The Invention of Monotheist Ethics: Exploring the Second Book of Samuel 9780761849247, 9780761849254, 0761849246

Table of contents :
Cover
Title Page
Copyright Page
Table of Contents
Act Four: David the Great
19. The Paths of Glory: The Curtain Rises
20. The Paths of Glory: Brother Against Brother
21. The Paths of Glory: The Making of a King
22. The Paths of Glory: David Triumphant
23. Reaching for Something Higher
Excursus VII: The Tent Shrine
24. To Build a House for God
25. The Course of Empire
Excursus VIII: David's War Machine
26. Interlude: Keeping Faith with Them that Sleep in the Dust
27. The Course of Empire II: The Loosing of the Blood-Dimmed Tide
Act Five: The Fall of the King
28. The Bathsheba Affair
29. Before the Bar of Justice
30. Rape and Revenge
31. The Fugitive's Return
32. The Man who Would be King
33. The Day of the Mercenaries
34. The Return of the King: Planting the Seeds
35. The Return of the King: Reaping Bitter Fruit
Epilogue: The Alternative Vision
36. The Martyrdom of the House of Saul
37. The Sweet Singer of Israel
38. The Sweet Singer of Israel: Twenty Years Later
39. David's Heroes: The Halls of Fame
40. The Ancient Sacrifice
Conclusions
Toward a New Conception of Morality
Postscript: The Death of the King
Appendix 1: Psalm 34
Appendix 2: Psalm 51
Appendix 3: Who's who in Samuel: A Listing of the Cast
Appendix 4: Timeline - Keeping Track of When it Happened
Appendix 5: Timeline - Putting Things in Perspective
Glossary of Terms and Place Names
Selected Bibliography
Index of Scriptural References
General Index
About the Author

Citation preview

THE INVENTION OF MONOTHEIST ETHICS VOLUME II

THE INVENTION OF MONOTHEIST ETHICS VOLUME II

Exploring the Second Book of Samuel

David and the Birth of an Alternative to a Man's World

Hillel I. Millgram

University Press of America,® Inc. Lanham • Boulder • New York • Toronto · Plymouth, UK

Copyright© 2010 by University Press of America,® Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard Suite 200 Lanham, Maryland 20706 UPA Acquisitions Department (301) 459-3366 Estover Road Plymouth PL6 7PY United Kingdom All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America British Library Cataloging in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Control Number: 2009936611 ISBN: 978-0-7618-4924-7 (paperback: alk. paper) eiSBN: 978-0-7618-4925-4

9 ..

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Maps Foreword and Acknowledgements

THE ROAD TO SAMUEL PROLOGUE Breakthrough: A Woman Re-evaluates a Man's World

ACTONE:THEPROPHET I. The Fall of the House of Eli 2. In the Still of the Night 3. Catastrophe Excursus 1: Israel in Canaan: How Did They Get There? 4. Odyssey: The Wanderings of the Lost Ark Excursus II: How They Lived in Those Days 5. The Road Not Taken Excursus III: The Problem of the Historian: How Did She Know?

ACT TWO: THE PROPHET AND THE KING 6. The Coming of the King: The Anointing 7. The Coming of the King: The Proving Excursus IV: In What Sort of Houses did Samuel and Saul Live? 8. The Coming of the King: The Second War of Independence 9. The Prophet Armed

ACT THREE: THE KING AND THE UPSTART I 0. The Boy from Bethlehem II. The Minefield I2. The Fugitive I3. The Wilderness Years: The Outlaw 14. The Wilderness Years: Search and Destroy Excursus V: David in the Wilderness I5. The Wilderness Years: Abigail Excursus VI: Why is there So Much Drinking Going On in the Bible? I6. The Wilderness Years: The Dramatist 17. Bitter Bread: In the Service of the Enemy I8. On a Darkling Plain

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vi

VOLUME II ACT FOUR: DAVID THE GREAT 19. The Paths of Glory: The Curtain Rises 20. The Paths of Glory: Brother Against Brother 21. The Paths of Glory: The Making of a King 22. The Paths of Glory: David Triumphant 23. Reaching for Something Higher Excursus VII: The Tent Shrine 24. To Build a House for God 25. The Course of Empire Excursus Vill: David's War Machine 26. Interlude: Keeping Faith With Them That Sleep in the Dust 27. The Course of Empire II: The Loosing of the Blood-Dimmed Tide

249 263 273 285 297 308 311 329 343 345 349

ACT FIVE: THE FALL OF THE KING 28. The Bathsheba Affair 29. Before the Bar of Justice 30. Rape and Revenge 31. The Fugitive's Return 32. The Man Who Would be King 33. The Day of the Mercenaries 34. The Return of the King: Planting the Seeds 35. The Return of the King: Reaping Bitter Fruit

365 373 383 393 401 413 429 435

EPILOGUE: THE ALTERNATIVE VISION 36. The Martyrdom of the House of Saul 37. The Sweet Singer of Israel 38. The Sweet Singer oflsrael: Twenty Years Later 39. David's Heroes: The Halls of Fame 40. The Ancient Sacrifice

449

461 477 485 491

CONCLUSIONS Toward a New Conception of Morality Postscript: The Death of the King

507 521

APPENDIX 1: Psalm 34 APPENDIX 2: Psalm 51 APPENDIX 3: Who's Who in Samuel: A Listing of the Cast APPENDIX 4: Timeline - Keeping Track of When it Happened APPENDIX 5: Timeline- Putting Things in Perspective

539 545 557 563 565

Glossary of Terms and Place Names Selected Bibliography Index of Scriptural References General Index About the Author

569 577 583 587 597

LIST OF MAPS The maps in these volumes have been designed as aids to understanding the text of Samuel. As such they have been simplified by excluding data unnecessary to elucidating the particular section of the book to which they pertain. Each section has been provided with the maps necessary to its understanding, and they should be considered an integral part of that section. P.1 The Central Highlands during the period of Hannah and Elkanah

26

4.1 The Central Highlands, the adjacent Jordan Valley and Philistia during the Age of Samuel

80

7.1 The Relief of Jabesh Gilead

108

8.1

122

Israelite and Philistine moves prior to the Battle of Michmas

8.2 The Battle of Michmas

126

8.3 The emerging Kingdom of Saul

138

9.1 The region of the Amalekite Campaign

143

10.1 David and Goliath

159

12.1 The area of David's wanderings during the Wilderness Years

185

17.1 David in Ziklag

226

18.1 The Philistines Move their Forces into the Valley of Jezreel

237

18.2 The Battle of Gilboa

237

25.1 The Arena of the Wars of Empire

328

27.1 The First Ammonite Campaign, Phase 1

352

27.2 The First Ammonite Campaign, Phase 2:

355

27.3 The Battle of Helam

358

33.1 The Rebellion of Absalom

419

35.1 The campaign against Sheba, son of Bichri

441

ACT FOUR

DAVID THE GREAT

The history ofthe world is but the biography ofgreat men. Thomas Carlyle, Heroes and Hero-Worship

What millions died- that Caesar might be great! Thomas Campbell, Pleasures ofHope

CHAPTER19 1

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES Thou wouldst be great, Art not without ambition, but without The illness should attend it; what thou wouldst highly That wouldst thou holily; wou/dst not play false William Shakespeare, Macbeth, Act I

The death of Saul has created a radically new situation for David. At one stroke his greatest enemy is dead and the throne of Israel unoccupied. As long as Saul lived David could not act; both principle and prudence would not permit him to raise a hand against the Lord's anointed. But Samuel had anointed two as kings over Israel. The Philistines have destroyed the first, thus clearing the path for the second. David, with a clear conscience, can now directly pursue the crown. This pursuit, and its outcome, forms the burden of the next six chapters of this volume. 2

l. With this chapter we commence what all current Bibles consider The Second Book ofSamuel. As was noted in the Introduction, the breaking of the Book ofSamuel into two books was a late phenomenon. It resulted from the Book's translation into Greek. The editors of the Septuagint (LXX) split the book in two in order to conform to the standard size of scrolls in the Greek-speaking world; i.e. it was a publisher's decision. The Book of Samuel, however, was written as one undivided work and so we will continue to treat it. The verse references, on the other hand, will continue to conform to current usage (i.e. 2 Samuel 4:7 = Second Book of Samuel, Chapter 4, verse 7). From here on in, all references with no special notation (i.e. 14:7) will refer to the Second Book ofSamuel. All others will contain the book reference (i.e. 1 Samue/14:1, Job 3:2 etc.). 2. It would be in place to note here that well before Saul's death his reign was increasingly perceived as a sinking ship. The Book of Chronicles informs us of a steady stream of desertions from Saul's army, officers and picked troops transferring their allegiance to David who was seen as the man with the future. This was true even during the "Wilderness Years" when David was on the run and his fortunes lowest. I Chronicles 12:8-18 records the names of eleven high-ranking officers who defected to David in this period, and tells of numerous anonymous desertions of rank-and-file troops. When David established himself in Ziklag the flow increased. 1 Chronicles 12:1-7 informs us of the accretion to David's forces of23 men from a missile unit (bowmen and slingers) from the tribe of Benjamin, Saul's "brethren!" And, just prior to the battle of Gilboa, when David was on his way back from Aphek to Ziklag, he was joined by seven regimental commanders who had deserted from Saul's army (I Chronicles 12:19-22). It seems likely that many ofthese men had previously served under or with David in the old days, when he had been one ofthe most successful field commanders in Saul's army. It was the accretion of these officers and veteran troops that explains David's ability to transform his band of malcontents into the crack battalion that was to form the nucleus of his future standing army. This account also demonstrates that his reputation and charisma had remained alive and well all through the period when he was a fugitive.

250

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

THE BRINGER OF ILL TIDINGS The author opens the tale of David's rise to power by focusing on his reaction to the news ofthe disaster of Gilboa.

Now it came to pass after the death of Saul, when David had returned from smiting the Amalekites - David having been in Ziklag for two days - that on the third day, behold, a man came from Saul's camp, his clothes torn and earth on his head Upon coming to David he fell to the ground and bowed low. And David said to him: "From where do you come?" And he said: "I have escapedfrom the camp ofIsrael." David said to him: "How did things go? Tell me. " And he answered: "The people have fled from the battle, and many of the people have fallen and are dead; Saul also, and Jonathan his son, are dead!" Then David said to the young man who told him: "How do you know that Saul, and Jonathan his son, are dead?" So the young man who told him said: "By chance I happened to be on Mount Gilboa, and there was Saul leaning on his spear, and the chariots and the horsemen closing in on him. He looked behind him, and saw me, and called to me. I said: 'Here am l ' He said to me: 'Who are you?' and I answered him: 'I am an Amalekite. 'And he said to me: 'Stand over me, I beg ofyou, and kill me, for I am in agony, yet my life is still in me. ' So I stood over him and killed him, for I knew that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown that was on his head, and the armlet that was on his arm, and have brought them here to my lord " Then David took hold of his clothes and rent them; and so did all the men who were with him. And they mourned, and wept and fasted until evening for Saul, andfor Jonathan his son, andfor the people of the Lord and for the house ofIsrael, for they hadfa//enbythesword (2Samuell:l-12) The first question that comes to mind concerns the contradiction between the events as related by this fugitive from the battlefield and what we have been told in the last chapter. And yet there is no necessary contradiction. Saul may have botched his suicide (much as Marc Anthony did), lingering in agony and slowly bleeding to death. Having struggled to his feet with the aid of his spear, and with his arms-bearer dead, he now begs the first person that chances on him to finish him off. There is nothing improbable about this scenario. If true, there is a terrible irony in this denouement: Saul's sin rebounding on his head. He had desisted, and had not finished off the Amalekites. Now it is an Amalekite who finishes him offi Alternately, the story could be a fabrication. Coming upon the body of Saul, the young man may have used the opportunity to strip the body and carry off his trophies. In either case it is to Ziklag that he has brought them-to David. When we think back to the account of the disaster of Eben-ezer and its aftermath, we are struck by the similarities. The condition of the bearer of ill tidings is described in virtually identical language, as is the question put to him, and also the way in which he imparts his news. This can hardly be a coincidence. The author is deliberately contrasting the two episodes. There is yet one more similarityin both cases the news is followed by death. In Shiloh it was old Eli who fell from the shock of the news, broke his neck and died. Here it is the messenger who will pay the price of his tidings. Why does he come to David with his tragic trophies in the first place? He obviously is expecting to be rewarded, and rewarded richly, for bringing proof to David that his enemy Saul is dead. With the death also of the heir apparent, Jonathan, the way is now clear for David to inherit the throne of

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

251

Israel. This is a rich, worldly package that he is presenting to the future king. He certainly never expects what his ·reward proves to be.

Then David said to the young man who had told him: "Where do you come from?" And he said: "I am the son of an Amalekite ger. " 3 David said to him: "How is it that you did not fear to put forth your hand to destroy the anointed of the Lord?" And David called to one of his warriors, 4 and said: "Go and strike him [down]!" And he smote him, and he died! Then David said to him: "Your blood be on your own head! Your own mouth has testified against you when you said: 'I slew the anointed of the Lord'" (1:13-16) David has him killed on the spot. Why? Once again we encounter that uneasy mix of prudence and principle that is so typical of David. On the one hand he has every interest in disassociating himself, in the public eye, from any suspicion of gloating over the death of Saul, or of having wished for it. Saul, by his tragic demise, had been transfigured from a king of flesh and blood, with all of flesh's failings, into a public hero and a martyr. De mortuis nil nisi bonum. 5 It would be fatal for David to be perceived as either rejoicing over Saul's death, or profiting from it. That the young man has come directly to David with his bloodstained trophies, expecting reward, testifies to a widespread belief that this is exactly David's frame of mind. If David is to be accepted as a legitimate candidate for the throne, and not as a vulture fattening himself on the carcasses of Israel's slaughtered heroes and martyrs, this belief will, at all costs, have to be put to rest. The cost is to be the young man's blood. With one dramatic gesture David makes it clear to all and sundry that he recoils in revulsion from any such thoughts. Neither before the fact nor after it will he have any part or profit in the death of Israel's king. But if we stop at this point in our analysis-David's clear political interests-we simply do not understand him. What is typical of the new David, the David that has emerged from the maturing process of the wilderness, is that every political act is inexorably intertwined with principle. He never acts purely on the amoral basis of political self-interest. Always his motives are mixed-in the best sense of the term. There are almost always good political reasons for what he does, but these reasons are simultaneously grounded in moral principles. The public face that he puts on his deeds (for what public figure ever represents himself as a crafty Machiavellian?) is not a mask but actually a true representation of himself. When he proclaims that he acts on principle he is telling the truth-perhaps not the whole truth, but the truth nevertheless. He sincerely means what he says. It is easy at times to be cynical and to discount David's moral claims as hypocrisy, but if we do this we are, by being overly clever, deluding ourselves as to the depths and complexity of his character. David is not a two-dimensional cutout; neither a tin saint nor a this-worldly manipulator. He is a brilliant political tactician and strategist, who can play the game of power with the best of them and come up the winner again and again. At the same time he is a man of principle who will keep moral imperatives always at the forefront of his consciousness, and will insist upon acting on them. His ability to meld these two, often contradictory, aspects of life and merge them into concrete acts and policies is one of the outstanding revelations of his genius. He routinely accomplishes what we often despair of-to be both moral and successful. He is a living example that it is possible to be principled and yet function brilliantly in the jungle of politics and power. It will only be when he loses this touch, when principle and self-interest cease to synchronize, that his life will begin to come apart. But this is yet far in the future. For the present we are viewing the David who, with a sure hand, is able to

3. Ger: a person of foreign extraction who is a permanent resident in the Land of Israel. By his own statement he is already second generation and presumably a worshiper of the God oflsrael. David's accusation has the implication: "You are a worshiper of the Lord. You can't claim ignorance of the religious status of an anointed king. Where was your fear of the Lord?" 4. Hebrew naarim; probably one of his personal bodyguard. 5. Of the dead one only says good things (Latin proverb).

