Why did Absalom say he had no son to keep his name in remembrance?

[ethereality]

In “David Is Persuaded to Bring Absalom Back”, 2 Samuel 14.1-27, Absalom has “three sons, and one daughter” (27). Then, in “The Defeat and Death of Absalom”, 2 Samuel 18.1-18, we read,
"2 Samuel 18.18:

Now Absalom in his lifetime had taken and set up for himself the pillar which is in the King’s Valley, for he said, “I have no son to keep my name in remembrance”; he called the pillar after his own name, and it is called Absalom’s monument to this day.

What happened to his three sons? Why doesn’t the narrative mention their death if they’ve died? Does it mean that he wanted his name “Absalom” to be remembered, and he didn’t give it to any of his sons?

 

[juliamajor]

In “David Is Persuaded to Bring Absalom Back”, 2 Samuel 14.1-27, Absalom has “three sons, and one daughter” (27). Then, in “The Defeat and Death of Absalom”, 2 Samuel 18.1-18, we read,
What happened to his three sons? Why doesn’t the narrative mention their death if they’ve died? Does it mean that he wanted his name “Absalom” to be remembered, and he didn’t give it to any of his sons?

There is no clear answer-the rabbi’s speculate that Absalom’s sons had been killed off.

 

[ethereality]

Isn’t 2 Samuel a part of 1 Samuel? Did it come to us from one unified source, or is it a compilation of various traditions?

With the Pentateuch, the New American Bible has explanations that various traditions were put together. That is, from The Introduction to the Pentateuch:

The grandeur of this historic sweep is the result of a careful and complex joining of several historic traditions, or sources. These are primarily four: the so-called Yahwist, Elohist, Priestly and Deuteronomic strands that run through the Pentateuch.

Is that the case here, too? A synthesis of different traditions?

 

[juliamajor]

Isn’t 2 Samuel a part of 1 Samuel? Did it come to us from one unified source, or is it a compilation of various traditions?

With the Pentateuch, the New American Bible has explanations that various traditions were put together. That is, from The Introduction to the Pentateuch:

Is that the case here, too? A synthesis of different traditions?

Originally the book of Samuel was 1 book. LXX divided it to make it less cumbersome. MT divided it around 13th c. AD. Scholars agree on plural sources There are 3 main theories that have been put forward.
1.Samuel is composed of two or three parallel, continuous narrative strands=which run the entire length of the book.
2. Samuel consists of many independent narratives.
3.Samuel consists of individual thematic units- the Ark cycle, the Saul cycle, David’s rise cycle, etc.
What most scholars agree on is that many hands contributed to the formation of the book., as seen by different styles of writing and narrative…Yet they have gelled into a cohesive whole.