Abishag-Tamar-Shunammite

by Damien F. Mackey ‘O FAIREST AMONG WOMEN’. Song of Songs 1:8 She is a Shunammite (not a “Shulammite”. e.g., ‘belonging to Solomon’), simply because she, Abishag, came from the town of Shunem (in northern Israel). Shumen is the town where the prophet Elisha will be hospitably accommodated by a ‘Great Woman’, whose son Elisha would revive after the son had died (2 Kings 4:8-37). A tradition has it that this rich woman of Shunem was a sister of Abishag. But at least a century separates them. Despite Abishag’s living in Shunem, her name may not be Hebrew. According to John L. Mackenzie (The Dictionary Of The Bible, p. 4): “Abishag … [the] meaning [is] uncertain”. Now, at this same period of time - in King David’s old age (but he was then closer to 60 than to 70) - there was a girl the description of whom was similar to that of Abishag, one who, though, had a Hebrew name, “Tamar” (תָּמָר: meaning “date palm”, or “palm tree”). We learn about Tamar in 2 Samuel 13 (whereas we had encountered Abishag in I Kings). Tamar was, just like Abishag, “a virgin”, “beautiful”, and living “at the palace”. Thus 2 Samuel 13:1-2, 7: “… Tamar … beautiful … a virgin … Tamar at the palace”. Conclusion 1: Abishag, of uncertain name, is the same girl as Tamar (her given Hebrew name). Two different names, two different authors! Therefore, expect the possibility of this girl’s origins being at least partly non-Israelite. 2 Samuel 13:1 apprises us of the further detail that young Tamar was prince Absalom’s sister: “… Tamar, the beautiful sister of Absalom son of David”. Now prince Absalom was, for his part, descended from kings both paternally and maternally. For, while King David of Israel was his father, he was born of David’s wife, Maakah (Maacah), who was the daughter of a (Canaanite?) king (I Chronicles 3:3): “[David’s] third [son], Absalom the son of Maakah daughter of Talmai [var. Tolmai] king of Geshur …”. However, when Hebrew uses relational words like “son”, ben (בֶּן), and “daughter”, bat (בַּת) - which we generally take in a literal sense - it may be that, in some cases at least, there is intended a less obvious meaning (e.g., in the first case, it could mean “grandson”, “official”). {Sir Alan Gardiner will lament, in Egypt of the Pharaohs (1960), the difficulty Egyptologists experience in trying to determine whether “son” literally means that, or something broader}. So, while we would immediately think to connect Tamar to Absalom as his blood sister, according to what we read in 2 Samuel 13:1, it may turn out to be not quite so simple as that. Some Jewish legends, in fact, will outright claim that Tamar was not Absalom’s sister – e.g., she may have been a foreign captive girl adopted into the family. Moses Maimonides, for his part (in Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim), will write: “… Tamar was Absalom’s sister only from his mother [but she was not related to David or his son Amnon] …”. Or perhaps her mother, Maakah, was a concubine (Song of Songs 6:7-9): Your cheeks are like halves of a pomegranate behind your veil. There are sixty queens and eighty concubines, and maidens without number. My dove, my perfect one, is only one, the darling of her mother, flawless to her that bore her. (Song 6:7-9 RSV) Now, similarly as the girl was ‘sister’ to prince Absalom, so, too, was she ‘sister’ to Solomon (Song of Songs 4:9): ‘You have stolen my heart, my sister, my bride’ (cf. Song of Songs 4:12). The common denominator in biblical descriptions of the girl, now as Abishag, now as Tamar, now as “the Shunammite”, is her incomparable beauty. When King David’s attendants “searched throughout Israel for a beautiful young woman and found Abishag”, it should not be expected that they had bothered to check out every single girl in the land of Israel, but probably only the noble (princess) ones. Likely the chosen girl was then living with her mother, Maakah, and with Absalom, in their family house (or palace) at Shunem. Her epithet would become from now on (Song of Songs 1:8): ‘O FAIREST AMONG WOMEN’. Now, this is similar in meaning to the Egyptian, HATSHEPSUT (“Foremost of Noble Women”), whose throne name in Egypt would be, in turn, very like the name, Maakah (Maa[t]-ka-[re]), without the inclusion of the pagan theophoric, re (the sun god, Ra): thus Maakah = Maa[t]ka-. Were these two women, Abishag and her ‘mother’, Maakah, ethnically Egyptians? And was the name of “uncertain” meaning, “Abishag”, a Hebraïsed attempt at “Ha[tshe]psut? (Gardiner calls her “Ḥashepsowe”)? Or, perhaps it was a combination of the Hebrew words, yapheh-ishshah (“beautiful” - “woman”)? Abishag = Yaph-isha? King David had determined, following Divine prompting (I Chronicles 28:6), for his son, Solomon, to succeed him afterwards on the throne of Jerusalem. This despite the fact that Solomon was by no means David’s oldest son. Before Solomon there were born at Hebron, for instance, those first six sons of David (each one by a different wife) (3:1-3): Amnon; Daniel; Absalom; Adonijah; Shephatiah and Ithream. Three of these first four, as well as Solomon himself, will be involved with the Shunammite, one way or the other. And two of these will die because of her. Abishag will even emerge, as consort of King David, as the veritable key to the kingdom (I Kings 2:22). The young Solomon was, for his part, madly in love with the Shunammite. No doubt, King David had promised her to Solomon along with the throne. The idyllic love between young prince Solomon and the Shunammite is reflected in the Song of Songs. But there is also much tension there, the pair having to endure a wait, opposition from hot-headed “brothers” (Song of Songs 1:6): “My mother’s sons [brothers] were angry with me …”. Then, into this halçyon pastoral scene of sun, vineyards, flocks, goats, shepherds, lillies, valleys and fruit trees - a veritable Garden of Eden - there will emerge a bitter and cunning “adviser”. Like the serpent of old. This dark character will bring down Amnon. And he will leave the Shunammite “desolate”. He will foment Absalom’s rebellion, forcing King David to leave his city of Jerusalem in tears. And he will finally, like Judas, commit suicide. He was Jonadab-Achitophel. Conclusion 2: Abishag, of uncertain name, the same as Tamar (her given Hebrew name), hailing from Shunem, was hence “the Shunammite” of King Solomon’s Song of Songs. Ethnically, she may have been Egypto-Canaanite, which thought will lead to the consideration (to be discussed later) that she was also Velikovsky’s Hatshepsut = “Queen of Sheba”. The virgin’s foreign-ness may perhaps be adduced further from what she will say in shocked reaction to Amnon’s attempt to seduce her based on advice from Jonadab. Here is the account of it, with King David now also making an appearance in the drama (2 Samuel 13:6-11): So Amnon lay down and pretended to be ill. When the king came to see him, Amnon said to him, ‘I would like my sister Tamar to come and make some special bread in my sight, so I may eat from her hand’. David sent word to Tamar at the palace: ‘Go to the house of your brother Amnon and prepare some food for him’. So Tamar went to the house of her brother Amnon, who was lying down. She took some dough, kneaded it, made the bread in his sight and baked it. Then she took the pan and served him the bread, but he refused to eat. ‘Send everyone out of here’, Amnon said. So everyone left him. Then Amnon said to Tamar, ‘Bring the food here into my bedroom so I may eat from your hand’. And Tamar took the bread she had prepared and brought it to her brother Amnon in his bedroom. But when she took it to him to eat, he grabbed her and said, ‘Come to bed with me, my sister’. Equally blunt would be Potiphar’s wife in her attempt to seduce the honourable Joseph (Genesis 39:7): ‘Come to bed with me!’ Tamar responds pleadingly to Amnon (2 Samuel 13:12-14): “‘No, my brother!’ she said to him. ‘Don’t force me! Such a thing should not be done in Israel! Don’t do this wicked thing. What about me? Where could I get rid of my disgrace? And what about you? You would be like one of the wicked fools in Israel. Please speak to the king; he will not keep me from being married to you’. But he refused to listen to her, and since he was stronger than she, he raped her”. No longer is she (Song of Songs 4:12): “A garden enclosed … a fountain sealed”? Regarding Absalom’s outstanding physical demeanour, we read of it in 2 Samuel 14:25-26: In all Israel there was not a man so highly praised for his handsome appearance as Absalom. From the top of his head to the sole of his foot there was no blemish in him. Whenever he cut the hair of his head—he