
As to the royal father, King Talmai of Geshur, seemingly a further complication, see ‘A Note on Biblical Pharaohs’ at the end.
But Am'non had a friend whose name was Jon'a-dab, the son of David's brother Shim'eah; and Jon'a-dab was a very crafty man. He said to him, "O son of the king, why are you so haggard morning after morning? Will you not tell me?" Am'non said to him, "I love Ta'mar, my brother Ab'sa-lom's sister." Jon'a-dab said to him, "Lie down on your bed, and pretend to be ill; and when your father comes to see you, say to him, 'Let my sister Ta'mar come and give me something to eat, and prepare the food in my sight, so that I may see and eat it from her hand.'" So Am'non lay down, and pretended to be ill; and when the king came to see him, Am'non said to the king, "Please let my sister Ta'mar come and make a couple of cakes in my sight, so that I may eat from her hand."
Then David sent home to Ta'mar saying, "Go to your brother Am'non’s house, and prepare food for him." So Ta'mar went to her brother Am'non’s house, where he was lying down. She took dough, kneaded it, made cakes in his sight, and baked the cakes. Then she took the pan and set them out before him, but he refused to eat. Am'non said, "Send out everyone from me.” So everyone went out from him. Then Am'non said to Ta'mar, ‘Bring the food into the chamber, so that I might eat from your hand.” So Ta'mar took the cakes she had made, and brought them into the chamber to Am'non her brother. But when she brought them near him to eat, he took hold of her, and said to her, “Come, lie with me, my sister." She answered him, "No, my brother, do not force me; for such a thing is not done in Israel; do not do anything so vile! As for me, where should I carry my shame? And as for you, you would be as one of the scoundrels in Israel. Now therefore, I beg you, speak to the king; for he will not withhold me from you.” But he would not listen to her; and being stronger than she, he forced her and lay with her.
Comment: What was ‘not done in Israel’ might be done in Egypt (Metzler).
Then Am'non was seized with a very great loathing for her. Indeed, his loathing was even greater than the lust he had felt for her. An Am'non said to her, “Get out!” But she said to him, “No my brother; for this wrong in sending me away is greater than the other that you did to me”. But he would not listen to her. He called the young man who served him and said, “Put this woman out of my presence, and bolt the door after her.” (Now she was wearing a long robe with sleeves; for this is how the virgin daughters of the king were clothed in earlier times) So his servant put her out, and bolted the door after her. But Ta'mar put ashes on her head, and tore the long robe that she was wearing; she put her hand on her head, and went away, crying aloud as she went.
Comment: Cf. Song of Songs 5:7.
Her brother Ab'salom said to her, “Has Am'non your brother been with you? Be quiet now, my sister; he is your brother; do not take this to heart.” So Ta'mar remained, a desolate woman, in her bother Ab'salom’s house. When King David heard of all these things, he became very angry, but he would not punish his son Am'non, because he loved him, for he was his firstborn. But Ab'salom spoke to Am'non neither good nor bad; for Ab'salom hated Am'non, because he had raped his sister Ta'mar.
Absalom Avenges the Violation of His Sister
After two full years Ab'salom had sheepshearers at Ba'al-ha'zor, which is near E'phraim, and Ab'salom invited all the king's sons. Ab'salom came to the king, and said, "Your servant has sheepshearers; will the king and his servants please go with your servant?" But the king said to Ab'sa-lom, "No, my son, let us not all go, or else we will be burdensome to you." He pressed him, but he would not go but gave him his blessing. Then Ab'sa-lom said, “If not, please let my brother Am'non go with us." The king said to him, "Why should he go with you?" But Ab'sa-lom pressed him until he let Am'non and all the king's sons go with him. Ab'sa-lom made a feast like a king's feast. Then Ab'sa-lom commanded his servants, "Watch when Am'non's heart is merry with wine, and when I say to you, 'Strike Am'non,' then kill him. Do not be afraid; have I not myself commanded you? Be courageous and valiant." So the servants of Ab'sa-lom did to Am'non as Ab'sa-lom had commanded. Then all the king's sons rose, and each mounted his mule and fled.
While they were on the way, the report came to David that Ab'sa-lom had killed all the king's sons, and not one of them was left. The king rose, tore his garments, and lay on the ground; and all his servants who were standing by tore their garments. But Jon'a-dab, the son of David's brother Shim'e-ah, said, "Let not my lord suppose that they have killed all the young men the king's sons; Am'non alone is dead. This has been determined by Ab'sa-lom from the day Am'non raped his sister Ta'mar. Now therefore, do not let my lord the king take it to heart, as if all the king's sons were dead; for Am'non alone is dead."
But Ab'sa-lom fled. When the young man who kept watch looked up, he saw many people coming from the Hor-o.na'im road by the side of the mountain. Jon'a-dab said to the king, "See, the king's sons have come; as your servant said, so it has come about." As soon as he had finished speaking, the king's sons arrived, and raised their voices and wept; and the king and all his servants also wept very bitterly.
But Ab'sa-lom fled, and went to Tal'mai son of Am-mi'hud, king of Ge'shur. David mourned for his son day after day. Ab'sa-lom, having fled to Ge'shur, stayed there three years. And the heart of the king went out, yearning for Ab'sa-lom; for he was now consoled over the death of Am'non.
Comment: Absalom had told Tamar not to take it to heart, and now Jonadab tells the neglectful King David the same. David had not queried Amnon’s request for Tamar, but he did query Absalom’s request for Amnon. In all this it is the girl herself who acts the most honourably.
A Note on Biblical Pharaohs
Critics have sometimes claimed that the failure of the Book of Genesis to name the ruler of Egypt at the time of Abram, Jacob and Joseph, but just to call him “Pharaoh” instead, is an indication that these texts are not historical, otherwise, they say, the king’s name would be given.
But, firstly, Professor A. S. Yahuda (The Language of the Pentateuch in its Relation to Egyptian) has shown that this was perfectly legitimate Egyptian usage, with the ruler often being referred to as just “Pharaoh” (Per-aa) in Egyptian texts. And, secondly, I have argued in a recent article:
Abram’s “Pharaoh” Biblically Named
and Archaeologically Identified
Toledoth and chiasmus, the keys to the structure of the Book of Genesis,
lead us to a real name for this Pharaoh.
that, in the case of Abram at least, whilst the Egyptian-orientated toledôt of Ishmael simply calls the man “Pharaoh”, the parallel account in the Palestine-orientated toledôt of Isaac, names him, as Abimelech of Gerar.
“These are the generations of Ishmael ...” (Genesis 25:12).
“These are the generations of Isaac ...” (Genesis 25:19).
Similarly, Dr. Metzler has shown that “Pharaoh” in I Kings can be identified by the discerning as David himself.
And another “Pharaoh” in I Kings 11:18 is also called “Shishak” in v. 40.
-->
Hatshepsut [=Abishag/Tamar] was the “Pharaoh’s daughter” of I Kings 9:24; but this Pharaoh was actually a Jew (David himself). Her (as Tamar’s) mother, Maacah, was also the daughter of a king, King Talmai of Geshur (which we learn was actually in Aram, 2 Samuel 15:8). So - presuming her grandfather, King Talmai, was a Syrian (Aram) - if Hatshesput, as Abishag/Tamar, had any Egyptian (or Nubian) blood in her at all, it could only have come from her mother, Maacah. She may perhaps have been related to pharaoh Ahmose.
Feast of Our Lady of Good Counsel
(26th April 2011)
And, here is a great article on this subject, from:
[But AMAIC would consider this Jonadab to be General Joab, and Israel influencing Egypt and not vice versa. Perhaps, also, the plot is a bit far-fetched]
A JONADAB CONNECTION IN THE ABSALOM CONSPIRACY? Andrew E. Hill*
This is the html version of the file http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/30/30-4/30-4-pp387-390-JETS.pdf.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
JETS 30/4 (December 1987) 387 -390
’ A J ONADAB CONNECTION IN THE ABSALOM CONSPIRACY?