252

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

manage this mismatched team of prudence and principle, and to keep them serving, rather than opposing, each other. So where lies the principle in this act of bloodletting? David plainly proclaims it:

"How is it that you did not fear to put forth your hand to destroy the anointed ofthe Lord... Your blood be on your own head! Your own mouth has testified against you when you said: 'I slew the anointed ofthe Lord"' (1:14,16) In other words: "How dare you! You, with your own mouth admit that you murdered the king, God's anointed? With your own words you have condemned yourself to death!" This was David's accusation, and he meant it with every fiber of his being. The young man has admitted to cold-bloodedly killing Saul. His excuse is that it was a mercy killing; Saul was in agony and begged him to finish him off. In David's eyes this excuse is unacceptable. He does not, at this time, know of Saul's arms-bearer. That is a person of whom David would have approved. He was sworn to lay down his life for his master; to serve him in all that he was commanded. He was ordered to assist in his king's suicide; he fully appreciated the reasons; he couldn't do it. He could die for his king (we remember how he killed himself, falling dead beside Saul's still twitching body) but he could not kill him; he would not, for he feared greatly to smite the anointed of the Lord. This is exactly how David feels. How can we forget that moment in the cave when David had Saul at his mercy - and spared his life? Despite his men egging him on, and with every possible provocation, he could not strike down his king. This, for David, is an inviolable principle to which he will cling his entire life. If the penalty for murder is death, how much the more so when the slain is none less than God's anointed king? It is a principle that everyone understood and approved. To principle must be added revulsion. This groveling youth turns David's stomach. By his own claim he was part of Saul's army. He had shared with his king their shattering defeat. He was in the act of fleeing when he came, by chance, on his wounded and, by his account, dying monarch. The Philistine chariots were closing in. So he paused just long enough to kill his king and to strip his body, and then he continued his flight. Instead of crossing the Jordan with the remnants of the defeated army, or retiring to his home, he proceeds to Philistia, to Zik1ag, to make merchandise of Israel's defeat. There is no mistaking David's loathing for this attempt to tum a profit out of national tragedy. So far we have tried to analyze the facts as presented by the author. But what was her view of the matter? She doesn't say. She simply presents these facts and leaves to us the task of drawing our conclusions. But I think, indirectly, she does express an opinion; by the way she arranges the material I think she has indicated her feelings in the matter. Our current account is a simple telling of what happened and who said what to whom. The author is almost invisible. But when we compare the Amalekite's account with the events surrounding Saul's death, as related by the author in the previous chapter, certain questions emerge. We have seen that it is possible to reconcile the two accounts. But why should this even be necessary? The same author wrote both chapters. If the young man is telling the truth, why is there not a hint of his presence in the account of Saul's death? One possibility is that the author did not want to intrude an anticlimax into the charged and tragic narrative of Saul's death. But another possibility is that she simply was not certain where the truth lay. Her sources did not allow her to either substantiate or disallow the lad's story. I suggest that perhaps she disbelieved but couldn't disprove the tale. We have already noted the similarity between the accounts of how the first word of the disasters at Eben-ezer and Gilboa reach the central figures of each generation. This similarity is due to the way

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

253

the author crafted the narratives and the words that she used. The author is inviting comparison. As we pointed out, in each case the message of disaster is followed by death. It is in the deaths that the contrast lies. In the case of Eben-ezer Eli's death is a tragic climax. No blame adheres to the messenger. With Eli's death (and that ofhis daughter-in-law) an era ends. But this time, conversely, it is not an end. It is the opening act of a new era; a new beginning. This is the opening scene of the drama of David's rise to power. The messenger is fatally tainted, his death sordid, and David begins his rise by washing his hands of the whole affair. Is the author hinting that the story told by the young man is a lie; that he tells the tale in the expectation that David wants Saul dead and will reward the one who has killed him? If so, his cupidity has braided the rope that will hang him. His own grasping has been his undoing. 6

HEBRON7 If David wishes to take advantage of the opening created by Saul's death, this is the time for him to "make his move."

Now after thii David enquired of the Lord, 9 saying: "Shall I go up to one ofthe cities of Judah?" And the Lord said to him: "Go up. " Then David said: "To which shall/ go up?" And He said: "To Hebron. " So David went up there, and his two wives also, Ahinoam of Jezreel and Abigail, the wife of Nahal of Carmel. And David took up the men who were with him, every man with his household, and they dwelt in the villages around Hebron. Then the men ofJudah came and anointed David king over the House ofJudah. (2: l-4a) Into a concise three and one half verses the author packs one of the most momentous events of that era. We should not be surprised: we have seen the author do this before, and we know that politics as such really does not interest her very much. It is, however, going to take us no little time to understand what has taken place. In the first place we must understand that David does not only enquire of the Lord. He also has to enquire of his Philistine overlords. With their victory at Gilboa the Philistines are the uncontested and absolute masters of all Israel west of the Jordan River, and nothing can take place without their assent. Simply to move his base of operations from Ziklag to Hebron, much less be crowned king, requires at the very least prior approval. So what possesses the Philistine Tyrants (this was a level of decision that would have required a Council consensus) to give David the green light? Here we must go back to the fundamental Philistine problem, that of demography. There simply are not enough of them. Their superb organization, military technology and level of training make them irresistible on the battlefield; to hold down what they have conquered is beyond their power. Unlike the aftermath of Eben-ezer, the morale of the current generation of Israelites is unbroken. As we shall soon learn, in short order a new center of government has been established by the Israelites in the unconquered territories across the Jordan, the defeated army has re-crystallized into a fighting

6. David, of course, has only the messenger's account and takes it at face value. The ambiguity that we face is the author's doing. I think that what the author is circumspectly suggesting is that had the messenger told the truth he wouldn't have died. For example, he might have said something such as: "As I was fleeing I chanced upon the body of Saul. Rather than let the symbols of royal authority, the crown and the king's armlet, fall into the hands of the enemy I took them, and have brought them to you for safe-keeping." In such a case he might have been rewarded or he might not, but he certainly would not have been put to death. 7. At this point in her narrative the author inserts David's Elegy for Saul and Jonathan. In order to maintain the flow in the analysis and its historic continuity, I have taken the liberty of moving the Elegy to the end of this chapter. I feel that by this rearrangement the Elegy can be better appreciated for the masterpiece it is. 8. I.e. having learned of Saul's death. 9. See Chapter 8.

254

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

force, 10 and shortly thereafter the Philistines are being subjected to armed incursions into their newly conquered territories. As the Philistines begin to discover, the fruits of victory at Gilboa are wasting away. Control is, almost immediately, beginning to slip from their grasp. The response of the Philistines to this erosion is a classic one-divide and rule. At this juncture, David's ambition and Philistine need form a good fit. Allowing David to tum the tribe of Judah into a small kingdom will serve Philistine interests. In effect, Judah is nothing more than Ziklag writ large. David will remain a Philistine vassal, and making him king over Judah will split that tribe away from Israel. In this the Philistines are counting on regional differences as well as tribal separatism. 11 And creating a vassal kingdom doesn't worry the Philistines. They feel that they can control David, and anyway Judah by itself is far too weak to pose a threat to them. Should David's ambition get out of hand, so much the better. Let him and the House of Kish fight it out among themselves and bleed each other white. Should either side begin to get the upper hand, the Philistines will then step in to keep the balance. David, of course, while understanding Philistine calculations completely, sees the move to Hebron as the first step in his plan to succeed Saul as the ruler oflsrael. The crown of Judah (a Philistine invention, something that has previously neither existed nor been desired) is for him simply a stepping-stone. As a native boy who has made good, with overt Philistine backing, (or at least tacit approval), and with his crack troops, David looks very good to the people of Judah. With the good will David has garnered by distributing the Amalekite loot to just about everyone who matters, David seems to have no great difficulty in being acclaimed king by the tribal assembly (this is the meaning of the term the men ofJudah) and being anointed in Hebron. 12 Why Hebron? Why not his hometown of Bethlehem where he had been anointed by Samuel? In the first place, the ancient city of Hebron, situated about 20 miles to the south of Jerusalem, is in the center of the tribal territory. 13 It is also the largest city in the area. But of equal importance are the historic associations that make it a holy city in the eyes of all Israelites. Hebron is the site of the burial caves of the Patriarchs of the Eeople, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as well as of three of the Matriarchs, Sarah, Rebecca and Leah. 4 It is this town that David establishes as his capital, and it is from this eminence 15 that he will rule his kingdom. This is to be his base of operations from which he will launch his bid to rule all the people of Israel. What sort of kingdom did David rule? We have already alluded to David as a sort of selfappointed Sheriff during his Wilderness Years. If we keep in mind the American frontier of the sec10. If C. H. Hauer's analysis is correct (see Chapter 18, note 43), it was the fact that the Philistines directed their main assault against the Israelite militia commanded by Saul and his sons--the most numerous but at the same time the weakest element in the army facing them--that allowed Abner and the regular troops he commanded to escape across the Jordan relatively unscathed. II. The position of Judah in Saul's kingdom had always been a bit shaky-for example, the fighting units of Judah were always mustered separately from those of"all Israel," i.e. the Northern Tribes. Note 1 Samue/11:8 and 15:4. 12. As in Saul's case, the private anointing of the future king by a prophet of God simply establishes God's choice. This, however, is not sufficient to crown a king. The political act of crowning has to be made by the free choice of the people-in this case by the tribal assembly. The anointing referred to here (involving the public pouring of sacred oil on the monarch's head) is the ceremony of the king's crowning. 13. Bethlehem was peripheral, being almost at Judah's northern boundary. 14. The present magnificent tomb, built over the burial caves, was begun by Herod the Great over 2,000 years ago when he enclosed the site with a great wall. The Byzantines later built a Church within the enclosure (which was converted by the Arabs into a Mosque). At the time of which we are speaking no construction is known to have marked the site, though the caves themselves might have been a destination for pilgrims. 15. Hebron is over 3,000 feet above sea level, one of the highest points in the region.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

255

ond half of the 19th century we can begin to appreciate the situation, disabusing ourselves of any grandiose assumptions. In contradistinction to the more populous and agricultural North, Judah was very sparsely populated, with an economy based mostly on animal husbandry. Herding sheep and goats (no cattle) on open range was the main source of livelihood. 16 Settlements were few, far between and small even by the standards of those times. Few were fortified to any serious degree. It is even possible that a sizeable percentage of the population was semi-nomadic, rhythmically moving with the herds back and forth, on a seasonal basis, dependent on the pasturelands for their flocks. Not too long before this era raising sheep had become a cash industry. Over centuries, selective breeding of primitive sheep had resulted in two major breakthroughs: sheep that did not molt (that is, shed their coats annually) and sheep that produced white, as opposed to brown, wool. This last made it possible to dye the resulting cloth various colors. With the invention of shears at just about this time, 17 sheep-raising ceased to be a subsistence endeavor and became an industry, producing wool to be dyed, woven into cloth and sold to settled populations in exchange for agricultural staples. 18 The percentage of sheep slaughtered for meat declined precipitously. Sheep were now bred for wool. The size of flocks increased geometrically. This was the economic base of the Kingdom. While Judah was to remain, long into the future, the poor cousin of the more settled and prosperous Northern Tribes, its more primitive and Spartan conditions gave its people a major advantage. With much of the male population engaged in shepherding, which involves living out of doors with the herds for months at a time, they became a very tough breed of men. Though stemming from an earlier age, Jacob's complaint to his father-in-law Laban gives a good idea of the conditions with which a shepherd had to contend.

"Thus I was; by day the scorching heat consumed me, and frost by night, and my sleep fled from my eyes." (Genesis 31 :40) Jacob complains that he had to put up with twenty years of that. Another aspect of sheepherding was that it could be extremely dangerous. This was wild country. Young David, we may remember, gave us in his boasting words some further idea of what was involved:

And David said to Saul: "Your servant has shepherded his father's sheep. If a lion, or a bear, would come and carry off a lamb from the flock, I would go after him and smite him, and rescue it out of his mouth. And if he should attack me, I would grab him by his beard and smite him and kill him! Your servant has killed both lion and bear! (1 Samue/11:3436) David was in his mid-teens when he made the above statement. Children were put to work early in those days. He had already become extremely tough, as well as extremely proficient, by necessity, with the shepherd's main weapon, the sling. Lions and bears roamed freely in areas such as Judah. 19 Sheep, especially lambs, were a very welcome addition to their diet, and shepherding was a constant battle with wild beasts, with the victory not always to the shepherd. The survivors, those who could continue to endure the brutal conditions of long-term living in the open and endless battles with 16. This does not mean that there was no agriculture. The Book of Ruth depicts fields of grain in the vicinity of Bethlehem. The same was undoubtedly true of Hebron, which is surrounded by an extremely fertile countryside. But farming played a very poor second to the dominant role ofthe "Sheep-men." Nahal of Carmel is an example of the rich rancher; Jesse of Bethlehem is a moderately prosperous smalltime sheep owner. 17. Before shears, the only way to harvest wool was to pluck the fleeces from molting sheep by hand. 18. The great regional center for dying wool was Phoenicia, on the current Lebanon coast. It was at this period that the diameter of the fine fibers reached about 20 micrometers (the typical thickness of fine wool today) from the 15 micrometers of primitive sheep. I am indebted for most of the above information to Michael L. Ryder, "The Evolution of the Fleece." 19. Lions roamed the Jordan Valley as late as the period ofthe Crusades.

256

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

predators (not to mention bandits and Bedouin raiders), emerged very tough indeed. Judah's soldiery, as a result, was the equivalent of two to three times their number in troops raised from among the farmers of the North. Despite the ultimate outcome of their plan to divide and rule, 20 the Philistines have reasoned well. The centripetal forces pulling Judah and the Northern Israelite tribes together-common ancestry, common religion and a shared historical tradition-are fairly evenly balanced by centrifugal forces pushing them apart: tribal separatism and sharply differing interests grounded in dissimilar economies and life styles. The push given by the Philistines is to prove decisive. What is for both the Philistines and for David a temporary expedient-the creation of a "Kingdom" out of a tribe-is to acquire a momentum that will prove irreversible. Once created, the Kingdom cannot be uncreated. Despite all the efforts of David and his successor Solomon, Judah and the North will never be permanently welded back together. From this moment on, the Children of lsrael, 21 worshipers of one God, are to be permanently divided into two separate States. George Adam Smith tellingly summarizes the contrasting effects of geography on the two newly emerged kingdoms and how they helped determine their futures: [Judah) has no harbours, no river, no trunk-road, no convenient market for nations on either side. In their commerce with each other these pass by Judah, finding their emporiums in the cities ofPhilistia . . . Gaza has outdone Hebron as the port of the desert.... The whole plateau stands aloof, waterless, on the road to nowhere .... From Judah we pass to Samaria. 22 Halves of the same range, how opposite in disposition and history. The northern is as fair and open as the southern is secluded and austere, and their fortunes correspond. . . . The more forward to attract, the more quick to develop, Samaria was the less able to retain ... the splendor and endurance both of prophecy and kingship remained with Judaea. 23 Thus it is that the smaller and the poorer of the two is destined to outlive its far richer and more populous northern partner by more than a century and become the seedbed of the future. After Judah's ultimate destruction the survivors will return from the Babylonian Exile to refound the southern state under the name of Judaea; that is why the descendants oflsrael (Jacob) are not known today as Israelites but rather as Jews, descendants of the tribe of Judah.

TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE It is one thing for David to disassociate himself from any hint of gloating, or suspicion of wishing to profit from the deaths of Saul and Jonathan. Both public policy and personal feeling demand that he not rest satisfied with negative gestures. Positive acts will be required to impress upon all Israelites his love and respect for Saul and Jonathan, not to mention his grief at their tragic ends. Our author recounts two such gestures made by David in this early period. For purposes of narrative continuity we will reverse the order in which the author presents them.

20. David, as we know, ultimately outsmarted them. 21. That is to say, the descendants of Jacob, whose other name was Israel. See Genesis 32:23-29. 22. This was the name by which the highlands of Ephraim came to be known when King Omri made Samaria the capital of the northern Kingdom of Israel. 23. G.A. Smith, Historical Geography ofthe Holy Land, p. 319-320.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

257

The first, shortly after being crowned king in Hebron, is precipitated by the news that the bodies of Saul and his sons have been rescued from the walls of Beth-shean and have received proper burial in Jabesh-gilead. And they told David, saying: "It was the men ofJabesh-gilead that buried Saul. " So David sent messengers to the men ofJabesh-gilead, and said to them: "May you be blessed by the Lord, because you performed this loving act to your lord, to Saul, in burying him. And now may the Lord show you steadfast love and truth; and I also will act generously to you because you did this thing. Now therefore let your hands be strong and be valiant, for your lord Saul is dead " (2:4b-7a)

This is a very fine gesture, recognizing the courage and nobility of the men of Jabesh, as well as their undying loyalty and gratitude to the man who had so dramatically saved them in their distress. The tone is only slightly marred by the postscript. After stressing the need for renewed courage and vigilance in dangerous times, for with Saul's defeat and death a power vacuum has been created, David adds a little note: incidentally, you might not be aware of this but the tribe of Judah has anointed me king! for your lord Saul is dead, and also the House ofJudah has anointed me king over them. (2:7b)

Was David angling for the men of Jabesh to recognize him as Saul's successor? This is very doubtful. David was sufficiently a realist to recognize that it was premature for any such expectations. The great distance between Jabesh and Hebron, the proximity of Jabesh to the new seat of Saul's son and legitimate successor, lsh-bosheth, 24 and their loyalty to the House ofKish all militated against such a move. It seems to me that David's purposes were more general and long term. The message was not secret; rather its contents were promulgated far and wide. David is undoubtedly glad that Saul and his sons have received a decent burial. His expression of gratitude to the men of Jabesh is sincere. But he may feel that a public message of gratitude and praise for the rescue and proper rites accorded to the late king of Israel and his sons will provide a fme setting for the formal announcement that he is now king of Judah, and by implication a contender for the crown of all Israel. Once again we see the joining of politics and principle. With this message David's hat is in the ring.