used to cut his hair once a year because it became too heavy for him—he would weigh it, and its weight was two hundred shekels by the royal standard. Some commentators will suggest that Absalom may have been, with all that hair, a Nazirite. But, as with Samson the Nazirite (Judges 13:7), Absalom’s hair will be his undoing. This particular era was one of obelisk (pillar) building (e.g., the Eighteenth Dynasty pharaohs). Correspondingly, we read (2 Samuel 18:18): “Prior to this Absalom had set up a pillar and dedicated it to himself in the King’s Valley, reasoning ‘I have no son who will carry on my name’. He named [it] after himself, and to this day it is known as Absalom's Memorial”. The contemporary pharaohs, too, had their “King’s Valley” (or “Valley of the Kings”). The reaction of King David and his two sons, Amnon and Absalom, to the rape of Tamar, is instructive. “When King David heard all this, he was furious” (2 Samuel 13:21). Still, he does nothing. “Then Amnon hated [Tamar] with intense hatred. In fact, he hated her more than he had loved her. Amnon said to her, ‘Get up and get out!’” (v. 15). “Her brother Absalom said to her, ‘Has that Amnon, your brother, been with you? Be quiet for now, my sister; he is your brother. Don’t take this thing to heart’. …. And Absalom never said a word to Amnon, either good or bad; he hated Amnon because he had disgraced his sister Tamar’.” (vv. 20, 22) In part, these most unsympathetic reactions towards the female victim might be accounted for according to the ethics of the day, due to her possibly lowly status (e.g., as a foreigner or a commoner). One has only to consider the off-handed response by Jesus Christ himself, initially - and of his disciples - to the pleas of the Canaanite woman (Matthew 15:23, 24, 26, 28): Jesus did not answer her a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, ‘Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us’. Then: ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel’. Then: ‘It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs’. But finally: ‘Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted’. And her daughter was healed at that moment’. Tamar fully anticipated what would be the result of Amnon’s assault, both for her and for him: ‘What about me? Where could I get rid of my disgrace? And what about you? You would be like one of the wicked fools in Israel’. And so, when he ordered her to: ‘Get up and get out!’, she answered emphatically: ‘No!’ (2 Samuel 13:16-19): ‘No!’ she said to him. ‘Sending me away would be a greater wrong than what you have already done to me’. But he refused to listen to her. He called his personal servant and said, ‘Get this woman out of my sight and bolt the door after her’. So his servant put her out and bolted the door after her. She was wearing an ornate robe, for this was the kind of garment the virgin daughters of the king wore. Tamar put ashes on her head and tore the ornate robe she was wearing. She put her hands on her head and went away, weeping aloud as she went. Cf. Song of Songs 5:7: ‘The watchmen found me as they made their rounds in the city. They beat me, they bruised me; they took away my cloak, those watchmen of the walls!’ There was apparently no question of Tamar, now a damaged woman, returning to the palace of King David. He would be “furious” when he heard about the incident, but “furious” at whom? Heir Amnon would continue on for another “two years”. And so would his brother, Absalom. Their éminence grise adviser, Jonadab-Achitophel, would insinuate himself into being the power behind the throne. Tamar’s only place to go would be back to Shunem, to her adoring mother, but also to the calculating Absalom (2 Samuel 13:20): “And Tamar lived in her brother Absalom’s house, a desolate woman”. Whilst scholarly critiques, such as Bimson’s and Clarke’s, are to be encouraged, these two have succeeded in creating a vacuum - no appropriate “Queen”. SIS editor in 1997, Alasdair Beal, commenting on the effect that Bimson’s 1986 critique had had on readers, wrote: Probably few articles caused more disappointment in SIS circles than John Bimson’s 1986 ‘Hatshepsut and the Queen of Sheba’, which presented strong evidence and argument against Velikovsky’s proposal that the … queen who visited King Solomon was none other than the famous Egyptian female pharaoh. This removed one of the key identifications in Velikovsky’s Ages in Chaos historical reconstruction and was a key factor in the rejection of his proposed chronology by Bimson and others in favour of the more moderate ‘New Chronology’. It also took away what had seemed a romantic and satisfactory solution to the mystery of the identity and origins of Solomon’s visitor, leaving her once more as an historical enigma. …. So, can “Sheba” yet be identified with any part of Egypt and/or Ethiopia, where Josephus said that the biblical woman had ruled as queen? No - Egypt/Ethiopia will be figuring only at a later stage in our story. We can actually give a definitive answer to the question of the location of “Sheba”, based on the highest authority: JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF. In what might initially seem like a very vague statement (Luke 11:31): ‘The Queen of the South … came from the ends of the earth …’, Jesus is here providing the most precise co-ordinates. This text offers us an excellent example of why the Bible needs to be read in its proper context, and not superficially, in a literal Western manner. Creationists are wont to read phrases like “the earth” (Greek tes ges, της γης) in a global sense. Though Patrick Clarke, himself a Creationist, will limit his horizons geographically, in this case, by suggesting that the biblical queen may have been from Yemen. (Logically, should he have located “Sheba” somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere?). However, for the Israelite audience which Jesus was addressing, “the earth” was “the land”, the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel). Now, the “ends” (or borders) of the land of Israel were Dan (North) and Beersheba (South). For example I Samuel 3:20: “And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba recognized that Samuel was attested as a prophet of the LORD”. The “end” to which Jesus is referring, “the South”, is obviously, then, Beersheba. “The south” is a common biblical term for the Negev (desert). So, we are here being unerringly directed by Jesus to the chief town, Beersheba, that stands at the southern border of Israel, in the Negev – and known as “the Capital of the Negev”. The Old Testament fully supports this geography, giving the name of the Queen’s realm as “Sheba”, which is just another name for Beersheba (Joshua 19:2): “… Beersheba (or Sheba) …”. And, given the ancient city’s strategic location of intersecting trade routes, we ought not be surprised to read that the Queen of (Beer)sheba travelled to Jerusalem with so richly-laden a camel train as she did (I Kings 10:2, 10), and that: “Never again were so many spices brought in as those the Queen of Sheba gave to King Solomon”. But that is still a bit in the future. Why were her ‘brothers … angry with’ the Shunammite? (Song of Songs 1:6) Because, as she continues: ‘… my own vineyard I had to neglect’. Professor Claude Mariottini concurs with others that this is a reference to her virginity, though he wrongly adds “that she gave herself sexually” to her lover: “The reason for the punishment her brothers inflicted on her was because she did not keep her own vineyard … probably a reference to her virginity, that is, that she gave herself sexually to her shepherd lover and as a result her brothers punished her for her indiscretion”. https://claudemariottini.com/2022/08/22/the-shulammite-black-and-beautiful-or-black-but-beautiful/ We know, though, that she was entirely guiltless in this affair - she having firstly obeyed the order of King David to attend the ailing Amnon, and then having been taken against her will by Amnon. Solomon, too, in fact, “lovesick” as Amnon had been, will plead for the Shunammite’s attention (Song of Songs 2:5): ‘Sustain me with raisin cakes, refresh me with apples, because I am lovesick’. When the Shunammite was at home, a veritable prisoner of Absalom and her other brothers, young Solomon was constrained to creep around the place surreptitiously, “behind the wall”, “gazing”, “peering through the lattice” (Song of Songs 2:8-9): ‘Listen! My beloved! Look! Here he comes, leaping across the mountains, bounding over the hills. My beloved is like a gazelle or a young stag. Look! There he stands behind our wall, gazing through the windows, peering through the lattice’.