Andrew E. Hill*
Jonadab the son of David’s brother Shimeah (Shammah, 1 Sam 16:9; 17:13)
appears in the OT record only in chap. 13 of the Succession Narrative, that
much-praised piece of ancient Israelite historiography documenting Solomon’s
installation on the Davidic throne.‘ His role in the Amnon-Tamar-Absalom
triangle has long puzzled Biblical commentators, and that for two reasons: (1)
because of the ill-fated advice he gave to the crown prince Anmon (2 Sam 13:3-
5), and (2) on account of his uncanny foreknowledge of the events surrounding
Absalom’s vengeful murder of Amnon (13:32-35). This note seeks to elucidate
Jonadab’s role in the narrative by affording an explanation for his advice to
Amnon and subsequent behavior in the royal court on the basis of all known
pertinent data, Biblical or otherwise.
Jonadab is an acknowledged “friend” (réa') of Amnon (1323). While it is
possible that he was a close personal friend of Amnon since he was a cousin, it
seems more likely that the word here connotes a special office or association
with the royal family (especially in light of his role as a counselor in David’s
cabinet; cf. 13:32-35). During Solomon’s reign, Zabud son of Nathan has the
title of priest and “king’s friend” (ré’eh hammelek, 1 Kgs 4:5). It may well be
that with J onadab (and others?) this cabinet post has its rudimentary begin-
nings in the Davidic monarchy.
Even more significant, J onadab is called a “wise” man (hdkdm, 2 Sam 13:3).
The majority of translators take this to mean “crafty” or “shrewd” due to the
criminal nature of his advice to Amnon.” Yet S. R. Driver noted that “subtil”
*Andrew Hill is assistant professor of Old Testament at Wheaten College in Illinois.
‘Traditionally Biblical scholars delineate 2 Samuel 9-20; 1 Kings 1-2 as the specific contents of
the Succession Narrative and universally date its composition to the tenth century B.C. during the
early years of Solomon's reign; cf. e.g. D. M. Gunn, The Story of King David: Genre and Interpretation
(J SOT Sup 6; Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1978) 13-16; R. N. Whybray, The Succession Narrative
(SBT; Naperville: Allenson, 1969) 11-47. While acknowledging the outstanding literary artistry of
the narrative noted by Gunn, Story 17-84, and W. Brueggemann, “Life and Death in Tenth Century
Israel,” JAAR 40 (1972) 96-109, I reject in part the extreme conclusions of Whybray, Succession 45-
55, as to the ahistorical nature of the document. Granted the political and apologetic character of the
narrative, this need not negate the factuality of the recorded history (even so Whybray, Succession
18-19). Here I agree with S. R. Driver, Introduction to the Old Testament (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark,
1909) 182, and Sellin-Fuhrer, Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968) 222, who
affirm the Succession Narrative as an historical document within the limits set by the author’s own
interests.
2E.g. H. W. Hertzberg, I and II Samuel (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964) 323; J. M. Ward,
“Jonsdab,” IDB, 2. 964; H. P. Muller, “hdkdm,” TDOT 4 (1980) 364-385; JB; NEE; RSV.
387
388 JOURNAL or THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
“is scarcely a fair paraphrase: the text says that Jonadab was wise.” He con-
cludes that had the writer intended to convey a meaning of “shrewd” or “crafty”
he would have used 'dr6m or another such word (cf. Gen 3:1). H. P. Smith
remarked that “Jonadab his cousin and intimate friend was a very wise man,
though in this case his wisdom was put to base uses.”‘ Most recently K. P.
McCarter interprets Jonadab to be “very wise,” while acknowledging that our
English connotation of “wise” may be a misleading translation.“ I concur with
Driver and the others cited on the understanding of Jonadab as a very wise
man. In addition, I posit that the ploy suggested by Jonadab to Amnon for the
seduction of Tamar was known to him by virtue of his standing in the royal
court as a sage.
