Traces of later interpolation are not numerous. In I 18 the reference to the 400 prophets of the Asherah is probably to be regarded, with Wellhausen, as a later insertion. Notice the absence of nx before "n.^'x.'i '.^'2}, and the omission of all mention of such prophets in vv.^-'"'. The insertion seems to exhibit a late confusion of the Asherah with the goddess Ashtoreth (see Asherah).
The statement of v.'"' in the same narrative looks like a quotation of the exact words of P in Gn 35'° ; and, if this be the case, vv.^'-''*, which appear to describe the building of a new altnr, will form a later addition to the statement of v.--"'' which speaks merely of the repair (x?-;;!) of the old altar of J". It should not, however, Ije overlooked that the giving of the name of Israel to Jacob is related also in J (Gn 32-'), and that the relation- ship of 1 K 18^"" to the passage of P may be nothing more than an easy verbal coincidence. In this case vv.^'- '^ may represent a detailed description of that which is first summarily stated in v.**, much in the same way as Gn 27^"^ stands related to Gn 27=^.
In the narrative of I 20 the grounds upon which Wellhausen regards the reference to the parts played by anonymous prophets (w."- '*• *■■ ^- ^-^) as later additions are inconclusive.*
I •22'^'', which is omitted in LXX (B, Luc), is certainly an interpolation, derived from Mic 1' foi the purpose of identifying Micaiah with Micali the Morashtlte. The plural d'?v regularly denotes ' peoples,' i.e. foreign nations generally, and is seldom or never used of Israel.
Very possibly also w.*"'^- (from pv\ ' and the blood ran out,' etc.) ^ may not have formed part of the original narrative ot Ahab's last battle. In LXX (B, Luc.) v.'"'/3 precedes v.'"''* 'and he died in the evening.' V^, for which v.*"'/3 prepares the way, hinges awkwardly on to the apparent close of the narrative in v.**, and seems to be intended to satisfy the prophecy as to Ahab's death in 21'-"', though the scene of the event diflers from that of the prediction.
II 17''"- -'"^ is the commentary of R" {phrases, Nos. 3, 29, 32, 33, 36, 39, 41, 43, 44, 46, 51, 53, 55, 56, 71, 72, and cf. Driver, LOT^ p. 203) upon the short historical notice 17'"*.+ Vv.'*- *> are certainly a later insertion, subsequent to the commence-
• Kucnen (Ond. § 251') agrees with Wellhausen's verdict upoi vv.is. 14.22. 2a^ but inclines to regard vv.33-l3 as of much greatei antiquitv, and of a piece with the narrative of ch. 20.
t Possibly composite. Cf.Wincklcr, A T (/ntersuchungen.l^2i
KINGS, I. AND n.
KINGS, I. AND EL
869
ment of the Judaan exile, and due to R"'. The opening of v." ji jnp -3 ' For he rent,' etc., clearly refers immediately to the statement of v." i;¥n'! Die;! . . . ' was very angry . . . and removed them,' bnt the sequence la destroyed by the interpolation, •? v." being deprived of all point. The whole reference of the section is to the causes which brought aljout the rejection of the kingdom of Israel, no reference being elsewhere made to Jndah except in v.", where .tii.t;i 'and unto Jadah,' is probably by the same hand as w."- ".
Stade {ZATW rl. 163 f.) rcgurds 17? " u ui exilic addition, Ut«r than R^*, upon the grounds that the writer of these veraes ascribea Molecii • worship (v.i7») and Assyrian star -worship (v.^flb) to the Northern kingdom — the atiuac-a which later on were rile in the Southern kingdom under Manaaseh (II iV- 9), and alao because certain phraaefl appear to exhibit the influence of Jeremiah; cf. vM 'Turn ve from your e\-il wavf,' with Jer 18" 26» 35" acs. ' ; 'J" testified,' etc, with Jer 7»*, U'lf; v.iob ' and they follow^ vanity ,' etc., with Jer 3». The refiections em- bodied in these verses are. however, in strict accordance with R^8 plan which runs throu^'hout his work, as the number of phrases above cited as characteristic of his hand sutllciently shows, nor is it at all unnatural that the editor who worked not many years after Josiali had removed from the kin^om of Judah the foreign abuses of Manosseh's reign, should ascribe the same kind of religious abuses to the kin),'dom of Israel, side by side with the worship of J" under the form of a calf. Nor, aeain, need the phrases above mentioned imply depen- dence upon the written prophecies of Jeremiah, any more than need other phrases ufie<l by It** elsewhere (Nos. .^»(C-.'>.^) in com- mon with Jeremiah go to prove that H"* and Jeremiah were one and the same person. All that clearly emerges from the fact of such resemblances is that the two writers were menibera of one prophetic school of thought, ».«. the Deuteronomic (cf. Driver, LOT^ p. 203 at end).
The narrative of II n**-*! is certainly composite. Vv.*'-'", in speaking of the races which were settled by the Assyrian king in the cities of Samaria, say that they ' feared J',' while retain- ini; the worship of tlieir own national deities. In v.**, on the cuntrary, it is stated with great em- phasis that they ' feared not J".' Again, while yy s4ff. refer exclusively to the foreign settlers, and only mention the introduction into tlieir midst of a single priest of Israelitish nationality (v.^ inx D')-3-?), to whom was due their instruction in the worship of J" ; vv."'-*' are couched in such terms as can refer only to Isnielitcs as such, of however mixed and renegade a strain. Notice especially yy S3. 88 [|,g reference to the Deuteronomic cove- nant; V." 'J", who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.'