On the other hand, the following considerations clearly make for the unity ol the two narratives : —
II 9'"', the meeting of Joram son of .Ahab with Jehu actually upon the estate of NalKith is a touch of high ilranmtic power which demands that the writer shouM not merely have known the story of Naboth (proved by vv."*- ■*), but should actually have written it down himself as an introduction to the sequel II 9f. Hence a presumption is created in favour of our Naboth carrative being the story thus written.
The imrillels between the prediction I 21'*-'* and the fuihlinont II !»»•»■•• cannot l>e insisted upon, because I 21"" has lieen largelvamplilied by It" (phrn-ifs, Nos. ,12, :t9, VA, 44, .Vi, U7-71), anci It is not now possible certainly to determine the
orifrinnl kernel of Elijah's prediction. It should, however, be noticed that the usual method of K" is to e.\iiand rather than to i.'xcise, and, if this plan has here prevailed, the original speech must be contained in vv.'••*'•'■*^ The disagreement in points of fact between I 21 and II 9 proves upon examination to be non-existent. Ahab's dispute with Naboth arose in the lirst instance about a viney.ird adjoining the palace ; but this was onlj- a portion of Naboth's estate ("S^n), the whole of which would lapse to the king, supposing that the family of Naboth became extinct. And I 21", where Jezebel tells Ahab to go down and taku possession of the vineyard, clearly implies the extirjiation of the whole family ; in the statement ' for Naboth is not alive, but dead,' the name Nalioth means Naboth and his sons, just as much as in V." ' thy blood, even thine,' means the blood of .\hab ami his son.
More decisive, however, is the question of the supposed unity of II 9'-l(F with I 20. 22, II S'-'' 6''-7-''. If this be granted, the diverse authorship of I 21 and II 9f. seems necessarily to follow, since I 21 can scarcely be regarded as of one piece with I 20. 22. The place where the dogs lick the blood of Ahab, 22^*, is discordant with 21", and in general the interest of the writer of 20. 22 — mainly, if not wholly, political^and his sympathetic feel- ing for the king of Israel, preclude the suppositiou that he is also the author of the Naboth story.
Wellhausen cites the following coincidences in phraseology of 11 9 f . with I 20. 22, etc.: — t-3 "nn •a chaniber within a chamber,' II 9-, I 20*' 22=*'; .n;.T ' tarry,' II 9^ 7' ; csci 3:i ' horseman,' 9" 7''' ; * vi; iisn ' turn the hands,' II 9^. I 22" ; t s?;.". ' take alive,' II 10'* 7'=, I 20'« ; and the root Kin II 10-'' 6-*. The importance of this collection is, however, open to doubt, since it contains no striking phrase, but only such as might be expected to occur in narratives nearly contemporaneous, and having, in the main, the same subjects in common.
On the other hand, a point of pliriuseology, apparently hitherto overlooked, sharjily separat«s between II 9 f. and I 20. 22, etc., and seems absolutely to preclude the tlieorj' of a common authorship. 'This is the title which is ordinarily apiilied to the king in the course of the narrative.
I 20. 22, II 3*-" 6'-7*' are bound together ty the u.se of a common title. In all, the wrilei ;< plirase is ' king of Israel,' and the projier name of the king, if it occurs at all, is in nearly every case reserved for the necessary- spcciCcation at the com- mencement of a section.
II 9, on the other hand, agrees with I 21 in ex- hibiting e. .egular preference for the proper nama simply, without further title.
The facta ore oa follow : —
1 20. Ahab king of Iiratl, tv.» U ; king of ItnuL 11 time*, vir. vv.t ■>■ 11- »i. a. 99. n. a A u. « ; (A< king, vt.» K>M» ; Ahidt •imply. T,i».
I i-J. Kinn of liraei 17 times, rit vv.l. «.*.ii.t.«.». 10. is. «. a. Kbit n.iiaa.u- tht tinn, vv.i""^ i«.>9.i7b.
II S'f. Einfi qf /«ra«/"s tiiiuii, viiL \t.4.».».10 11. ixijf.u; Ahab •imiity, t.» (protMbly from another source) ; (A* king Joram, r.e.
II aa-7». King q/ ttrael 7 time*, rit (^ » 1* ". IX n. ■ ; 1A« kina 10 limei. vii. (P<. » 7» «. 11 14. 15. nn* 1».
II 0. Juram or Jehoram simplv 0 timed, viz. \•v.l*^i*. 1« K^ 17. tl. 'J:^ u 94 ; oiioo Jfhuram Ou ting, v.i* ; and one© JtMoraim king of lsra*l in direct distinction fro'm ' Ahazioli kinj; of Jutlfvh,' T.91 ; never king o/ Itrafl limply. Tlio double occurrence of Joram In v.ie is Rpeci&lly to be notice<I. itnce, on account of the pmxiniKv of ' AhAiioh king of Jud&b,' tiie specification king qf itra^i niicht have tieen expected.
.snnilarly, in I 21 Altl^ aimplT is \isiial ; » timet (omitting the
Sn.plie.-y TT.91 J«\ vli. VV.9. 1 ). MS Id 9tLn.99. 2hab king of a^nixria, v.l ; Ah(^ king of ltra*l, v. IS.
Now though this agreement in form of reference cannot be pressed to prove identity o( authirship
* In 7>4 MT Tooaliie* o-;io 3:-;, but LSI rwidera B Ui^rM, Luc its^rai, (.». 3:''(cr •3:'!) for ;:";.