According to H. P. Miiller, “after the beginning of the monarchy, it is com-
monly understood that the root hkm refers above all to the academic wisdom
of the court and the ideals of the class entrusted with it."° Furthermore, recent
study has shown considerable Egyptian influence on a wide range of OT literary
types, most notably Hebrew wisdom.’ In recognition of this fact, R. N. Whybray
states that
we cannot dismiss the considered opinion of S. Morenz, who claims that the pres-
ence at Solomon's court of bilingual officials with a competent knowledge of Egyp-
tian writing must be regarded, in view of what we now know of that court and
its diplomatic relations with Egypt, as absolutely beyond question; and what is
true of Solomon’s court may reasonably be supposed to be true of David's also.“
Given this Egyptian influence in the Israelite united monarchy and the knowl-
edge of and access to Egyptian literature, my contention is that Jonadab was
not only skilled in the academic wisdom of the royal court but also had some
familiarity with Egyptian literature.
The particular issue in question is Jonadab’s counsel to Amnon to feign
illness (probably not too difficult since he was already “haggard”) and then
make an innocent request of King David who would no doubt come and inquire
about the crown prince’s health (2 Sam l3:4—-5). This same motif occurs in the
Egyptian love poetry of the New Kingdom (c. 1570-1085 B.C.).’ One song is
“Driver, Introduction 229 (italics his).
‘H. P. Smith, The Books of Samuel (ICC; Edinburgh; T. and T. Clark, 1899) 328 (italics his).
5K. P. McCarter, II Samuel (AB 9; New York: Doubleday, 1984) 321.
“Miller, TDOT 4 (1980) 373.
7Cf. McCarter, II Samuel 320-321; W. McKane, Proverbs: A New Approach (OTL; Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1970) 51-150; R. E. Murphy, “Hebrew Wisdom,” JAOS 101 (1981) 25-26; Wisdom in
Israel and the Ancient Near East (V'I‘Sup 3; ed. M. Noth and D. W. Thomas; 1960); R. Weill, “Les
transmissions littéraires d’Egypte a Israel," REg 1 (1950) 43-61; Whybray, Succession 96-116; R. J .
Williams, “The Sages of Ancient Egypt in the Light of Recent Scholarship,” JAOS 101 (1981) 1-20.
9Whybray, Succession 97.
“For a catalog of the parallels between Egyptian and Israelite love poetry and commentary on the
interrelationships of the two see M. Pope, Song of Songs (AB 7C; New York: Doubleday, 197 7) 54-
84; J . B. White, A Study of the Language of Love in the Song of Songs and Ancient Egyptian Poetry
(SBLDS 38; Missoula: Scholars, 1978). Cf. McCarter, II Samuel 320-322, on the “lovesickness” motif
of a man for his “sister” (i.e. lover) in Egyptian love poetry.
A JONADAB CONNECTION IN THE ABSALOM CONSPIRACY?
translated as follows by W. K. Simpson:
Now I’ll lie down inside
and act as if I’m sick.
My neighbors will come in to visit,
and with them my girl.
She’ll put the doctors out,
for she’s the one to know my hurt."
Here the scenario is slightly difl'erent and the cast of characters has changed.
The basic story line remains the same, however. The man in love pretends to
be stricken with a malady. Naturally, visitors concerned about his well-being
will arrive, and out of all this the young man will eventually end up alone with
his lover so that she can attend to his “needs.” In the case of Amnon there is
no reciprocation on the part of Tamar, and he must coerce her to have sexual
relations with him (13:11-15). While Amnon achieved a degree of immediate
gratification in this release of pent-up lust for Tamar, the more long-term ram-
ifications of the misdeed are entirely predictable.“
Unlike those who view this counsel of Jonadab to Amnon as bad advice
because it concerned itself only with methods and failed to calculate the con-
sequences, I am convinced that Jonadab knew full well the ultimate outcome
of his counsel.“ The illness ploy, borrowed from Egyptian love poetry, was
maliciously designed to exploit Amnon’s domination by sensuality (a trait he
shared with his father David). More than this, I am inclined to see Jonadab as
a co-conspirator with Absalom in the whole affair, since both men have much
to gain.
Absalom’s desires for revenge against Amnon and ultimately his designs
for usurping his father’s throne are clearly seen in the narrative (cf. 13:21-23,
32; 1521-6). Amnon, as crown prince, stands in the way as a rival to the am-
bitions of Absalom. Absalom and J onadab collaborate to remove this obstacle
to kingship by taking advantage of a basic weakness in Amnon’s character.
The calculated plotting of Absalom and Jonadab is evidenced by the pointed
questioning of Tamar by Absalom after her rape and his almost callous treat-
ment of a sister brutishly violated and now bereft of a meaningful future (al-
most as if he expected it, at least according to the tone of the statements in the
narrative; cf. 13:20-22). While a most reprehensible allegation, it seems Tamar
may have been an unwitting pawn of a devious schemer, an expendable token
in the power play for the throne.
Further testimony to the Absalom-Jonadab conspiracy is found in the time-
table exposed in the narrative. Absalom coolly bides his time for two years
before ostensibly avenging Tamar’s rape (13:23), and only after a three-year
self-imposed exile in Geshur (the homeland of his mother Maacah, 3:3) does he
return to Jerusalem to make preparations for his own kingship by undermining
popular allegiance to David (13:39; 15:1~6). Certainly this belies a carefully
"The Literature of Ancient Egypt (2d ed.; ed. W. K. Simpson; New Haven: Yale University, 1973) 300.
"Hertzberg, II Samuel 323—324.
"Cf. Whybray, Succession 59.
390 JOURNAL or ms EVANGELICAL THIEOLOGICAL socmry
constructed strategy for seizing control of the monarchy and bespeaks a man
of considerable foresight, determination and ability.
One last proof adduced for a J onadab connection in the Absalom conspiracy
is J onadab’s own response to the rumor supposing the assassination of all the
king’s sons (13:30). In countering the false report Jonadab betrayed his com-
plete knowledge of the ambush in Baal Hazor (including the participants in
the crime, since he confirmed that “they {the servants of Absalom] killed” only
Amnon; cf. 13:29, 30-32) before any official or eyewitness news reached Jeru-
salem. In addition he informed the royal court that Absalom had been plotting
his revenge for two years (13:32-33). The only possible explanation for J o-'
nadab’s detailed foreknowledge of the bloodletting at Baal Hazor is his involve-
ment in the scheme from its inception.
For his part, Jonadab was no doubt wise enough to discern that Absalom
was a more likely and more capable candidate as David’s successor. By aiding
Absalom in the conspiracy to slay the crown prince, Jonadab was attempting
to secure his political future.“ With Absalom on the throne perhaps he antici-
pated appointment to the cabinet position of king’s friend or even chief coun-
selor to the king--although the latter apparently was never realized, since
Ahithophel moved into that slot when Hushai fled Jerusalem with David
(15:12; cf. 15:31-34). In fact, while the motive of advancement in political rank
logically explains the behavior of Jonadab, we can only speculate as to the
particulars since he exits the narrative after this episode, never to reappear. It
is possible that Jonadab died during Absalom’s three-year hiatus in Geshur,
or upon his return he either forgot Jonadab or he fell out of favor with the new
crown prince. Despite the almost annoying paucity of material for careful anal-
ysis, Jonadab’s character remains an interesting study among the parade of
personalities vying for power and position in David’s court, and ultimately his
role in the Succession Narrative is best understood as that of co-conspirator in
the Absalom coup.
“Note that this theme is not uncommon in the narrative, since Absalom (2 Sam 16:1--18:18), Joab
(20:4-13), Adonijah (1 Kgs 1:5--2225) and Solomon (1:11-40) all maneuver behind the scenes to
enhance their political prospects.
