15. Observations and Considerations on the Epilogue Formulae in the Books of Kings 1 Jürg Hutzli 15.1 Introduction: The three elements of the epilogue formulae of the Book of Kings The present article examines the final part of the regnal formulas in the Book of Kings, i.e. the epilogue formulary. Most reports of the kings of Israel and Judah end with an epilogue containing formulaic statements about the death of the king and his succession. Typically, the epilogue formula is introduced by the phrase (source reference): ‘ Now the rest of the acts of PN 1 , are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah (of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel)? ’ and consists of three elements: 1. Dynastic notice (‘PN 1 slept with his fathers’); 2. Statement of burial; 3. Statement of succession. 2 Example: 1 Kgs 22:51: Jehoshaphat MT translation תיוָ בֹ א ט מעם־ א֙ פָ שָ הֽ יְ הכבַ שְ הו מי1. And Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers מביוִ אָ מוד֣ דָ מעיר֖ בְ תיוָ בֹ א ר מעם־ א֙ בֵ קָ הו מי2. and he was buried with his fathers in the city of his father David, תיו׃ סָ ֽ חְ הת נ֖ בְ רםָ ָ יהְ  הֹ מְ הו מי3. and Jehoram his son became king in his place. Sometimes one, two or all three of these elements are altered or lacking. The epilogue formulae of the Judean kings are more consistent than those of the Israelite kings; the latter often lacks a burial notice. Interestingly, the accounts of the deported (arrested) kings (Hoshea: 2 Kgs 17:6, Jehoahaz: 23:34, Zedekiah: 25:7 and Jehoiachin: 25:27–30) do not contain an epilogue at all, nor the accounts of the reigns of Ahaziah and Athaliah which mark an episode of disrup- tion in the history of the Davidic kingdom. For all these kings even the phrase ‘Now the rest of the acts of PN 1 , are they not written in the Book of the Chro- nicles of... ?’ is lacking. The absence of an epilogue in these cases is probably 1 I thank Jan Rückl for his comments in our discussion on our thematically related papers. 2 In particular the first element of the epilogue formula (the dynastic notice) and the problem of its understanding attracted much attention in scholarship. The recent monograph by Suri- ano 2010, deals systematically with all three elements.