The Hebrew Text of 2 Chronicles 11:18: Kethib and Qere

The Hebrew text of 2 Chronicles 11:18 presents a small but significant textual issue that has implications both for understanding the genealogy and for evaluating the broader manuscript tradition. The verse in question reads in the consonantal Masoretic Text (Kethib):

וַיִּקַּ֣ח ל֗וֹ רְחַבְעָם֙ לְאִשָּׁ֔ה אֶת־מָחֲלַ֕ת בֶּן־יְרִימוֹ֖ת בֶּן־דָּוִ֑יד אֲבִיחַ֖יִל בַּת־אֱלִיאָ֥ב בֶּן־יִשָֽׁי׃

The critical point concerns the phrase בֶּן־יְרִימוֹת בֶּן־דָּוִיד, where “ben” (בֶּן) appears twice, indicating “son of Jerimoth, son of David.” If read uncritically, this would mean that Mahalath, a female wife of Rehoboam, is being described as the son of Jerimoth and grandson of David. However, the Masoretes themselves recognized this incongruity and added the Qere marginal correction, changing בֶּן (son) to בַּת (daughter), thus yielding the more sensible reading: “Mahalath the daughter of Jerimoth, the son of David.”

This textual correction is supported by multiple modern translations (ASV, NASB, ESV, LEB, CSB, UASV), which reflect the Qere reading. The use of “daughter” (בַּת) is grammatically correct and harmonizes with the syntax and logic of the verse. It avoids the absurd suggestion that Rehoboam married a male descendant of David, which would contradict the genealogical norms and marriage customs recorded throughout the Hebrew Bible.

Internal Evidence: Singular Pronouns and Narrative Flow

The argument for reading the phrase as describing Mahalath as the daughter of Jerimoth and Abihail is further strengthened by the surrounding verses (2 Chronicles 11:19–20), where the narrative continues using singular feminine references, indicating a single wife. There is no textual signal or grammatical shift that would suggest a second wife is being introduced in verse 18. Rather, the entire verse and the narrative that follows center on one woman: Mahalath.

Thus, Mahalath is most naturally understood as the biological daughter of Jerimoth, who is in turn a son of David, and of Abihail, who is the daughter of Eliab, David’s eldest brother (1 Samuel 17:13). This would make Mahalath the granddaughter of David on her father’s side and the great-niece of David on her mother’s side—a union well within the accepted genealogical boundaries for Israelite royalty.

The Problem with the Kethib Reading “Ben”

The reading “ben” in the Kethib is best explained as a scribal error—a confusion stemming from the overwhelming frequency of male genealogical formulas in biblical texts. The scribes copying genealogies were far more accustomed to writing “son of” than “daughter of,” especially when copying long lists of male lineages, such as in 1 Chronicles 1–9. This kind of unconscious mechanical error—where a scribe, conditioned by habit, writes the more familiar term—fits well into known patterns of scribal behavior.

The correction to “bat” in the Qere reflects a conscious recognition by the Masoretic scribes of the absurdity in the Kethib. They preserved the original (though faulty) consonantal reading as per their tradition but added marginal notes to guide readers in proper interpretation. The presence of this Qere-Kethib pair gives strong evidence for the long-standing awareness of the corruption, and the correction itself was deemed necessary despite the conservatism of the Masoretic tradition in altering the text.

The Manuscript Tradition and Textual Transmission

That so many Masoretic manuscripts retain the erroneous “ben” in the consonantal text reveals the manuscript stemmatics behind the MT. This uniformity across manuscripts likely reflects a relatively narrow base of parent exemplars from which the later medieval manuscripts were copied. Such a limited textual lineage explains how an obvious error could be perpetuated across many copies without correction in the consonantal text, even while being noted in the margins.

This fact illustrates the vital role of marginal Qere readings in preserving the intended sense of the text when the Kethib contains clear corruptions. It also shows the conservative scribal practice of preserving even mistaken readings rather than introducing corrections into the consonantal line. However, from a textual criticism perspective, where the goal is to restore the original text, the Qere reading is preferable in this case, both on internal and external grounds.

Evaluation of the Translation History

The King James Version reflects the Kethib text literally: “Mahalath the daughter of Jerimoth the son of David, and Abihail the daughter of Eliab the son of Jesse.” This phrasing makes it ambiguous whether Abihail is Mahalath’s mother or a second wife of Rehoboam. The lack of punctuation or grammatical clues leads to multiple interpretations. However, when read in conjunction with the singular pronouns in verses 19–20, it becomes evident that only one woman is being referenced.

Most modern versions, such as the NASB, ASV, and UASV, follow the Qere reading and clarify the genealogy to show that Mahalath is the daughter of both Jerimoth and Abihail. For example, the NASB reads: “Then Rehoboam took as a wife Mahalath the daughter of Jerimoth the son of David, and of Abihail the daughter of Eliab the son of Jesse.” This reflects the correct genealogy and the syntactical relationship intended in the Hebrew.

The Soncino commentary on Chronicles accurately notes that “the conjunction is implied” and that Mahalath was the daughter of both Jerimoth and Abihail, not that Abihail was a second wife. This interpretation maintains consistency with ancient genealogical practices and avoids creating new problems.

Genealogical and Historical Considerations

Jerimoth is not a prominent figure in the biblical text, but he is listed among the sons of David in 1 Chronicles 3:1–9. However, he is not associated with any royal activity or significant historical role. His inclusion here in the genealogy is primarily for the purpose of establishing the Davidic lineage of Mahalath, and by extension, the legitimacy of Rehoboam’s marriage.

Abihail is described as the daughter of Eliab, David’s eldest brother (1 Samuel 16:6). This would make Mahalath a relative of David through both paternal and maternal lines—perhaps a means of consolidating the royal bloodline. Royal intermarriage within a family was not uncommon in the ancient Near East, including within the Davidic dynasty, where securing dynastic legitimacy often necessitated such unions.

Implications for Textual Criticism and Transmission

The case of 2 Chronicles 11:18 is an instructive example of several broader textual-critical principles:

First, it demonstrates that the more difficult reading is not automatically to be preferred. In this case, the harder reading (“ben” when “bat” is required) is plainly corrupt, and the Qere correction must be followed. The principle of lectio difficilior (“more difficult reading”) must yield to the greater principle of coherence and contextual fit.

Second, it confirms that the Qere readings can and often do preserve more accurate traditions than the Kethib. The Masoretes, though preserving the consonantal text, were careful to preserve corrections when they had strong reasons to believe a scribal error had occurred. Their marginal notes thus carry considerable weight in textual evaluation.

Third, this passage provides evidence that many medieval MT manuscripts derive from a narrow pool of exemplars. The consistency of error across the tradition is not a sign of early authenticity, but rather an indication of a bottleneck in the textual transmission history.

Conclusion: Rehoboam Did Not Marry David’s Grandson

The claim that Rehoboam married David’s grandson arises only if one reads the Kethib text uncritically and ignores the Masoretic Qere correction and contextual clues. When the evidence is weighed properly, it becomes clear that Mahalath, Rehoboam’s wife, was a woman—the daughter of Jerimoth, who was himself a son of David, and Abihail, daughter of Eliab, David’s brother. This places Mahalath within the royal family but does not violate genealogical or narrative norms. The reading “ben” is a scribal error corrected in the Qere and justifiably emended in modern critical texts and translations.

You May Also Enjoy

Comparison of Modern Bible Versions and Their Utilization of Textual Criticism

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS