Shemini Atzeret: Redacting a Missing Festival into Solomon’s Temple Dedication

Adapted from a seminar paper by the author entitled “The Duration and Calendar Dates of Solomon’s Dedication: 1 Kings 8:65–66” (2019), presented to Dr. Raanan Eichler, Bar-Ilan University Bible Department.

Jacob Milgrom gives three interpretations for the word עצרת: “hold back (from doing work),” “closing celebration,” and “solemn assembly.” He prefers the last, understanding the term ʿatzeret, when used to described a holiday, to refer to a day of solemn prayer—for rain, in the case of Sukkot, and for the harvest, in the case of Passover (Deut 16:8). See Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, AB 3 (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 2029-2031. Cf. HALOT, which defines עצרת as “celebration, festive assembly.”

Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are also missing in this calendar, and from Exodus 23 and 34 as well. Deuteronomy 16 does mention an ʿatzeret in verse 8, but it is a reference to the seventh day of the Matzot festival:

^{דברים טז:ח} שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תֹּאכַל מַצּוֹת וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי עֲצֶרֶת לַי־הֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה מְלָאכָה:

^{Deut 16:8} After eating unleavened bread six days, you shall hold a solemn gathering for YHWH your God on the seventh day: you shall do no work.

Whether D existed before P or the reverse is a matter of scholarly debate.

Two additional Canaanite months are mentioned in 1 Kings 6: בּוּל (= Cheshvan, v. 38) and זִו (= Iyar, vv. 1, 37). The other month mentioned in the Bible that takes its name from the Canaanite calendar is אָבִיב (= Nisan; see Exod 13:4, 23:15, 34:18; Deut 16:1).

The Vilna text reads יָמִים אֲחֵרִים, “other days.” Ostensibly this refers to Shemini Atzeret (day 22) and the day after (day 23). Some commentaries suggest that this is a scribal error and that it should read יום אחד, “one day.” See Albeck’s discussion in his commentary ad loc.

See Radak and Ralbag on 1 Kgs 8:65. Cf. Malbim (v. 66), who writes that the people were released from being together with the king (פטרם מלהיות עמו ביחד) on the 22nd but were not given permission to leave until the 23rd. The academic scholar Jacob Milgrom defends the midrashic reading here, noting that it is at least possible that even according to Kings, the people were formally dismissed on the 22nd but nonetheless remained to observe it as a holiday and offer prayers for rain. See Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27, AB 3B (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 2031.

See discussion in David Glatt-Gilad, “Deuteronomy: The First Torah,” TheTorah (2015).

Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 152–153.

See Edward L. Curtis and Albert A. Madsen, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles, ICC (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910), 348; James A. Montgomery and Henry S. Gehman, The Books of Kings, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1951), 201; John Gray, I & II Kings: A Commentary, OTL (London: SCM Press, 1970), 232; Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, 594; Mordechai Cogan, I Kings, AB 10 (New York: Doubleday, 2000), Ch. 11, Notes. Cf. Volkmar Fritz, who suggests that whole of v. 65, connecting Sukkot to the dedication, is a later addition, since the pilgrimage to the Temple on Sukkot (Deut 16:13) only took place after centralization of the cult in the late monarchy. See Volkmar Fritz, 1 & 2 Kings: A Continental Commentary, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 102.

^8:65 καὶ ἐποίησεν Σαλωμων τὴν ἑορτὴν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ... καὶ πίνων καὶ εὐφραινόμενος ἐνώπιον κυρίου θεοῦ ἡμῶν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας. ^8:66 καὶ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ ἐξαπέστειλεν τὸν λαὸν…

Fritz (CC, p. 102) understands it as Sukkot followed by dedication, and Jonathan Goldstein, (1 Maccabees, Anchor Bible 41 [New York: Doubleday, 1976], Ch. 12, Notes) understands it as a double Sukkot combined with a dedication.

If this was the motivation, then the scribe may have been envisioning a dedication ceremony before Sukkot, in line with what Chronicles presents, though if so, the parenthetical would flatly contradict verse 2 and leave the Shemini Atzeret problem intact. See Montgomery and Gehman, The Books of Kings, 201; Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, 593-594; Martin-Jan Mulder, 1 Kings: Vol. 1, Kings 1–11, HCOT, (Leuven: Peeters, 1998), 458; Fritz, 1 & 2 Kings, 102.

The Babylonian Talmud understands it the same way; in fact, it uses the Kings text as the source for the legal principle of אין מערבין שמחה בשמחה, “not combining two separate festive occasions” (b. Moed Katan 9a).

Also see Targum on Song of Songs 3:11, which describes Solomon’s fourteen-day celebration. The Peshitta (Syriac) translation of 2 Chr 7:8–10 reads like Kings, with fourteen days of Sukkot and no mention of Shemini Atzeret. Curiously, it also reverses MT Chronicles’ order of festivities, placing the Feast before the dedication, and most surprisingly, it describes the people being dismissed “on the full moon of Tishrei,” which is the start of Sukkot. See M. P. Weitzman, The Syriac Version of the Old Testament: An Introduction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 210.

If those scholars who interpret MT Kings as also having the seven days before Sukkot are correct, the scribe who intervened here could theoretically have been the same scribe.

The Talmud uses the apparent violation of Yom Kippur to derive the legal principle: “The (dedication of the) Temple overrides Yom Kippur” (מקדש דוחה יום הכפורים). See b. Moed Katan 9a; b. Shabbat 30a. Academic scholars offer various explanations for Yom Kippur’s absence in the dedication account. Jacob Milgrom writes that Yom Kippur existed as a celebratory purgation rite in pre-exilic times and “was probably observed in its pristine nonfasting form” during Solomon’s dedication. Since ritual purification of the altar and sanctuary would have been a necessary part of the proceedings in any case, it was not necessary for Chronicles to mention it. (Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, 1071.) Another line of thinking is that Yom Kippur—at least as a major, established holiday—did not enter the calendar until after the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, later even than Shemini Atzeret. That is why we do not find the holiday written about in Chronicles, nor in fact anywhere throughout the Prophets and Writings. See e.g., J. Morgenstern, “Two Prophecies of the Fourth Century b. c. and the Evolution of Yom Kippur,” Hebrew Union College Annual 24 (1952-1953), 43; TABS Editors, “The Absence of Yom Kippur in Nevi'im and Ketuvim,” TheTorah (2013).

^{2 Chron 7:8} καὶ ἐποίησεν Σαλωμων τὴν ἑορτὴν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ ἑπτὰ ἡμέραις… ^7:9 καὶ ἐποίησεν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ὀγδόῃ ἐξόδιον ὅτι ἐγκαινισμὸν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου ἐποίησεν ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας ἑορτήν. ^7:10 καὶ ἐν τῇ τρίτῃ καὶ εἰκοστῇ τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ ἑβδόμου ἀπέστειλεν τὸν λαὸν…

If the LXX here is later than this gloss, then it is modifying the text to fit with the conception in LXX Kings, that only one week in total was celebrated.

The authors of Kings drew from earlier sources, sometimes palace or temple records such as such as The History of the Kings of Israel, The History of the Kings of Judah, and The Book of the Deeds of Solomon, See Mordechai Cogan, I Kings, Introduction, “Composition of the Book of Kings.” It is, therefore, possible that this account derives from such an ancient record. If so, this would strengthen the argument for Shemini Atzeret as a latecomer to Israel’s festival calendar.