ELEGY One task remains to David; a task that both policy and principle demands. He has to pay his final respects to his king and to his dear friend. Common decency requires no less. But I think more than proper decorum is involved. I think that David feels the national disaster, the tragedy of Saul's death and the loss of Jonathan with every fiber of his being. He is moved to his core. I base this estimate upon the quality and the depth of feeling expressed in the Elegy. It is a moving piece of poetry with great force. Its pathos has had the power to bring tears to the eyes for millennia. Even after suffering the inevitable impoverishment that is the price of translation, it remains inexpressibly moving. I doubt that so much feeling could be synthetically generated. This, it seems to me, is a true reflection of David's grief and sense ofloss. 25

24. Mahanaim is less than 15 miles to the south of Jabesh, and between Jabesh and Hebron; see Chapter 20. 25. It is instructive to compare David's elegy for Saul and Jonathan with his elegy for Abner (3:33-34, see Chapter 21). In the case of Abner, a man for whom David had no real feeling, the elegy is noble and fitting to the status of the deceased-but essentially political propaganda, devoid of the personal element and of emotional

258

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

And David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son, and said i(6 should be taught to the people ofJudah; behold, it is recorded in the Book ofJashar: 27 Your glory, 0 Israel, lies slain on your high places! How are the mighty fallen! Tell it not in Gath, Proclaim it not in the bazaars ofAshkelon; Lest the daughters ofthe Philistines rejoice, Lest the daughters ofthe uncircumcised exult. 0 mountains of Gilboa, Let there be no dew, Let there be no rain upon you, Nor outpouring ofthe deeps. 28 For there the shield ofthe mighty was vilely cast away, The shield ofSaul, unanointed with oil. From the blood ofthe slain, From the bowels ofwarriors, 29 The bow ofJonathan turned not back; And the sword ofSaul returned not empty. Saul and Jonathan, beloved and lovely! In life and in death they were not divided They were swifter than eagles, They were stronger than lions. Daughters of Israel, weep over Saul, Who clothed you richly in scarlet, Who put ornaments ofgold on your apparel. How are the mighty fallen in the midst ofbattle! Jonathan lies slain on your high places!

depth. This is what David, the superb poet, produced when he was not personally involved. The elegy for Saul and Jonathan demonstrates how David wrote when he really cared. 26. Reading with LXX; MT reads the bow. 27. The Book ofJashar (or The Book of the Upright): apparently an anthology of great poetry current in the author's time. She cites it as her source. The Book ofJashar is also quoted by the author of the Book ofJoshua as the source of the poem in Joshua 10:12-13. 28. This line is rendered in accordance with the suggestion of H. L. Ginsberg in "A Ugaritic Parallel to 2 Sam. 1:21," p. 209-13. As it stands MT reads: andjields of offerings. See note 33 below. 29. This line is rendered in accordance with the suggestion of Cross and Freedman in Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry, p. 16.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

259

I am grieved for you, my brother30 Jonathan. You were so very dear to me. Wonderful was your love to me, Passing the love ofwomen. How are the mighty fallen, And the weapons ofwar perished! (1:17-27)

As is our custom, let us walk through David's Elegy, elucidating his argument and his metaphors, and trying not to lose sight of the poetic whole while focusing on the parts. The Elegy opens by boldly stating the theme: Your glory, 0 Israel, lies slain on your high places!

That is, on the mountains; 31 followed immediately by the shocked exclamation: How are the mighty fallen! ( 1: 19)

How could this have happened? The state, the king, his son, the glory of all that had been achieved-shattered at one blow! Only yesterday they bestrode our world, and now, see how they have been brought low. This exclamation of combined shock, disbelief and resignation becomes the refrain of the poem; the tolling of a great funeral bell marking an overwhelming tragedy. Following hard on the sense of shock and disbelief comes the question-what will the news of this disaster do to our hated enemies? The thought of their gloating, their exultation does not bear considering. It will be salt on Israel's wounds. This will be more than we can bear. May this news never reach them. Tell it not in Gath. Proclaim it not in the bazaarl2 ofAshkelon; Lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, Lest the daughters ofthe uncircumcised exult. (1:20)

As we may remember from the victories of Saul and David, it was the custom of those times that the women led in national celebrations, commemorating and hallowing the occasions with public song and dance. Gath and Ashkelon are simply examples, meant to represent all the cities of the Philistines. Shrinking from the thought of the Philistines' elation, David's bitterness overflows onto the site of the disaster. He curses Mount Gilboa: 0 mountains of Gilboa, Let there be no dew, Let there be no rain upon you, Nor outpouring ofthe deeps. (1:21)

30.1.e. "my kinsman." 31. Gilboa is not a single mountain, but a ridge with a series of high points; hence it is referred to here, and elsewhere, in the plural. 32. Hebrew hutzot; this term designates sections of streets set apart for a market place. Usually rendered as streets, "hutzot is better understood as 'bazaars' as attested by the excavations of Ashkelon where several shops line the street leading to the sea." (King, "Travel, Transport, Trade," p. 102) It is in the commercial areas of the city, where people congregate, that proclamations would be made.

260

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

May the life-giving winter rains, may the fructifying summer dew cease to fall upon you; may the springs and underground water sources dry up; may the whole mountain range tum into a desert, incapable of supporting life. 33 Why? For there the shield ofthe mighty was vilely cast away, The shield ofSaul, unanointed with oil (I :21)

Most shields ofthis period were made of wood and leather, often stiffened with metal plates and studs. Leather has to be regularly oiled to keep it from drying out and cracking. Iron also needs to be oiled to protect it from rust. Instead of being brightly oiled as it was while Saul reigned triumphantly, his shield is pictured as discarded, begrimed34 and moldering in that junk heap that is the battlefield of Gilboa on the morning after. This is a powerful symbol of what had become of both king and country-the very words unanointed with oil are a bitter reflection on what had become of the former King, "the anointed of the Lord." The Elegy now becomes more specific, focusing on Saul and Jonathan themselves. They may have died, but they went down fighting. From the blood of the slain, From the bowels ofwarriors, The bow ofJonathan turned not back; And the sword ofSaul returned not empty. 35 (1 :22)

Their deaths did not come cheap. These heroes sold their lives dearly, together to the last, loyal and true to one another. Saul and Jonathan, beloved and lovely! In life and death they were not divided They were swifter than eagles, They were stronger than lions. ( 1:23)

Arrows "drinking blood," swords "eating flesh," "faster than eagles," "stronger than lions"- all standard poetic cliches only slightly reworked. This is how heroes were poetically described. What gives these tired words life is the personal interjection, the truth that Saul and his sons were united, true to one another to the last. It is an incontrovertible fact that, despite his illness, Saul's sons never

33. This poetic conceit of laying a curse upon the sites of disastrous events was common in the ancient world, as was the parallel between water from above (rain) and water from below (upwelling of the deeps, i.e. subterranean waters). Genesis 49:25 provides an example of this parallelism. Blessings ofheavens above, Blessings ofthe deep that lies beneath ... An almost exact parallel to David's curse has been found in Ugaritic poetry, in which the poet curses the site of his son's death (see note 28 above): Let there be no dew, no rain, No upsurging ofthe double deep. 34. The Hebrew term nigal has this connotation. 35. This also was a standard poetic metaphor in Biblical Age poetry, the arrow "drinking" blood; the sword "eating" the flesh of the enemy; as in: I will make My arrows drunk with blood, And my sword shall devour flesh. (Deuteronomy 32:42)

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

261

turned their backs on him. This fact is what bathes their last moments in grandeur. Had they killed ten times as many Philistines as they actually did, it would still be insignificant in the light of this decisive personal fact. From this moment the personal element takes over from the national tragedy. Women in the ancient world were not merely the custodians of public rejoicing; public mourning and lamentation was also entrusted to them. So David calls the women of Israel to bewail Saul; not simply pro-forma but with real feeling for the tragedy. Remember, he says, what you owe him. 36 Remember what he did for you. Don't forget the way the kingdom and the security that he created raised your standard of living to unprecedented heights. Daughters ofIsrael, weep over Saul, Who clothed you richly in scarlet, Who put ornaments ofgold on your apparel. (I :24)

And then the cry of despair, the knell of the great bell, as David's personal grief breaks through to the surface: How are the mighty fallen in the midst ofbattle! Jonathan lies slain on your high places! I am grieved for you, my brother Jonathan. You were so very dear to me. Wonderful was your love for me, Passing the love ofwomen. (1 :25-26)

This is what really hurt. And David, in his grief, is wrenchingly honest. Jonathan was as dear as a brother to him, and he extols Jonathan's love for him. He does not say that he loved Jonathan, only that he finds it wonderful how much Jonathan loved him. As it was in the beginning, so it is at the end; Jonathan the giver and David the taker. Jonathan loved David and understood David as no one before or after ever did or could. And he loved him despite the fact that he knew his love never would be, never could be, returned. In the depth of his grief, in the clarity of this moment of truth-for I believe that in these words David is expressing his real feelings-he recognizes the one-sidedness of the relationship. I think that perhaps part of David's grief is for himself, for that self-love that does not allow him to fully and deeply love others. What he has lost, never to be found again, and for which no substitute exists, is a true friend. To Jonathan David was a friend. 37 As such David knew that he could rely on his unconditional support and love; he need never fear rebuff. (For David, on the other hand, Jonathan was but a brother; though brothers are close they are not necessarily friends.) For the rest of his life David will be surrounded by acquaintances, courtiers, generals and sycophants: tools every one. He will experience sexual passion, but no true intimacy. The spiritual relationship that he had with Jonathan is a glory never to return. It lies slain on Mount Gilboa. With resignation David once more tolls the great bell, and draws down the curtain. How are the mighty fallen, And the weapons ofwar perished! (l :27)

36. Obliquely we thus learn that the creation and consolidation of Saul's kingdom created an economic boom, even as did David's consolidation in the generation following. 37. Aristotle differentiates between sexual relations and friendship. Though one does not necessarily negate the possibility of the other, they are two separate phenomena. For Aristotle friendship was the crown of private human relations, occurring only among equals. He conceived of it as a spiritual relationship of mutual understanding and devotion, both to each other and to shared ideals and goals. The relationship between David and Jonathan is often cited as one of the outstanding historical examples of what Aristotle meant.

262

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE CURTAIN RISES

This was the Elegy that David wrote, and he instructs that it be taught to the people of Judah. 38 Poems in those days (and in more recent times as well) were memorized and recited (actually sung) on public and private occasions. David wants this tribute to their late King and his heir to be literally on everyone's tongue; firstly, as the homage due the founders of the first Israelite state, and secondly, as a reminder to everyone of his respectful attitude to them. After all, David is still suspected of being poised to profit from the deaths of Saul and Jonathan, and must do all that he can to banish this suspicion. Seen in this light, the Elegy is magnificent political propaganda. No one hearing it can doubt the sincerity of David's grief. So there are several levels to the Elegy; David is uniquely capable ofkilling several birds with one stone. But to take this as simple propaganda, or even primarily so, in my opinion does not begin to understand the man. David can be devious, but he can also be sincere. Here sincerity breathes in every line of this emotionally charged masterpiece.

A NOTE ON THE SHEPHERD If the prevailing character of Judaea be pastoral ... it is not surprising that the forms which have impressed her history and her religion upon the world should be those of the pastoral habit. . . . The founder of its one dynasty (David) and the first of its literary prophets (Amos) were taken from following the flocks. 39 The king and every leader of men was called a shepherd. God was the Shepherd ofHis people, and they the sheep of His pasture.... Judaea offers as good ground as there is in the East for observing the grandeur of the shepherd's character. On the boundless Eastern pasture ... the shepherd is indispensable. With us sheep are often left to themselves; I do not remember to have seen in the East a flock without a shepherd. In a landscape such as Judaea, where a day's pasture is thinly scattered over an unfenced tract, covered with delusive paths, still frequented by wild beasts, rolling into the desert, the man and his character are indispensable. On some high moor, across which at night hyenas howl, when you meet him, sleepless, far-sighted, weather-beaten, armed, leaning on his staff, and looking out over his scattered sheep, every one on his heart, you understand why the shepherd of Judaea sprang to the front of his people's history; why they gave his name to their king, and made him the symbol of Providence ...40

38. Why Judah? Why not all Israel? David was King of Judah, and Judah was where his writ held sway. This means that this decree dates from the earliest days of his reign. Obviously the Elegy was widely disseminated throughout the tribes of Israel, but David had no power there to enforce the widespread teaching of it. 39. 2 Samuel7:8; Amos 7:15. 40. G. A. Smith, The Historical Geography ofthe Holy Land, p. 311-312.

CHAPTER20

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

Hence jarring sectaries may learn Their real int 'rest to discern; That brother should not war with brother, And worry and devour each other.

William Cowper, The Nightingale and Glow-Worm

Establishing himself as king of Judah is not a simple matter to be accomplished overnight As we have noted, David has first to get the approval and backing of his Philistine overlords. He has to move his army, with their families, and settle into the Hebron region. Overtures to various clan chieftains and men of influence have to be followed by protracted negotiations. Then comes the convening of the tribal assembly, the decision to elect David as their ruler, and finally a public crowning ceremony at which he is anointed king of Judah. All this takes time, and as the weeks tum into months David's chances of profiting from the power vacuum created by Saul's defeat and death slip away. By the time David is capable of acting, his "window of opportunity" is gone. The shattered remnants of Saul's government have pulled themselves together, a new capital has been established, the broken army has reformed into an effective fighting force, and Saul's surviving son, lsh-bosheth, 1 has been proclaimed king over Israel. Now Abner, the son of Ner, Saul's general, had taken Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, and had brought him across to Mahanaim; and he made him king over the Gilead, and over the I. His real name was Eshbaal, as recorded in I Chron. 8:33 and 9:39. Baal means lord or master, and there are many who are of the opinion that in early Israel the term was used as a way of referring to God, even as we use the term the Lord. It is difficult to conceive that Saul, a religious fanatic, or Jonathan, for that matter, would incorporate in their son's names references to anyone but the God oflsrael. But Baal was also the title of the chief deity of the Canaanite pantheon. With the passage of the years the term came to refer exclusively to him. By the author's time the use of the term baa/ in the name of an Israelite had become a serious embarrassment, so she changes the name from Eshbaal (man of the Master-i.e. God) to Ish-bosheth (man of shame). We will continue to refer to him by the euphemism given to him by our author simply because that is how he has come to be known.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

264

Asherites, 2 and over Jezreel, and over Ephraim, and over Benjamin and over all Israel. (2:8-9)

Mahanaim is located across the Jordan River, roughly 25 miles due east of Shechem (the current Nablus). It was the chief town of the trans-Jordanian region known as the Gilead. Here, where the Philistines never penetrated, the Israelites have a chance to recuperate from their defeat and to reorganize. Once firmly established in the Gilead, the House of Saul begins to extend its sway to the Galilee, north of the Valley of Jezreel, the region of the tribe of Asher. This too is an area that is beyond Philistine domination. But now we are informed, amazingly, that by stages the sovereignty of the House of Saul has extended to the Philistine lifeline of Jezreel itself (probably the hills only but not the valley itself), then to the heartland of Israel, the region of Ephraim, then lastly to the tribal region of Benjamin, on the very border of Judah. Is this sovereignty merely a hollow claim with no substance to it? It is obviously more than that, for we soon see Israelite troops moving freely in these territories with no hindrance from the Philistines. One possible explanation is that Ish-bosheth is being allowed to exercise a limited sovereignty over these regions as a Philistine vassal. Another explanation is the divide-and-rule policy of the Philistines; they are only too happy to let their vassal David do their fighting for them. The two kingdoms bleeding each other, neither able to triumph decisively, suits Philistine purposes nicely. A further point needs to be made. We read that Abner made Ish-bosheth king over all Israel. A fundamental change in the meaning of the term "Israel" has taken place, reflecting a change in the facts on the ground. Up until this point, the term all Israel referred to all the people of Israel. Now it refers to the northern tribes alone. The creation of the Kingdom of Judah has produced a reaction; a second kingdom has come into being which will be known by the name of Israel. In a few short years the Beth Yisrael, the House of Israel that had constituted Saul's kingdom, is to become permanently divided into two parts, to be known as the Kingdom of Judah and the Kingdom of Israel. This is a change with which the Israelites will have to learn to live. Having informed us that Ish-bosheth has succeeded to what is left of Saul's kingdom, and appending the standard formula giving us the basic data of his reign, the author hastens to do so for David as well.

Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, was forty years old when he began to reign over Israel, and he reigned two years. But the House of Judah followed David Now the timl that David was king over the House ofJudah in Hebron was seven years and six months. 4 (2:10-11) This new reality, of the northern tribes having crystallized into a kingdom under Saul's son, creates a major dilemma for David. He obviously has no intention of remaining a Philistine tool indefinitely. But breaking free will involve reversing the results of Gilboa. Judah, by itself, is far too weak to accomplish such a feat. Only if David can control the resources of all the tribes can he have any realistic hope of achieving independence. Had he been able to act immediately after Gilboa he might have been able to gather all the strings into his hands while the situation was still chaotic. The House of Saul's reassertion of its claim over the overwhelming majority of the Israelites has put paid to any such hopes. David's problem amounts to this: somehow he will have to arrange for the northern tribes to voluntarily abandon the House of Saul and come over to him, and at the same time keep the Philistines in the dark as to what is happening. Any suspicion that such a move is in the offing will bring the Philistine armies down on him when he has no chance of resisting them. On the face of it the

2. Reading with Targ. (that is, the tribe of Asher). MT reads the Ashurites (Assyrians?). On the other hand, Syr. and Vul. read over the Geshurites. For Geshur see note 20 below, and Chapter 30, note 47. 3. Literally, Now the number of days. 4. This refers to the period between being crowned in Hebron and the moving of his capital to Jerusalem. See Chapter 22.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

265

problem seems insoluble. This is how the Philistines see the situation, and this is why they have given David the go-ahead to establish his kingdom. How David is able to outmaneuver both the Philistines and the House of Saul provides a lesson in brilliant statesmanship. With its twists and turns, this forms the burden of our present chapter.

THE BLOOD IN THE POOL With Benjamin's addition to the sovereign territory ruled by lsh-bosheth, the borders of the two kingdoms touch, and conflict can no longer be avoided.

Now Abner, the son of Ner, and the troops5 of Ish-bosheth, the son of Saul, went out from Mahanaim to Gibeon, and Joab, the son ofZeruiah, and David's troops went oul and they met together at the pool ofGibeon. They seated themselves; the one [unit] on one side of the pool and the other [unit] on the other side of the pool. (2: 12-13) Gibeon is located about six miles northwest of Jerusalem. It was one of the largest towns in the territory of Benjamin. Judging from the number of casualties reported after the battle, the two units here confronting each other must range in size anywhere from battalion to regimental strength. The pool referred to is a huge cylindrical pit, 36 feet in diameter, cut directly into the rock of the hillside. A rock-cut staircase spirals down around the sides to the water level over 80 feet below. This encounter is hardly accidental. At least one of the parties, perhaps both, has come intending to force a showdown. Abner may have come intending to assert Ish-bosheth's rule over the territory, while Joab7 has moved to prevent him from doing so; or conversely David's troops may be encroaching upon Benjamite territory and Abner has intervened to expel them. Either way they have come to fight. So these two small armies, numbering between 500 and I ,000 men each, rest facing each other, the pool between them. And now comes an incident that has been widely misunderstood:

And Abner said to Joab: "/pray you, let the warriori arise and sport before us. "And Joab said: "Let them rise. " So they arose and passed over by number: twelve for Benjamin and for Ish-bosheth, son of Saul, and twelve of the soldiers of David Each caught his opponent by the head, and thrust his sword into his opponent's side; so they fell down together! So they call that place Helkath-hazzurim, 9 which is in G ibeon. (2: 14-16) This is not a sporting contest that somehow got out of hand, as some commentators have suggested. What we are having described to us are twelve individual duels to the death by matched teams of selected swordsmen. 10 The duel was an accepted means of avoiding the many casualties a pitched battle between two armies would involve. If both sides agreed, the decision depended on the outcome of a duel between two champions, or two teams of champions. As General Yigael Yadin explains:

5. Literally "servants." In this chapter whenever "servants" appears it will be rendered as troops or soldiers, which is its meaning in this context. 6. LXX adds from Hebron. 7. Joab, David's nephew, is to be his top general to the very end of his long reign. See Chapter 16, note 8. 8. Naarim. See Chapter 10, note 41. 9. That is, the field ofthe sword-edges or the field ofadversaries or the field offlints. The Hebrew is ambiguous. 10. The tactics employed in the duels were apparently standard for that period. We actually possess a picture of a duel (an engraving, from the city of Gozan, that is contemporaneous with the events described in our chapter) showing exactly what we have been told: two combatants, each grabbing the head of the other with his left hand, while with his right hand he plunges his sword into his opponent's side.

266

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER Here, then, is a form of warfare-a duel-which takes place in accordance with prior agreement of the two armies, both accepting the condition that their fate shall be decided by the outcome of the contest. . . . What almost certainly happened was that the two armies met at Gibeon, and one commander, Abner, suggested to his rival commander, Joab, to hold dueling contests between the picked men of both sides instead of pitting their entire force against each other. Abner makes the request. But only after Joab has agreed do the duels begin. For reasons we can only guess at in the absence of firm details, the result is indecisive, for the contestants "fell down together." And this explains the next phase of the story-" And there was a very sore battle that day." The duels had been fought, neither

contestant had won, and so there was no alternative but to gain a military decision by the committal to battle of the whole of both armed forces. 11

So there was an extremely hard battle that day, and Abner and the men of Israel were struck down by David's troops. Now the three sons of Zeruiah were present there, Joab, Abishai, and Asahel; and Asahel was as light on his feet as one of the gazelles of the field Now Asahel pursued Abner, and as he went he turned neither to the right hand nor to the left in following Abner. Then Abner looked behind him and said: "Is it you, Asahel?" And he answered: "It is l " And Abner said to him: "Turn to your right or to your left, and seize one of the warriors and plunder him. " But Asahel would not leave offfollowing him. And Abner said again to Asahel: "Turn away from following me. Why should I strike you to the ground? How then could I face your brother Joab?" But he refused to turn aside, so Abner struck him in the stomach with the butt of his spear, and the spear came out his back; and he fell there and died on the spot. Now everyone who came to the place where Asahel had fallen and died, stood still. (2: 17-23) In fierce battle the Israelite formations are broken, and the soldiers tum and run. In the rout Joab's youngest brother, Asahel, chooses no less than Abner as his target and pursues him relentlessly. Abner, after identifying his pursuer, warns him off: "Pick on someone of your own caliber." Abner again warns him: "Don't make me kill you. How will I be able to look your brother Joab in the eye?" 12 But Asahel, like all the sons of Zeruiah, is a hothead and simply won't listen to reason. All this time the gap between pursued and pursuer is closing. Asahel is running Abner down. As the gap narrows to a few feet, leaving Abner with no choice, he wheels and strikes. There is no contest. Asahel is simply out of his league. Abner still tries to spare him. The author emphasizes that Abner struck, not with the spearhead but with the butt end of the spear. 13 All to no avail. Such is the power of the blow that the spear punches .straight through Asahel's body. Abner continues his flight while everyone coming upon their commander's brother, lying in a pool of his own blood, comes to a dead halt, unable to continue forward. But this small circle standing around what had been Asahel is but a tiny fraction of Joab's troops. The main body presses the fleeing Israelites relentlessly.

Now Joab and Abishai pursued after Abner, and as the sun was setting they came to the hill of Ammah, which lies before Giah on the way to the Wilderness of Gibeon. And the Benjamites rallied behind Abner, formed themselves into a company and took their stand on the top of a hill. Then Abner called to Joab, saying: "Must the sword devour forever? Don't you realize that the end will be bitter? How long will it be before you tell the people to stop pursuing their brothers?" And Joab said: "As God lives, ifyou had not spoken, only in the morning would the people have left off, every one, from following his brother. " So Joab

II. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, Vol. II, p. 265,267. 12. Abner is not simply being altruistic. Killing Asahel could start a blood feud. 13. The blunt end. Though metal-shod it was not the spear-point that inevitably would have been fatal. A blow with the butt end of a spear would probably disable Asahel but not kill him.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

267

blew the Shofar; 14 all the people halted, and did not continue the pursuit of Israel, and stopped fighting. And Abner and his men marched all that night through the Arabah/5 they crossed the Jordan, traversed the Bitron [Ravine] and came to Mahanaim. (2:24-29) This time the appeal to reason works. It is evident that, eventually, some fmal settlement must be made. Prolonging the killing will only increase bitterness and make a settlement even harder to reach. Joab graciously concedes the logic and halts the fighting. Able to disengage, Abner beats a hasty retreat back to Mahanaim.

So Joab broke offthe pursuit ofAbner and mustered all his troops, and there were nineteen of David's men missing, not counting Asahel. 16 And David's men had struck dead three hundred and sixty men of the Benjamites and of Abner's men. Then they took Asahel and buried him in his father's sepulcher, which was in Bethlehem. 17 And Joab and his men marched all night; the day broke on them in Hebron. (2:30-32) How can we explain the radical disparity in the losses sustained by the two sides? One possibility is that, after the slaughter at Gilboa, Abner has replaced the veteran soldiers he has lost with raw recruits. But this is only a partial explanation at best. There is a fundamental difference in the quality of the manpower at the disposal of the two sides. Though the population available to Abner is many times greater than that available to David, their aptitude for fighting is poorer than that of the men of Judah. We have already had occasion to remark on the toughness of the average adult male in primitive Judea. 18 Finally, we have mentioned that David's forces were constantly being augmented by desertions from Saul's army, even when he was on the run. This reinforcement, in all likelihood, swelled once David was installed as King in Hebron. David, perceived as the wave of the future, seems to have the pick of the soldiers. The clash at the pool of Gilboa is the beginning of the civil war that is to rage for two long years. Our author does not bother to detail the further battles of the war. She does not need to do so, for the outcome of the opening battle presages the way the subsequent clashes develop. The conclusion is to be merely a matter of time.

Now the war between the House ofSaul and the House ofDavid was a long one; and David grew stronger and stronger, while the House ofSaul became weaker and weaker. (3:1)

INTERMISSION IN HEBRON As we have seen, the pressures and dangers of life as an outlaw did not prevent David from having a private life. Thus it should hardly surprise us that, if anything, his private life proceeds apace once he ascends the throne of Judah. The author takes a moment to pause in her engrossing account of the civil war to focus on the events in David's home life, because the seeds of the future are here being planted. 14. The ram's horn was used in battle for signaling the troops. See Chapter 8, note 7. 15. The Jordan valley; their retreat carried them east, down from the mountain ridge (a drop of over 3,000 feet}, then north, parallel to the Jordan River until they reached a fordable spot. Then they turned up the ravine cut by the Jabbok River until they reached Mahanaim (which was on, or close to, the Jabbok). 16. Taking a head count to determine the number of casualties was standard practice. So was taking a body count offallen enemies when you possessed the field. 17. From the fact that Asahel is buried in his father's tomb it would seem that Zeruiah's husband had died young, leaving his wife a widow with young children. Perhaps this is the reason that her children, so uncharacteristically, are known by her name rather than his. See Chapter 16, note 8. 18. See Chapter 19.

268

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

Now sons were born to David in Hebron; and his firstborn was Amnon by Ahinoam of Jezreel; and his second, Chi/eab 19 by Abigail, the wife of Nahal the Carmelite; and the third, Absalom, the son of Maacah, the daughter ofTalmi, king ofGeshur; the fourth, Adonijah, son of Haggith; and the fifth, Shephatia the son of Abita/; and the sixth, Ithream by Eglah, David's wife. These were born to David in Hebron. (3:2-5) We first note that, to his two wives Ahinoam and Abigail whom he married during the "Wilderness Years," David has now added another four. Maacah we can understand; she is a princess and this is a political match. By marrying her David cements a relationship with Geshur, a small Aramean kingdom north of the Gilead, borderin§ the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, in the region today known as the southern Golan Heights. 2 As to the other three, we are given neither clue as to the circumstances of the marriages nor told anything about them. Suffice it to say that, now that he is a king, David has the beginnings of a very well appointed harem. Ofthis more later. The second point to be noted is that six boys are recorded as being born. Didn't his wives have any girls? Of course they did. One of them, Absalom's sister Tamar, will figure prominently in our story. The girls are not listed because what the author is presenting to us is a list of princes, in order of birth - heirs to the throne. During the seven and a half years that David reigns in Hebron six sons are "born to the purple." 21 Let us list them in their order of birth. This list will serve as a handy reference for what is to come.

Birth Order

Son

1. Amnon 2. Chileab (Daniel) 3. Absalom 4. Adonijah 5. Shephatia 6. Ithream How they are nurtured, and educated, will prove decisive to the future

Mother Ahinoam Abigail Maacah Haggith Abital Eglah of the people oflsrael.

19. Possibly his name is derived from Caleb, the founder of the clan to which Abigail's late husband, and presumably she as well, belonged. Besides Nabal's vast estates, which may have passed to her upon his death, she probably came from an important and wealthy family. Marriages of convenience, which this seemingly was, were not made with paupers. So Abigail, besides being a beautiful woman of strong character, was also a woman of real substance, whose connections to all the best families of Judah, and especially to the Calebite clan, would have been of great assistance to David in gaining the crown of Judah and cementing his hold upon it. In the paralle11ist in 1 Chronicles 3:1-3 the son of Abigail is called Daniel. He may have had two names. 20. This kingdom was one that the Israelites failed to subjugate in the years of the Conquest (Joshua 13:13). Though small, it was important. It sat astride one of the major land routes joining Mesopotamia, the Mediterranean coast and Egypt. The major center excavated to date, the Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age Tel Hadar, contained a very large grain storehouse built on an Egyptian model, and was massively fortified. Tel Hadar was destroyed in the II th century and the site was abandoned for more than one hundred years. The center of the kingdom now shifted to Tel Ein-geb which, in our period, became the premier city in the region (see Chapter 30, note 47). From what we know of the architecture and the artifacts that have been uncovered, Geshur's culture was markedly different from that oflsrael. 2 Samue/15:8 defines Geshur as an Aramean state. 21. That is, recognized from birth as heirs to the throne. Actually this phrase is a corruption of the original "born in the purple." The phrase goes back to Byzantium, where empresses, when they entered labor, were carried to a little palace by the sea to give birth in a chamber of purple marble. Those "born in the purple" were the heirs to the throne, royal from their very start in life; purple was the royal color, and even in David's time kings wore purple robes.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

269

THE SHADOW OF RIZPAH In the course of human affairs, there are those who emerge to be "the movers and the shakers," the initiators of the events and trends that shape the lives of their contemporaries and of the future. These, by common consent, are the great of history, and with these we have been primarily concerned: Samuel, Saul, David and even Abner. All others on the stage are not the actors but are the acted upon, the minor players with only subsidiary, supporting roles. Yet among these minor roles is to be found a unique sub-category: bit-players who, while living their private lives and being acted upon by the major movers, yet act as pivots upon which great events turn. They are catalysts who, by their very existence, bring about fundamental shifts in the trends of the times. Winston Churchill coined the phrase "the hinge of fate" to describe a decisive turning point in the grand march of events. Rizpah was such a hinge, and through her the history of her times took a decisive shift. But before we can get to Rizpah and appreciate her significance we must take a step backward to an event that we treated cursorily. We devoted extended analysis to the circumstances surrounding David's ascent to the throne of Judah, but Ish-bosheth's crowning was passed over with no comment. This was an oversight that needs to be corrected. In the case of David we were told:

Then the men ofJudah came and anointed David king over the House ofJudah. (2:4a) We spent pages elucidating what lay behind this simple statement. Now we must examine with equal care the parallel laconic comment:

Now Abner, the son of Ner, Saul's general, had taken Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, and had brought him across to Mahanaim; and he made him king ... (2:8-9a) The contrast should give us pause. David is crowned as the result of a decision of the men of Judah, that is, the assembly of the representatives of the entire tribe, a duly constituted body. It is this election that gives him his legitimacy. With Ish-bosheth there is no mention of "the men of Israel," the parallel representative body. In contrast to the precedent established by his father Saul, he is not elected but is placed on the throne by General Abner, who controls what is left of the army. What legitimacy he has is due solely to the fact that he is his father's son. 22 All this should open our eyes to what is really happening. The true ruler of Israel is Abner. lshbosheth may sit on the throne but he is powerless; a mere figurehead. It is Abner who put him on the throne, and it is Abner who controls the levers of power.

Now while the war between the House of Saul and the House of David was being waged, Abner was strengthening his position23 in the House ofSaul. (3:6) What is being described is what we would call a military dictatorship?4

22. In ancient lsmel the kingship, especially in the North, was elective. Kingship by inheritance was a foreign practice that had no precedent in Israel and, indeed, was never able to establish itself in the Northern Kingdom. It was only in the Southern Kingdom of Judah that legitimacy by inheritance became the established principle, the National Assembly simply ratifying each successive monarch (though the Assembly retained for itself the right to reject one son of the previous king in favor of another). 23. The Hebrew term mithazek b . .. means to improve or consolidate one's position within a given context. Here it has the sense that Abner is increasingly open in his running of the affairs of the kingdom; that is he is "throwing his weight around." 24. When we speak of"the House of Saul" ruling Israel, this is more than a tum of phrase. Abner was Saul's first cousin, and as such very much part ofthe family. See I Samue/14;50-51.

270

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

But for all his power, Abner needs Ish-bosheth. Ish-bosheth, as Saul's heir, gives the regime what legitimacy it has. 25 Ish-bosheth, on the other hand, needs Abner. He seems to have been a colorless person with little capacity for rule, and certainly not in time of war. Together, as a team, they made a regime possible. It was Rizpah who drove the wedge between them that ended the rule of the House of Saul. Now Saul had a concubine whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah. And /shbosheth26 said to Abner: "Why have you been sleeping with my father's concubine?" (3:7)

A concubine in ancient Israel was a marriage partner of inferior status to that of a wife. She could be a slave; more frequently she was a woman of a lower socio-economic status than her husband. 27 She was married to her husband and their children were legitimate with apparently full rights of inheritance.28 It appears that the custom of those days was that the harem of a dead king passed to his successor?9 Thus Rizpah should have become the concubine of Ish-bosheth. But in defiance of all custom Abner has appropriated her as his own. Some commentators think that this was Abner's way of making a bid for the throne. 30 But this is unlikely. Abner didn't need the throne. If he had felt that he wanted the throne and could dispense with Ish-bosheth as a figurehead he would not have needed to make indirect claims. Abner had the power, and as we shall soon see, he was a very direct and blunt man: he would simply have deposed lsh-bosheth and seized the throne by force. I think that the problem is not political but personal. What is taking place is the very common occurrence of two men wanting the same woman. By custom she "belongs" to Ish-bosheth, but Abner wants her so badly that he is willing to risk a falling out with the king. Ish-bosheth, on the other hand, could overlook this "breach of etiquette," seeing that he is totally dependent on Abner. Yet he provokes a confrontation that he cannot possibly win. Everything seems to point to both men having lost their heads over Rizpah, and to have her both are willing to risk shattering an alliance upon which they are both dependent. What kind of a woman is Rizpah to cause two mature men to so lose all sense of proportion? What we are told here is no more than her name and the effect that she has upon Abner and lshbosheth. Even if we knew no more than this we might suspect there was more to her than just a pretty face or a seductive personality, though we couldn't be sure. But we do know, for years later Rizpah once again surfaces in our narrative, and we discover that she is a woman of remarkable character, and with an overpowering determination to do the right as she sees the right. Once again she is to prove the catalyst of change. This tale will have to await its proper time in the author's ordering of her book, but this we can say: with hindsight we will realize that it is her character and personality, as 25. Could Abner have arranged, if he wished, to be chosen by the representatives of the northern tribes as their

king? We have no way of knowing, since it appears that he never tried. But he seems to have lacked personal charisma, and perhaps he knew better than to try. 26. Reading with LXX and Vulg. MT lacks Ish-bosheth. 27. Rizpah was probably freeborn from a poor family. It would be very unusual to mention the parentage of a slave. 28 According to Mesopotamian law (Code of Hammurabi) the husband of a slave concubine had the choice of either recognizing her children as his heirs along with any children by his wife or wives, or if not he had to free her and her children. On balance, what little evidence there is seems to indicate that in ancient Israel the father's recognition was unnecessary. Children of concubines were recognized heirs of their fathers. Some became highly distinguished. Jacob's sons by his concubine Bilhah, Dan and Naftali, and those by his concubine Zilpah, Gad and Asher, were fathers of tribes along with his other eight sons by his two wives. The first attempt to establish a monarchy in Israel, during the age ofthe Judges, was made by Abimelech, the son of Gideon the Judge by a concubine. (See Judges 8:29-9:57) 29. The new king would, of course, marry them, with the exception, needless to say, of his own mother. Biblical law forbids marriage with one's mother. 30. For example, Anson Rainey claims: "To lie with a monarch's concubine was tantamount to usurpation of the throne ... For this reason Abner took Rizpah." (Rainey, "Concubine," p. 862)

THE PATHS OF GLORY: BROTHER AGAINST BROTHER

271

much as any beauty or glamour she possesses, that drive Abner and Ish-bosheth to the acts that destroy them both. To recapitulate, Abner has taken his late king's widow, Rizpah, and she is living with him. This drives lsh-bosheth to throw caution to the winds and confront Abner, an act that Abner will not tolerate. His fury knows no bounds.

Abner was furious over Ish-bosheth 's words, and he said: "Am I a dog's head? "31 [Up until] today I have been loyally serving the House of Saul, your father, and his brothers and his friends, and I have not delivered you into the hand of David; yet you accuse me this day of impropriety with regard to a woman! May God do so to Abner, and more also32 if I do not accomplish for David what the Lord has sworn to him - to transfer the kingdom from the House of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan to Beer-sheba. "33 (3:8-10) Speak of bluntness! Abner has had just about all that he can take from this incompetent ingrate whom he has placed upon the throne. From being the central support of the House of Saul, he now brutally announces that he is transferring his allegiance to David. lsh-bosheth is struck dumb with terror.

And he could not answer Abner another word, for fear ofhim. (3: 11) Without lifting a finger, by the very fact of her existence, Rizpah has brought about the fall of the House of Saul. The civil war is over.

31. Reading with LXX. MT adds the words that belongs to Judah? "Dog," in Biblical Hebrew, was a term signifying something of no value, totally insignificant, and hence contemptible. That was Goliath's meaning when he saw David and roared out, "Am I a dog that you come to me with sticks?" That is, do you hold me in such contempt that you come against me armed only with a stick? The meaning here is similar (if a dog is valueless, how much more so a piece of a dog): "Am I so contemptible that you dare talk to me in this way?" 32. One of the standard forms of a Biblical oath, see Chapter 2, note 17. 33. From Dan to Beersheba: a phrase meaning "all of the Land of Israel." Dan was the northernmost Israelite city, Beersheba the southernmost.

CHAPTER21

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

Lords, I protest, my soul is full ofwoe, That blood should sprinkle me to make me grow. Come, mourn with me for what I do lament, And put on sullen black incontinent.

William Shakespeare, King Richard 11, Act V

As we have indicated, Abner has "had it" with Ish-bosheth, this puppet who won't know his place. He could easily usurp the throne-he has the power-but he makes no attempt to do so. Perhaps he fears that he would not be accepted as king; perhaps, after being the real ruler for a time he finds that he doesn't like the burden of responsibility or that he isn't suited for the job; perhaps he just is not all that ambitious. So he determines to unite the two kingdoms under David, and having made his decision loses no time in putting his resolve into motion. So Abner sent messengers to David at Hebron, 1 saying: "To whom shall the land belong?" And he said [further]: "Make your allianci with me, and behold, my hand shall be with you, to bring over all Israel to you. " (3: 12)

This is a proposal of breathtaking scope. Deal with me, Abner is saying, and I will deliver the crown oflsrael to you on a silver platter.

THE DOWN PAYMENT David is not a little wary of the offer. Besides the question of what Abner wants in return (all agreements are, of necessity, two sided), several issues must be at the forefront of his mind: why the

I. Reading with LXX. MT reads in his place or where he was. The Hebrew is unclear. 2. The Hebrew term brit means a formal pact or alliance between two parties involving mutual obligations. Until the early 20th century it was almost universally rendered in English as "covenant."

274

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

offer in the first place? Is Abner serious, or is this a ruse-a new move in the ongoing civil war; some sort of trap? And secondly, and of overriding significance: if the offer is serious, can Abner deliver the goods? David has to test Abner, before committing himself. Of all possible tests, the way he resolves to challenge him to prove his bona fides is to demand that he rectify the burning personal issue that has been weighing on David's mind and heart-Michal. When they had hurriedly whispered their goodbyes on that perilous night neither had expected their paths to be easy, but both had been certain that the parting was only temporary. Only death would make permanent their separation. Neither had contemplated the possibility that she would be forced into marriage with another. To David the situation was intolerable, but he had been as powerless to prevent it as Michal had been. We have said that David would not rest until he could be reunited with Michal, and now, for the first time, he sees in Abner's offer his opportunity.

And he said: "All right, I will make an alliance with you. But one thing I demand of you, and that is, you shall not see my face unless you first bring Michal, Saul's daughter, when you come to see my face. " And David sent messengers to Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, saying: "Give me my wife, Michal, whom I betrothed at the [bride] price of one hundred Philistine foreskins." (3:13-14) What David is saying to Abner amounts to this: "I am willing to make a deal with you, but only if you can prove to me that you are serious. Unless you restore to me my wife, Michal, there is nothing to talk about. Don't even bother to show up for negotiations." But David does not refer to Michal as his wife in his reply. He refers to her as Saul's daughter, and in this lies David's test of Abner's seriousness. Besides being anointed by Samuel, David has no claim to the crown of Israel. This is his weak point. Having his marriage to Saul's daughter formally recognized by the Israelite power establishment (which is what their returning her to him would mean) would enormously strengthen his claim to the throne. This is an act that Abner would never countenance unless he is serious in his offer to switch sides. Its political consequences would be disastrous to the standing of the House of Saul. David now addresses his second concern: can Abner deliver? He gives Abner no chance to procrastinate. He sends emissaries to Ish-bosheth, as one king to another, with a formal demand that his wife, Michal, be restored to him. The author stresses that he is addressing Saul's son, and thus Michal's brother. But in his demand there are no political overtones (though Ish-bosheth can hardly be unaware of them). David simply focuses on the fact that she is his wife, and that he has paid in full the bride price demanded of him by Saul, lsh-bosheth's father. Now he wants her back. Every instinct of Ish-bosheth would prompt him to refuse such a demand. If, despite this, Abner can produce Michal, David will have sure proof both that Abner is sincere in his offer and that he has the power to deliver on an agreement. Only his price remains to be determined. But this can be worked out in the negotiations. Abner rises to the occasion. What pressures he brings to bear upon the unfortunate Ish-bosheth we are not told; only that the king buckles under.

3. A perplexing problem remains. Under Biblical law a divorced woman who marries another man can never return to her original husband (see Deuteronomy 24:1-4). But the key to the possible explanation lies in the simple fact that David never divorced Michal (see Chapter 15, note 29). It has been shown that in Mesopotamian law, if a man is forced to leave the country and give up his wife, with the passage of a stated span of time she automatically becomes a widow and can remarry. But should the first husband ultimately return he has the right to reclaim her, and in that case she must leave her new husband and return to him. It seems quite possible that similar practices were in effect in Israel at this time. (Ben-Barak, "The Legal Background to the Restoration of Michal to David," p. 15-29)

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

275

So Ish-bosheth sent, and took her from her husband, 4 from Paltiel, the son ofLaish. And her husband went with her as far as Bahurim, weeping as he went. Then Abner said to him: "Go back, "and he went. (3: 15-16)

The episode is brutal. Abner treats Michal and Paltiel as pawns. No one consults them or considers their feelings. What Michal feels we are not told, though we can imagine. But the picture of poor Paltiel, ruthlessly robbed of his love (for it is obvious that he loves her) and powerless even to protest, is one that does not quickly fade from the mind. He is reduced to the degrading humiliation of following his wife, crying every step of the way, as Abner and his soldiers lead her off. At the border village of Bahurim the sad spectacle comes to an end. They are now entering the territory of Judah, the kingdom ruled by Michal's first husband who is reclaiming her, and enough is enough. Abner turns on Paltiel and bluntly tells him to clear out and go home. And broken, Paltiel goes. Another expendable pawn has been sacrificed to the interests of a deal between the mighty ofthe earth. Of the reunion between Michal and David we are not told. I think it is only reasonable to assume that it was not easy for either party. Their pictures of each other, formed as they had been years before, have no relation to the current reality. Then David had been a young and dashing military hero, a man on the make. And Michal had been a fairy princess, madly in love, won by prowess and daring. Neither image can survive the changes wrought by the intervening years. In the place of a young and dashing hero-husband Michal now encounters a mature and hardened man, with six wives and a slew of children. David faces an embittered woman, smoldering with resentment over the treatment she has endured. There must have been considerable disillusionment on both sides, preparing the ground for the tragedy to come.

THE ASSASSINATION The conditions met, Abner gets down to business. He can't simply install David on the throne of Israel as he had done with lsh-bosheth. David is not Saul's legitimate heir. Only an election by the elders, the clan and tribal chiefs, in formal assembly can replace the House of Saul with the House of David. So the task that lies before Abner is to persuade the elders of Israel to give their votes to David: to back him in the assembly. So Abner conferred with the elders of Israel, saying: "All along you have wanted David as king over you. So do it! For the Lord has spoken concerning David, saying: 'By the hand of my servant David will I deliver My people Israel out of the hand of the Philistines, and from the hand of all their enemies.'" And Abner also conferred with the Benjamites. Then Abner went to tell David in Hebron what Israel and all the House ofBenjamin thought good to do.

(3: 17-19) Abner puts a special effort into persuading the tribe of Benjamin, Saul's tribe. There the loyalty to his house would be the strongest. But Abner has an advantage; he too is a Benjamite, and to him they will listen. Abner's argument is simply that David is the only person capable of achieving victory in a showdown with the Philistines. Most people realize the impotence of Ish-bosheth, and with Abner jumping ship the argument is unanswerable. In addition Abner reminds the elders of David's divine sanction (by now everyone is aware that Samuel had anointed him). He seems to have swung the majority into his camp. With the election apparently in his pocket, Abner now goes to Hebron to report on the situation and to strike his deal with David. 4. Reading with LXX and Targ. MT reads a man.

276

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

So Abner came to David at Hebron, and twenty men were with him. Then David made a feast for Abner and the men who were with him. And Abner said to David: "/will arise and go, and gather all Israel to my lord the king; they will make a covenant with you, that you may reign over all that your heart desires. " So David sent Abner away, and he went in peace. (3:20-21) So what is the deal struck in Hebron? Though the author does not specify the quid per quo, in return for securing David's election the very least that Abner could have demand is that he continue, under David, to hold the position that he held under Saul-Commander in Chief of the armed forces. For what David is getting the price is cheap, and there is no doubt that he readily agrees. It will mean dumping his nephew Joab, but as Napoleon is credited with saying, if you want to make an omelet you have to break eggs. The deal done (note that Abner, for the frrst time, now addresses David as "my lord the king") Abner is sent on his way to conclude the arrangements for putting David on the throne. Now David is no fool. From the start he must have realized what Abner's bottom line would be; though not ambitious, he would accept no position that would amount to a demotion. David also knows his Joab, or thinks he does. He is certain that Joab would not accept being fired with good grace. He is not the kind of person to sacrifice his personal interests for the greater good. He will do everything in his power to prevent his being sidelined. The only way such a deal could be made is behind Joab's back. So David seems to have arranged for him to be out of the way, apparently on a raiding expedition, while he and Abner are carrying on their negotiations. When he gets back he will be presented with a fait accompli; he may kick and scream but he will have no choice but to accept the situation. David could not have been more wrong. As it turns out, Joab returns a bit earlier than expected.

Just then David's troops, and Joab, returned from a raid, bringing much spoil with them. Now Abner was not in Hebron with David, for he had sent him away, and he had gone in peace. So Joab and all the army that was with him arrived, and it was told to Joab: "Abner, the son ofNer, came to the king, and he sent him away, and he went in peace." (3:22-23) We have said that David is no fool. But then neither is Joab. The substance of the king's conversation with the general commanding the enemy armies is unknown, but Joab can easily follow the same line of reasoning that we have. It does not take long for him to realize that if David and Abner are talking, a deal must be in the making. If so, where will that leave him? He explodes in fury. In his confrontation with the king, Joab can hardly accuse him to his face of making a deal that will cut him out. His line is that David is being duped. Any offers that Abner makes are no more than a blind; his real purpose being to size up, personally, the situation in Judah and in Hebron. He is neither more nor less than a spy. The interview becomes very heated, Joab as much as calling David a fool. He can allow himself such freedom because he is a close relative, because of the memory of shared dangers and travails in the wilderness years and also because David is on the defensive. Even so Joab is sailing perilously close to the wind.

Then Joab came to the king and said: "What have you done? Here Abner came to you. Why have you sent him away, so that he has gone in peace? Doni you know that Abner, the son ofNer, came to deceive you, to learn your comings and goings, to learn all that you are doing?" (3:24-25) David lets Joab blow off steam, expecting some such reaction. After he has calmed down he will learn to accept the new situation. He will have no choice. The deal being done, he now can prevent 5. Reading with LXX. MT reads so that he has gone. You know . ..

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

277

neither the agreement nor its terms. It appears that David has no suspicion of the lengths to which Joab is capable of going in order to serve his own interests.

Then Joab went out from David's presence, and he sent messengers after Abner, and they brought him back from the cistern of Sirah. 6 But David knew nothing about it. Now when Abner had returned to Hebron Joab drew him aside into the gateway, to speak privately with him, and there he smote him in the stomach! So he died for the blood of Asahel his brother. (3:26-27) Joab strikes before events get beyond his control. The messengers sent to recall Abner obviously purport to be from David, and probably believe themselves so to be. How can they know that Joab, just emerging from an audience with the king, is taking action on his own and not relaying orders from the king? At this supposed royal request, Abner returns. Joab, who asks to speak privately with him, meets him at the gate. Gateways of cities were strongly fortified compounds, flanked by strong towers. The area between the two towers was roofed, and consisted of one or two wooden gates with strong bars to secure them. This area was recessed and shielded from public view. It is into this recess, away from his bodyguards, that Joab draws Abner. Abner seems to harbor no suspicions, and to be totally unprepared for the sword-thrust in the stomach that ends his life. Joab at once produces his cover story: this killing is blood-revenge for Abner's killing of my brother, Asahel, and thus fully justified.' As to the rest, let David rage; with his intended supplanter dead, Joab's job is secure.

THE PENANCE With one blow all of David's expectations have been shattered. The crown oflsrael, so tantalizingly within reach, has now been snatched out of his grasp. Worse, Abner's murder by one of David's highest and most trusted lieutenants may be laid at his door, so poisoning the atmosphere as to make the crown oflsrael all but unattainable. One of David's greatest assets, his reputation as "Mr. Clean," may be permanently discredited. To make matters worse still, there is little that David can do about it. He cannot punish Joab for murder: his claim that the killing was revenge for the killing of his brother is an ironclad excuse. He can't even sack him. As long as he had Abner, an experienced and highly capable general as a replacement, Joab was expendable. With Abner dead Joab is now indispensable. Joab has calculated correctly. David may rage but he must keep him in his job.

Afterwards, when David heard of it, he said: "/ and my kingdom are forever guiltless before the Lord from the blood ofAbner, the son ofNer. May it fall on the head of Joab, and

6. Josephus places the site about two and a half miles north of Hebron. 7. According to the custom of the time, it was the duty of close relatives to avenge the killing of a kinsman. The avenger was called Goel Ha-dam, the "redeemer of the blood." It was believed that the slain person could not rest in peace so long as revenge had not been taken on his killer. Indeed, in a society lacking in organized police forces, the main protection a person had was the knowledge that to kill someone was a way of committing suicide. The person's family would make sure of that. So all-pervasive was the blood feud that Biblical law provided "cities of refuge" in which those guilty of unintentional homicide could find shelter and be safe from the Goel Ha-dam (Numbers 25:9-15, Deuteronomy 4:41-43). In the case of premeditated murder, Biblical law saw the killing of the murderer by the victim's relatives as justified execution. (With the consolidation of the state, and the resultant establishment of police forces and a court system, the custom of the blood feud eventually withered away.) In our case, it would seem that Joab was stretching matters a bit. It seems doubtful that death in regular military combat would normally constitute grounds for a blood feud. But apparently the custom was so deeply embedded that, even in this case, Joab could get his claim accepted.

278

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

all his father's house. 8 May the house of Joab never be without one suffering from a discharge or one who is leprous, or one who clutches a crutch, or one who falls by the sword, or one that lacks bread " Now Joab, and Abishai had been laying fol Abner, because he had killed their brother Asahel at the battle ofGibeon. (3:28-30)

David has been reduced to impotence. He can publicly disclaim all knowledge and responsibility. He can put all the blame on Joab and call down a curse on him and all his house: chronic and disgusting sickness, crippling disability, death in war, and poverty. But beyond disclaimers and curses he cannot go. Not only can he not punish Joab, he even has to accept his cover story. Even if he should want to reveal the terms of the private agreement that he had reached, with Abner dead who is there to corroborate David's side of the story? Joab has neatly trapped David. One recourse remains to David, to force Joab to be one of the chief mourners at the State Funeral that he holds in Abner's honor. This must have been highly humiliating to Abner's assassin. Forced to lead the funeral procession as commander of the honor guard that precedes the bier, 10 he has to stand in the first row while David declaims the eulogy, listening with a straight face as he is publicly called one of the bnai avlah, the children of iniquity, wicked and treacherous. It is not much but that is all that David feels able to do at this time. Then David said to Joab, and to all the troops 11 that were with him: "Rend your clothes, and put on sackcloth and make lament before Abner. " 12 And King David followed the bier. They buried Abner in Hebron, and the king lifted up his voice and wept at the grave of Abner; and all the people wept. And the king intoned this dirge over Abner: "Should Abner die as afoo/13 dies? Your hands were not bound, Your feet were not fettered As one falls before the wicked, u So have you fallen. " And all the people wept again over him. (3 :31-34)

8. "The biblical concept of bloodguilt derives from the belief that deeds generate consequences and that punishment inheres in sin. The most vivid examples ofthis belief appear in connection with unlawful homicide, where innocent blood (dam naki'; Jonah 1:14) cries out for vengeance (Genesis 4:10). Rejected by the earth (Isaiah 26:1; Ezekiel24:1), it attaches itself to the slayer and his family, literally 'dancing around their heads' (2 Samuel 3:28-29) for generations" (Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary, Numbers, p. 509) 9. Reading with Q (Dead Sea Scrolls); MT reads had killed. 10. Coffins were not used. A body was conveyed to the grave on a kind of stretcher, carried by 6 or 8 men. The term used, mitah, normally means bed. 11. Literally people. 12. That is, to precede the body of Abner, as it is carried to the grave, weeping and wailing, and covering their heads with their hands. The funeral customs of that period, both in Israel and among neighboring peoples, included tearing one's garments, wearing sackcloth (a coarse and very uncomfortable material usually used for bagging agricultural produce}, walking barefoot in the funeral procession, sprinkling dust and ashes on one's head and covering the head with one's hands. The bier would often be followed by professional mourning women chanting laments. (It seems that in our case David took upon himself this function in order to show especial honor to Abner.) After the funeral, during the period of mourning (which normally lasted a week) the mourners would sit on the ground. Various funeral practices of neighboring peoples, such as slashing one's flesh with a knife or partially shaving one's head (Deuteronomy 14:1), are explicitly forbidden to Jews by Biblical law as either harmful or idolatrous. 13. Hebrew nabal, a vile person. It also has the connotations of ignoble and disgraceful. 14. Bnai avlah, see above.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

279

Upon returning from a funeral the usual practice is to have a meal, and the mourners are expected to eat. Against all customary usage and urgent persuasion David insists on fasting until nightfall, insisting on the nobility of the slain Abner, and protesting his inability to act against the assassin.

Then all the people came to urge15 David to eat bread while it was yet day, but David swore, saying: "May God do so to me, and more also, if I taste bread or anything else until the sun goes down!" And all the people took notice of it, and it pleased them; everythinl6 the king did pleased all the people. So all the people and all Israel knew that day it had not been the king's intention to slay Abner, the son ofNer. And the king said to those who ministered to him: 17 Do you not know that a prince and a great man has fallen this day in Israel? And I am this day weak, even though anointed king; these men, the sons of Zeruiah, are too hard for me. May the Lord requite the evildoer according to his wickedness. (3:3539) David's efforts at damage control seem to have succeeded. Though, as we shall learn, pockets of resentment and blame persist, especially in Benjamin, most people accept that David was not personally involved in the assassination of Abner. This, of course, does not undo the damage done. The window of opportunity has been slammed shut. David, on the verge of being crowned king of Israel, now is further away from his goal than before. He has only succeeded in containing the fallout. Joab, on the other hand, has succeeded in preserving his job. He will continue as Commander-in-Chief of David's army, despite the damage that he has done him. Both of them know that there is nothing David can do. David's hands may be tied, but he will not put the matter behind him and go on from there. Go on he does, but he will not forget what Joab has done. As we shall learn, David has a very long memory.

IN COLD BLOOD! The news of Abner's assassination causes shock waves throughout Israel. If the war had been going badly despite his strong hand, what can one expect now? For those elders who had thrown in their lots with Abner's plot to transfer allegiance to David, the collapse of their plans with his death must have been devastating. Now on his own, Ish-bosheth is proving incapable of rising to the occasion by providing decisive leadership. In the resulting paralysis demoralization spreads relentlessly. Once the rot has set in, things begin to come apart. Nor is there a lack of those who want to get out from under a collapsing kingdom.

Now when Ish-bosheth, 18 the son of Saul, heard that Abner had died in Hebron his courage failed, 19 and all Israel was in shock. Now Saul's son had two men, battalion20 commanders; the name of one was Baanah and the name of the second was Rechab. They were sons of 15. In Rabbinic Hebrew the term used here refers specifically to the bringing of food to mourners immediately after the funeral. 16. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg; MT reads as everything. 17. Literally, his servants. 18. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg. MT omits the word Ish-bosheth. 19. Literally his hands hung loose. 20. The term gedud is used in modem Hebrew for battalion. In those days it was used for a unit smaller than that of the major Israelite military formation, the "thousand." Since we have adopted the convention of translating ancient military designations into their nearest modem equivalents (such as using the term "regiment" to translate "the thousand"), translating gedud as battalion seems reasonable. The gedud formation seems to have largely been used as a raiding unit.

280

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

Rimmon, a Benjamite from Beeroth. 21 (Now Beeroth was also considered part of Benjamin, for the Beerothites fled to Gittaim and have been gerim22 there to this day.) Now Jonathan, Saul's son, had a son whose feet were crippled He was jive years old when the news about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel; and his nurse picked him up and fled. And as she fled, in her haste he fell and became lame. His name was Mephibosheth23 ( 4: 1-4) The author, having been forced by her narrative to digress from the progress of events, takes advantage of the pause to introduce us to yet another of the players. This is the first that we hear of Saul's grandson. Why does the author introduce him here? I am not sure, but perhaps it is to inform us that besides Ish-bosheth, the younger brother of Jonathan, there is another person in line to the throne, Jonathan's son. But he is a cripple (apparently his legs were broken when he fell and were never set properly) and this disqualifies him. Besides, at this time he is only seven years old. The digression over, we return to the rats deserting the sinking ship; to the two Benjamite battalion commanders, the brothers Baanah and Rechab.

So the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, set out, and came to the house of /sh-bosheth about the heat of the day when he was taking his noonday rest. Now the doorkeeper of the house had been cleaning wheat; she became drowsy and fell asleep and Rechab and his brother slipped in. 24 When they entered the house he was lying on his bed in his bedroom; they struck him and killed him, and they cut off his head! Then they took his head and went all night by way of the Arabah. They brought the head of Ish-bosheth to David at Hebron. Then they said to the king: "Here is the head of Ish-bosheth, son of Saul your enemy, who sought your life. The Lord has, this day, avenged my lord the king on Saul and on his offspring." (4:5-8) If the murderer of Abner could claim some semblance of justification on the basis of a blood feud, here there is not even an attempt at an excuse. Two army officers murder their fellow tribesman and king out of crass opportunism. The bloody head of poor Ish-bosheth is, to them, a passport to

21. Possibly the present el-Bireh, less than ten miles north of Jerusalem; possibly the present Nebi-Samwil, about 5 miles NW of Jerusalem. The location is uncertain. Beeroth was part of a Tetrapolis, a union of four cities whose other three members were Kiriath-jearim, Chephirah, and Gibeon (which led the union). Amorites, who had contrived to enter into a treaty with the Israelites at the time of the conquest, inhabited these cities. The treaty allowed them to remain, in return for their providing a manual labor force for the Israelites (Joshua 9). Everyone knew this. Thus the statement that Baanah and Rechab were both Benjamites and also inhabitants of Beeroth is so strange as to force the author into a digression to explain this incongruity to those not cognizant of local history. It appears that the Amorite population fled during the reign of Saul (probably due to his persecutions of the Gibeonites; see Chapter 36) and Benjamites settled there in their place. The towns formed an enclave within the tribal territory of Benjamin. 22. Ger (plural gerim): a resident alien with defined rights and responsibilities. 23. His real name, as given in I Chronicles 8:34 and 9:40, was Merib-baal. We must be careful not to confuse him with his uncle Meppibaal, also renamed Mephibosheth, whom we will meet in 2 Samue/21:8. As to the reasons for altering their original names, see Chapter 20, note 1. 24. Reading with LXX: MT reads so they went into the midst ofthe house, as though they were fetching wheat, and they smote him in the stomach. Then Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped. Whichever reading is used, the underlying assumption is that Ish-bosheth is residing in a standard Israelite house, perhaps one a bit bigger than the norm but in no other way different (see Excursus IV following Chapter 7: "In what Sort of Houses did Samuel and Saul Live?"). Ish-bosheth has his bedroom on the second floor. On the ground floor the standard storage room may have been supplemented by the rooms usually used for stabling animals, and may have served as a central supply depot, providing rations for the troops stationed around Mahanaim. We know that one of the main functions of Greek palaces and government centers of the period was to serve as grain storage centers; it seems likely, then, that the residence of the king would be similarly used, at a minimum for the needs of his army.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

281

give them safe entry and new careers under David, whom they correctly perceive as the wave of the future. Once again little men have misread the character of David, seeing in him the mirror image of their self-serving selves. But David answered Rechab and Baanah his brother, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, saying to them: "As the Lord lives, Who has redeemed my soul out of every adversity, when at Ziklag one told me: 'Behold, Saul is dead', and thought he war bringing good tidings, instead of giving him a reward for his news I seized him and killed him. How much more when wicked men have killed a righteous man in his own house, upon his own bed, shall I not now require his blood at your hand, and rid the earth ofyou?" And David commanded his wa"iors, 25 and they killed them, and cut off their hands and their feet, and hung [their bodies] by the pool in Hebron. But as for the head of Ish-bosheth, they took and buried it in the tomb ofAbner in Hebron. (4:9-12)

Once again, by forceful and dramatic public action, David disassociates himself from any suspicion of complicity in political murder or from encouraging it in any way. Not only is he expressing his disgust and abhorrence of the vicious murderers by the public display of their mutilated bodies, but also he is driving home the lesson that, regardless of any benefit he might obtain, assassination is not the way to his favor. Its reward is death. The lesson sinks in, and all attempts to curry his favor by assassinating his political enemies cease. By a series of dramatic public acts David has excised a growing cancer.

AMBITION'S TRIUMPH David has kept his hands clean; there is no mistaking his disgust. Yet at the same time there is no disguising the fact that the two bloody brothers have rendered a real service to David. Their political calculations had been correct; with Ish-bosheth out of the way, a political vacuum has been created. The next in line to the throne after lsh-bosheth is a crippled child, and so a non-contender. A political vacuum is unsustainable, and out of desperation and lack of real choice the consensus that Abner had been building now becomes a groundswell. What David has planned and worked for finally comes to fruition. Then all the tribes ofIsrael came to David at Hebron, and said: "Behold, we are your bone and your flesh. 26 In times past, 27 when Saul was king over us, it was you that led out and brought in Israel; and the Lord said to you: 'You shall shepherd my people, and you shall be leade?8 over Israel. "' So all the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron, and King

25. Naarim. 26. This was the formal way a kinship relationship was expressly recognized. When Jacob flees to Padan-aram and informs Laban (who is his mother's brother) who he is, Laban recognizes his kinship with his nephew with the words: "Truly, you are my bone and my flesh. " (Genesis 29: 12-14) This sense of kinship extended to members of one's clan and even, in attenuated form, to members of one's tribe. But David was not even of the same tribal grouping as the elders of the Northern Tribes. Here the language implies something else: adoption. A kinship relationship could be established in ancient Israel not only through consanguinity (i.e. by blood relationship) but also legally, through the legal mechanism of a covenant. We have already seen this in the relationship between David and Jonathan (see Chapter 10, note 38). Here the elders are proposing the same thing; that David become a kinsman by adoption, and thus quality to rule over them. 27. Literally, also yesterday, also the day before yesterday. 28. Nagid. See Chapter 6 for the significance of this usage.

282

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

David made a covenani9 with them at Hebron, before the Lord And they anointed David king over Israel. 30 (5:1-3) The reader having been told of David's coronation as king over Israel, the standard statistics on the reign of the new king are inserted:

Now David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years. In Hebron he ruled over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah thirty-three years. 31 (5 :4-5) It is important that we understand exactly what it is that we have been told. The elders have no intention whatsoever of raising a tyrant over themselves. It seems that Samuel's lessons have sunk in after all. The very fact that the elders use the term "Nagid" (leader), the term insisted on by Samuel, shows their caution. What the elders are proposing is some sort of constitutional monarchy that places limits on the powers of the king. What exactly these limits are we are not told, but evidently David and the elders are able to reach mutually agreeable terms. These are enshrined in a brit, a formal covenant "before the Lord," each side swearing to abide by the terms of the agreement. This becomes what we would call the constitution of the Kingdom oflsrael. Implied in this election is the unspoken assumption of the elders that the ultimate power lies in their hands; they have elected a king, and if he fails to abide by the terms set they can "unelect" him. David, of course, sees things differently. He sees the election as irrevocable; he is king for life. As long as things will go well these potential grounds for conflict will remain hidden. But the time will come when they are to become explosively overt. A second point needs to be made. David will not be occupying the throne that Saul has left vacant. That throne over all Israel no longer exists. In the hiatus following the death of Saul the situation has changed. Out of the ruins of Saul's kingdom two separate states have emerged: Judah and Israel. They will not recombine; the break is irreversible. David has already been elected and crowned King of Judah. (Note how David is referred to as king before his election.) Now he is being elected and crowned king of another kingdom-Israel. Two separate and independent states are being joined by the fact that both have one and the same king. This is called a personal union. 32 Such unions are common in a monarchial world. For example, when Queen Elizabeth I died without children in 1603, the next in line to the throne was King James the sixth of Scotland, an independent country that had been at war with England, off and on, for centuries. He ascended the throne of England as James I, and by this act of personal union two previously hostile nations were brought together under the umbrella of one ruler. To this day they remain two nations: for over 100 years after the union they possessed separate parliaments, and even after almost 400 years banks in Scotland still issue their unique currency.

29. Hebrew brit, the same word used with regard to the deal between David and Abner (see note 2 above). There, as a pact between two people, it was rendered as "alliance." Here something more serious is indicated: a constitution under whose terms the elders would elect David king, and under whose terms he would rule. To indicate the much broader scope of the use ofthe term here and in 3:2I we have rendered it as "covenant." 30. I Chronicles II :3 adds the words according to the word ofthe Lord by the hand ofSamuel. 31. In its present form, an editor must have written this insert after David's death (see Chapter I7, note 5). Another possibility is that the author repeated the statistics of David's reign in Hebron (2:11), adding that after seven and a half years he moved his capital to Jerusalem. This formed the introduction to his description of how David moved his capital to Jerusalem (5:6-9), which we will discuss in Chapter 22. On this supposition, after David's death an editor expanded the statistics to encompass the king's total reign. 32. It was A. Alt ("The Formation of the Israelite State in Palestine") that first made the case for the Davidic State being structured as a personal union between the two sovereign Kingdoms of Judah and Israel. This view was expanded and butressed by G. Buccellati (Cities and Nations of Ancient Syria, p. l37-I93). I find all attempts to reject their reasoning unpersuasive.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: THE MAKING OF A KING

283

Inheriting a foreign throne, or being perforce elected to one, does not necessarily make a ruler loved and accepted. James Stuart was never liked or well accepted on the throne of England; the English were always, under the best of circumstances, uncomfortable with this coarse and absolutist Scotsman as their ruler, and his son succeeded in provoking a rebellion that cost him his head. In much the same way the much more cultured and prosperous Israel will never fully accept David. The elders may talk of him being "of one bone and flesh" with them, but to them he always will remain the southern barbarian adventurer. He is the best that there is currently available, but they will never be fully comfortable with him. He can never be "one of their own," as Saul had been. Unless we understand this, much of what is to come will remain incomprehensible. So David is now King of Judah, King of Israel, and, incidentally, also "Baron" of Ziklag. (Ziklag will never be incorporated into either the Kingdom of Judah or the Kingdom of Israel. It will remain a separate principality, ruled by David and his heirs.) Energetic kings have a way of collecting territories and titles, and these are not the last that David will collect. But the titles are not the issue. Having gathered the resources of both Judah and Israel into his capable hands, the real question is, can he utilize them effectively in the coming showdown with the Philistines.

CHAPTER22

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince

Having informed us that David transferred his capital to Jerusalem after reigning seven and one half years in Hebron, the author is at pains to let us know just how David manages to acquire possession of a city that does not even belong to the Israelites. This, however, distorts the sequence of events, and since we have become much more sensitive to a strict chronological order than were the people in the Biblical age, we will pass over Jerusalem and continue following the events as they unfold. We will return to the conquest of Jerusalem in its proper historical setting. 1

IN THE VALLEY OF THE GIANTS The news of David's coronation as King of Israel comes as a thunderbolt, not only to the Israelites but especially to the Philistines. David has done everything to keep the matter quiet. Not only have all negotiations been held in the strictest secrecy, including those with the delegation of elders

I. There are a number of scholars who continue to maintain that the text is in chronological sequence, but fail to convincingly explain how David could have launched a campaign to take Jebus (Jerusalem) before first laying to rest the Philistine threat. Jebus was almost certainly a Philistine dependency and, all other considerations aside, the Philistines could be depended upon to come to the aid of their allies if and when they would come under attack. The very fact that the account of the conquest of Jerusalem makes no mention of Philistine intervention is compelling evidence that they were no longer a significant military factor, i.e. that David had already defeated them.

286

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

that had come to Hebron to offer him the crown, but David has refused to go to Shechem,2 or some other northern site, to be crowned. He undoubtedly convinces the elders that if they drag out affairs with a formal crowning ceremony up north, they will find uninvited guests crashing the party-a Philistine army. The argument being unanswerable, the elders consent to quickly crown David on the spot, in Hebron, as king of Israel. The news of the ascension of David to the throne oflsrael can't be kept secret for long. Soon the whole region is aware of what has happened. The news that David has slipped the leash, and that therefore their entire policy of divide and rule is in tatters, goads the Philistines into frantic action. They are too late to prevent the coronation, but they may yet prevent the United Kingdoms from becoming a political and military reality if they act immediately. They waste no time.

Now when the Philistines heard that David had been anointed king over Israel, all the Philistines went up in search of David; but David heard of it and went down to the stronghold (5:17) The reaction is massive. We learn elsewhere that Bethlehem is occupied by Philistine troops,3 and probably Hebron as well. David does not attempt to make a defiant stand to save his capital. The Philistines have moved before he can mobilize the northern tribal militias. He can now rely only on his own battle-hardened troops, augmented by various Israelite units that have trickled into Hebron to pledge their allegiance to the new king,4 and by some part of the Judean militia. This is far from sufficient to stem the Philistine onslaught. So David evacuates Hebron and falls back on his wildernessdays base, the stronghold of Adulam. 5 Here, in this harsh country, he has room to maneuver to gain the time he needs to be able to mobilize the forces of his new kingdom, Israel. There follows a period of skirmishing, feints, and what amounts to guerrilla warfare. How long this stalemate is protracted we do not know, but long enough for various heroic incidents to take place- incidents that inscribe themselves upon the public memory. 6 David has eluded them for the moment, but the Philistines understand only too well the reasoning behind his delaying tactics. They move major forces to cut Judah off from northern reinforcement.

Then the Philistines came and deployed in Emek Rephaim. (5: 18) Emek Rephaim-literally, the Valley of the Giants 7-lies southwest of the ancient Jerusalem of those days (though now it is the site of several of the modem city's neighborhoods). 8 The northern 2. Shechem (the modern Nablus) was the most prestigious city of the north. Here, in the days shortly after the Conquest, Joshua had raised an altar and in an impressive ceremony erected monumental stones inscribed with the words of the Covenant (Joshua 8:30-35). It was here, at the end of his life, that Joshua convened all the tribes to hear his farewell address and enter into a new covenant with God, reaffirming their loyalty to Him and His word (Joshua 24). It was also designated (along with Hebron) as a sanctuary city, and a Levitical city as well (Joshua 20:7, 21:21). The first attempt to establish a monarchy in Israel was made at Shechem by Abimelech, son of Gideon the Judge (Judges 9). Just as all rulers of England and Scotland since James I are crowned kings over their respective kingdoms both in London and in Edinburgh, so would David have required coronation both in Hebron and also some northern site, probably Shechem. His grandson Rehoboam went there to be crowned (1 Kings 12:1), and it is likely that Solomon was crowned there. 3. 2Samue/23:13-17, 1 Chronicles 11:15-19. 4. 1 Chronicles 12:23-40 gives a listing of these units. 5. It is generally agreed that whenever the term "stronghold" is used without a specific designation (i.e. "the strongholds ofEn-gedi") it refers to Adulam; see Chapter 13. 6. 2 Samue/23:13-17, 21:15-22, I Chronicles 11:12-14 etc. We will deal with these events in Chapters 36 and 38. 7. The Rephaim were one of the ancient, indigenous peoples of the region that had been largely displaced by the Canaanites and Amorites that the Israelites encountered. The Rephaim were distinguished by being of enormous

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

287

part of the valley formed the border between Judah and Benjamin, but most of its length was in Judah proper. It is the only large expanse of land in the environs of Jerusalem that is suitable for growing crops, and has always had a considerable population. Occupying the valley effectively drives a wedge between David's two constituencies. 9 His waiting game thwarted, David decides upon a bold, almost foolhardy strategy. He will launch a surprise attack at a key point in the dispersed Philistine forces. This means he will have to forego use of the Judean militia and rely solely on his professional troops-only they can move with the speed and precision needed to maintain the element of surprise. As in the past, David consults the oracle, 10 and having received a favorable response, moves decisively.

So David inquired of the Lord, saying; "Shall I go up against the Philistines? Will you deliver them into my hand?" And the Lord said to David: "Go up, for I will certainly give the Philistines into your hand. " Then David came to Baal-perazim, and David smote them there, and said: "The Lord has broken through my enemies as waters burst through [a dam]!" That is why the spot was called Baal-perazim. JJ (5: 19-20) The surprise is complete. With a force of not much more than a thousand men, if that, David smashes the main Philistine army deployed in the Valley of the Giants. The term "smote" does not here mean simply "defeated," but something closer to "totally destroyed." With what amounts to no more than a regiment, David has burst through the Philistine formations with the force of pent-up floodwaters and has routed their entire host. So devastating is the catastrophe that the Philistines even abandon the images of their gods on the field of battle.

And they [the Philistines] abandoned their idols there, and David and his men took them away. 12 (5:21) Many battles and victories are to follow in David's long career, but none as spectacular as this. Hundreds of years later this battle will still be remembered as the model of absolute and decisive victory. The prophet Isaiah will be able to find no better examples when he wishes to call to remembrance God's wondrous past deliverance of His people:

For the Lord will rise up as on mount Perazim, Injury as in the vale ofGibeon/ 3 To do His deed-strange is His deed! And to work His work-astounding is His work! (Isaiah 28:21)

stature. Goliath and his family were reputedly late remnants of this now almost extinct people. LXX renders the Hebrew word Rephaim as "giants" (gigantes and titanes) as does Syr. and Targ. 8. The German Colony and Baka among others. 9. Jerusalem (or Jehus as it was then known), was a non-Israelite mountain city-state. This kingdom was comprised of the city itself and the surrounding territories, including Emek Refaim which served as its granary. It was the fact that the major fortress and political unit in the area was one of their dependencies that made the Philistine thrust into the heart of the Judean highlands militarily possible. They were operating on "friendly territory." 10. See Chapter 8, especially notes 39 and 40. 11. I.e. "The Lord of Bursting Through." The exact location of the site is at present unknown. 12. 1 Chronicles 14:12 reads: And they [the Philistines] abandoned their gods there, and David gave orders, and they burnt them with fire. LXX reads similarly. 13. This refers to David's subsequent defeat of the Philistines, which we shall shortly examine.

288

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

With this dramatic turning of the tables, David opens his lines of communication to his new kingdom of Israel. The reinforcements now begin to flow in, and when he next has to confront Philistine might he will have the resources ofboth his kingdoms behind him. 14 Although the Philistines have suffered a serious setback, they are far from through. There is nothing wrong with their strategy of driving a wedge between the two kingdoms. Only their tactical incompetence in the field has been at fault. So mobilizing their full forces (do they withdraw their garrisons from Judah?) they once more sweep up the Vale of Sorek and into Emek-Rephaim-the Valley of the Giants. And once again the Philistines came Uf• and deployed in Emek-Rephaim. So David inquired of the Lord. He [the Lord] said: 1 Do not go up, but circle around behind them, and come upon them opposite "bechaim. "16 And it will be, when you hear the sound of marching in the tops of "bechaim," then act! For the Lord will go out before you to smite the camp of the Philistines. " And thus did David do, even as the Lord commanded him, and smote the Philistines from Gibeon17 all the way to Gezer. (5:22-25)

From the sparse data given here (our author is consistent in lacking interest in military affairs) it is hard to be clear about the tactics of this battle. It seems clear that David avoids a frontal confrontation and hits them from an unexpected direction. If bechaim does indeed refer to a grove of trees or a forest, then one explanation of our text could be that the trees screen David's army, or possibly his advance strike force, from view. When the sound of the wind blowing through the treetops blankets the sounds of his advance he pushes forward, achieving tactical surprise. In all events, the outcome of the battle is an overwhelming victory, driving the remnants of the Philistine army all the way to Gezer (a Canaanite city in the plains about six miles from Ekron). This defeat turns the tide of the war. From this point onward it is the Philistines who are on the defensive, as David carries the war to them. Of its course we know little. We do know that David conquers Gath and her surrounding territories. 18 Ultimately he reduces a much-diminished Philistia to vassaldom, followed by the subjugation of the remaining Canaanite enclaves in the land, of which many had been Philistine dependencies. 19 From being a mercenary in Philistine employ, David is to use Philistia, in the years to come, as a pool from which to recruit his own mercenaries; the employee has become the employer. This is a reversal indeed. 14. It is surprising what we can learn, at times, from a single word. The reference to David and his men (one word in the Hebrew) tells us that he fought the battle with his personal troops only, and without the aid of the Judean and Israelite militias: the "troops of Judah" and the "troops oflsrael." The author is very careful to make these distinctions, and we will meet with them again and again. In his next battle there is no reference to David and his men. They are now subsumed in the larger united army. We will discuss how David organized his fighting forces at a later point in this book. 15. I Chronicles l4:I4 reads And God said to him: I6. The word only appears in this passage and in the parallel passage in I Chronicles 14:13-17. It may be a place name, but all ancient sources took it to be a grove of trees. It has been rendered as mulberry trees or as balsam trees. Until the recent urbanization, the valley was noted for its groves of mulberry trees. Individual specimens still remain to this day, largely in private gardens. I7. Reading with I Chronicles I4:16 and LXX; MT reads Geba. I8. Gath did become subject to Israel as its subsequent fortification by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles ll:8) shows. The Chronicler informs us: and he (David) took Gath and her towns out of the hand of the Philistines. (I Chronicles I8: I) "Although this text is not to be preferred to that of 2 Sam. 8:1, it is factually correct. ... Gittite troops formed a special contingent among David's mercenaries (2 Sam. l5:I8)." (Bright, A History of Israel, p. I99, note 3I) I9. The most important of these, Jerusalem, will be dealt with shortly. Of others, such as Beth-shean (see Chapter I8), we know only through archaeological evidence: the destruction of the Temple of Ashtaroth and the subsequent refortification of the city testify to the Israelite conquest of this strategic site and its incorporation into David's expanding domain.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

289

But exactly how all this comes to pass our author does not tell us. All we are given is the bottom line:

Now after this David smote the Philistines and subdued them; and David took hegemo,Y0 out ofthe hand of the Philistines. (8: 1) The Philistine power has been broken; and as it turns out, permanently. 21 The hundred years' war for the domination of this remarkably diverse and varied geographic region, known alternatively as the Land of Canaan or The Promised Land, is over. From this point in time onward, the land is to be the possession of the descendants of Jacob; the children oflsrael. 22

THE BALANCING ACT The conclusion of the Philistine wars forces David to confront a critical matter: how to govern the mismatched pair of kingdoms that he rules. For the duration of the wars 23 the problem could be deferred; the crisis has riveted everyone's attention on the vital issue of independence or subjugation. The unexpected dimensions of the victory won by David gives him a honeymoon period in which to shape his policies, but it is a problem that demands urgent attention. In what does the problem reside? Both kingdoms are populated by inhabitants who are members of one faith community and one people, with the same language, ancestry, and historical inheritance. Yet their current condition is quite different. We have already mentioned the backwardness of Judah relative to Israel and recent archeological surveys paint a stark picture of the dissimilarity. In contrast to the primitive sheep-herding economy of Judah with its half-dozen or so small towns, Israel boasts dozens of small and medium sized towns as well as full-blown cities. Israel's economy is based on agriculture and, to a lesser extent, commerce. Its population is many times greater than that of Judah, its wealth and standard of living far higher and, by all indications, its political organization much more developed. By almost every criterion Judah and Israel are radically out of step with each other.

20. Hebrew: metheg ammah. The rendering follows the suggestion of H. L. Ginsberg. 21. This is corroborated archaeologically. The Philistine city of Ekron covered 50 acres during the Iron I period, the period before David. During Iron II (from David onward) we find Ekron reduced to a mere 10 acres! This dramatic decline in area, and thus in population, vividly reflects a new reality. In similar manner the beautiful pottery which the Philistines made during the 12th and ll th centuries no longer appears after l 000 BCE. Though very decadent traces of the old continue, Philistine culture of the lOth century becomes increasingly like that of its former vassals. The political center of gravity has shifted and the plain is now largely under the political and economic control of Israel. The hill country has assumed the ascendency for the first time in the history of the country. 22. "In the long history of the country, its fate was never tied to the fortunes of one people, and never has any people succeeded in imposing unity upon it from within-never, that is, with the solitary exception of the people of Israel during the biblical period, during the Second Jewish Commonwealth, and today, a truly extraordinary phenomenon." (Sarna, JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis, p. 118) 23. How long did the Philistine wars last? Of the seven and one half years that David ruled in Hebron, probably two were consumed in civil war with lsh-bosheth. The consolidation necessary upon the conclusion of the wars, the preparation, siege and conquest of Jerusalem, and the transfer of the government to the new capital must have taken at least a year. So we are left with something like four to four and one half years for the duration of the war, which seems reasonable.

290

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

Biblical law prohibits yoking an ox and an ass together as a team to pull a plow. 24 Their mismatched sizes and strengths make it impossible to pull together efficiently without exasperation for the stronger and suffering for the weaker. David is faced with just such a mismatched team. His problem is not to decide whether to yoke them together; as he is king of them both this is already an accomplished fact. Saul never really attempted to cope with this problem. While technically king over all the tribes, in practice his rule was effective only in the north, Judah being treated as a semiautonomous entity and largely left alone. (Even the Judean militia, when mustered, was mobilized separately from that of the northern tribes.) David, who cannot permit himself this luxury, will have to invent a way of yoking his two kingdoms into a working team. David is also burdened with a further problem. He comes not from the richer, more populous and more advanced kingdom, as did Saul. He is from the backwoods, the wild frontier, the primitive land of sheep-herding clansmen. In the eyes of northern "sophisticates" he looks like a rough, semicivilized barbarian with the merest veneer of culture. He is a great soldier, none better; everyone admits that. As long as the wars continued he was indispensable. But now, with independence established and Israel at peace and secure, doubts begin to surface. Is this the man to rule over us? For a backward hole-in-the-wall like Judah he is obviously adequate. He is one of them. But is this shepherd boy the right kind of ruler for an advanced and settled kingdom such as Israel? David will not only have to find the way to balance his two kingdoms, but also to prove himself to Israel as a statesman as well as a successful warlord. David's problem is far from being unique. Throughout history, rulers of backward kingdoms have successfully ascended the thrones of richer and more advanced states. We have already alluded to the events of 1603 when James VI of Scotland inherited the throne of England. The contrast between Scotland and England of those days is reminiscent of that between Judah and Israel. England was a populous, wealthy and cultured state, in the forefront of European commerce and development, while Scotland was one of the poorest and least advanced states in Europe, with a backward social structure of warring clans resting upon a primitive pastoral economy. What made it possible for a Stuart king to rule England was the long tradition of monarchy, and the central role legitimacy played in the politics ofthose days. Everyone accepted that, as the son ofMary, Queen of Scots, James Stuart was the legitimate heir to the throne of England (and removing any doubt, Queen Elizabeth had recognized James as her successor). The English might carp at having this northern barbarian as their ruler, but they had to resign themselves to it. It took two generations of misrule to lead the English to revolt against the House of the Stuarts. David has no such buttress. Monarchy is only a generation old, and his legitimacy as king of Israel is not his by right of inheritance, but by election only. He cannot rest on tradition but will have to consolidate his position by wise statesmanship. His first moves are among his most brilliant, and he achieves results that are to rise above his immediate purposes and to reverberate to our present day.

JERUSALEM! Now that he has a chance to catch his breath, David's most immediate problem is where to establish the seat of government of his new kingdom of Israel. Obviously he cannot continue to rule Israel from Hebron. Not only is it out of the way, but northern pride will not allow Israel to be governed from a Judean town. David could solve his problem the same way that James VI coped with his: by having two capitals, one for each kingdom, and alternating between them. Just as James ruled England from London and Scotland from Edinburgh (naturally spending the majority of his time in London, and giving most of his attention to the affairs of his more important and prosperous kingdom), so David could make some centrally located city in Israel such as Shechem his capital, and 24. Deuteronomy 22:10.

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

291

alternate between it and Hebron. That he opts for a more innovative solution is a mark of his political genius. In many ways the newly created United States of America faced a similar problem. Composed of thirteen sovereign and mutually jealous states formed into two blocs, sites such as Philadelphia or New York, two early seats of government, obviously wouldn't do. The statesman-like solution ofthe Founding Fathers of the Republic was to create a federal zone for the capital of the new nation, Washington, D. C., centrally sited between the Northern and the Southern blocs while belonging to neither. David, three millennia before, opts for just such a solution to his problem. Next door to Emek Rephaim, the Valley of the Giants- that great battleground of the recent wars -is Jerusalem, 25 a Jebusite city state directly between the kingdoms of Judah and Israel. Despite several past attempts, the Israelites have not succeeded in dislodging the possessors of this mountain fastness. As one of the few surviving pockets of the pre-Conquest population of Canaan, they have remained a thorn in the side of the Israelites for generations. It is in this fortress city with its surrounding territory, belonging to neither North nor South that David determines to establish the capital of both his kingdoms. The task he has undertaken is no easy one. Jerusalem has survived numerous attempts at conquest for very good reasons. Straddling a mountain spur with precipitous drops on its eastern, southem and western sides, it is connected to the main mountain ridge only by a narrow saddle to its north. This being its weakest point, its northern walls are consequently massively fortified. Excavation has revealed that the Jebusite walls at some points measure twenty-seven feet thick. To take this fortress by assault is virtually impossible. Nor can it easily be reduced by siege. Underground tunnels and conduits assure the city of a secure supply of water. 26

Now David and his troopl 7 went to Jerusalem, against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land 28 Now the inhabitants ofJehus said to David: 29 "You will not come in here. Even the blind and the lame will ward you off;" thinking David can't get in here. [Nevertheless] David took the Stronghold of Zion, which is the City of David Now David said on that day: "Whoever would smite the Jebusites, let him strike by the way of the conduit, and [attack]

25. As we have previously indicated (see note 9 above), in those days the city was known as Jehus. It was named for the people who inhabited it, the Jebusites. David's conquest ended the Jebusite kingdom, and the city reverted to its original name, Jerusalem. This name is attested by Egyptian sources from as early as the 18th century BCE. 26. Excavations begun in 1997 by Ronny Reich and Eli Shukran have revolutionized our understanding of how ancient Jerusalem kept itself supplied with \Yater. The Gihon spring, the only perennial water source in the area, has been discovered to have been enclosed by a massive tower with walls 12 feet thick. From the spring an underground conduit channeled the water into pools at the southern end of the city. In addition a large, deep rectangular pool had been cut into the rock just west of the spring, with a rock-cut tunnel leading from the spring to the pool to feed the water into it. This plastered pool was secured by a gigantic tower to its north (and presumably another equal one to its south, though the archeological team has yet to dig there), making the water source virtually impregnable. The entire water system was rounded out by a tunnel reaching from inside the city to the pool forts, making it possible for the inhabitants to walk underground to the pool and draw water in perfect safety. This previously unsuspected water complex has been shown to have been constructed sometime in the 18th or 17th centuries BCE (Middle Bronze II), anywhere from 700-800 years before David. It continued in use for almost 300 years more, until a superior system, constructed during the reign of King Hezekiah (720-692 BCE) superceded it. In passing it is worth noting how little of ancient Jerusalem has been excavated to date, and how little we know of it from archeology alone. As every new dig tends to overturn what had seemed to be absolute archeological certainties, it would be just as well to keep open minds. In all probability we have many further surprises in store. More on this later. 27. Literally his men. 28. I Chronicles II :4 reads to Jerusalem, that is Jehus, where the Jebusites, the inhabitants ofthe land, were. 29. Reading with I Chronicles II :5; MT reads who said to David:

292

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

the lame and the blind, who are hateful to David; "30 Therefore it is said: "The blind and the lame shall not come into the house. "31 (5:6-8) This account is terse and far from clear, yet several points emerge. First, that David assaults Jehus (Jerusalem) with his own troops only. The Judean and Israelite militias are not mentioned, which means that he does not mobilize them for the campaign. This point is extremely important, and we will shortly discuss its significance. Secondly, the overwhelming confidence ofthe Jebusites in their ability to withstand any siege or assault. We have already indicated that this confidence is well founded in discussing the geographic siting of the fortress and its secure water supply. It is worth noting that, in the thousand years following David's successful assault, the city will fall only twice despite many sieges: in 586 BCE to the Babylonians, and in 70 CE to the Romans, both the most massive empires of their times. 32 It will hold out successfully against both the resurgent Egyptian Empire (in about 915 BCE) and the even more massive Assyrian Empire (in about 70 I BCE). And finally-that David succeeds in conquering Jerusalem. But how David manages the feat remains uncertain. (The Book of Chronicles adds a fourth piece of information: that by his outstanding bravery in leading the assault Joab permanently assures himself the position of supreme commander of the combined armed forces of Israel and Judah-see footnote 31 ). It is only fair to explain that while we have rendered the text pretty well the way most translations do, the rendering is based on a number of assumptions that are far from certain. (The Hebrew text is obscure, and the early versions do not help us, all reflecting roughly the text that we have.) The first of these assumptions is that the references to the blind and the lame are to an arrogant taunt made by the Jebusites. The second is that the way David succeeds in taking the impregnable stronghold is by turning one of its major strengths into a weakness. By managing to penetrate the very tunnel system that provides the Jebusites access to the water of the Gihon spring, he uses it to introduce a commando unit into the midst of the city. If this is indeed the case, we can appreciate Joab's daring in leading the assault team. In this scenario Joab's team would have to sink a shaft to access some part of the underground system. Then they could either storm through the pedestrian tunnel into the eastem part of the city, or wade through the long water conduie 3 to emerge into the southernmost part of the city, there to do whatever they set out to do-open the gates, or create a diversion, or perhaps make their way to one of the walls and lower ropes. The team could number little more than a dozen or two-dozen men. This kind of mission is foolhardy at best and certainly no place for claustrophobics!34

30. Literally who are hated by David's soul, reading with the Keri (as do Targ. and Syr.). 3I. I Chronicles II :6 reads instead: Now David said: "Whoever first smites the Jebusites will be commander in chief" And Joab, the son of Zeruiah, went up first and became commander. This verse lacks all reference to "the lame and the blind" as well as to the conduit (tzinor), but undoubtedly preserves a valid piece of infonnation. 32. The Bible also records the sack of Jerusalem, and the demolition of its northern defenses, by King Jehoash of Israel early in the Eighth Century. But this was due to Judah's decisive defeat by Israel's army at the battle of Beth-shemesh. King Amaziah of Judah having been taken prisoner, he surrendered Jerusalem without a fight (2 Kings I4:8-I4, 2 Chronicles 25:I7-24). 33. The conduit was between one and one half to three feet wide, and varied between six and twelve feet in height, though part of this, of course, was filled with water 34. This interpretation of the events requires the Hebrew words vayigah batzinor to mean to strike [by way of] the [water] conduit. This is a possible rendition though a forced one, and plausible only because the alternative assumptions and renditions are so much worse. The two main alternatives seem to be: (I) taking the references to the lame and the blind to be to some sort of magical rite, parading these unfortunates on the wall of the city and cursing any attacker with these infinnities. Thus Joab's feat would have involved braving the hex and, by example, proving it to be vain. This assumes the city to have been susceptible to frontal assault, and the word tzinor (which usually means "pipe or "conduit") to mean some kind of grappling-hook (Yadin, The Art of Biblical Warfare, p. 268-70). (2) To take tzinor to mean "wind-pipe," "gullet," and David's command to be: "Whoever smites a Jebusite, strike for his neck" (i.e. kill them all, don't wound them), the reason being that

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

293

Despite our uncertainties about the precise meaning of these verses, and so about how David manages to take Jehus, the fact remains that he does. This is to be his capital, and he renames it "The City of David." (The "Stronghold of Zion" seems to refer to the citadel, or inner fortress, that dominates the city.)35 Which brings us back to the point, mentioned earlier, that David takes the city not with the militias of Judah and Israel but solely with his own troops. This establishes the extraterritoriality of Jerusalem. Not having contributed to its conquest, Judah and Israel have no claim to it. It belongs exclusively to David and his heirs, and will never be incorporated into either kingdom. David has a new title to add to his previous ones; he is now also King of Jerusalem. 36 For more than 400 years, David and his descendants will continue to rule Jerusalem as a separate entity-being known as the kings of Judah and Jerusalem. Thus David, in renaming Jehus "The City of David," is driving home the point of its being neutral ground, belonging to neither kingdom but only to him. While this name will remain as a designation of the city, with the Jebusites removed from possession, the ancient name of Jerusalem reasserts itself. By the time the Book of Samuel was written, everybody is calling the city Jerusalem. 37 Their kingdom conquered, what will happen to the Jebusites? Contrary to common opinion, they are neither exterminated nor driven out. They mostly accept David's rule and stay, remaining in possession of their property. When, a few years later, David wants to acquire a threshing area on which to erect an altar, he purchases it from its owner Araunah, the Jebusite. 38 Most scholars are of the opinion that David integrated Jebusite craftsmen and officials into his service, and although there is no direct evidence of this it appears to me probable. Because of the need to accommodate the new government and David's growing retinue, and the fact of Jerusalem's relatively small size, it seems inevitable that a proportion of the Jebusite inhabitants was displaced. But it appears very doubtful whether there was ever a full-scale eviction, much less a massacre. If there had been our author would have told us. Not being reticent on this subject, when massacres take place we are informed. 39

So David dwelt in the stronghold, and he called it The City of David And David fortified around [it]from The Millo towards the house. 40 (5:9) David didn't want his capital to be filled with blind and lame survivors of the Jebusite defenders! (McCarter, Anchor Bible: 2 Samuel, p. 136-8). Neither alternative seems very likely. 35. We do not know what the term Zion, first used here and in I Chronicles II :5, means. Perhaps it was simply the name the Jebusites had given to their acropolis. With the passing of time Zion came to signify the Temple Mount, all of Jerusalem and even ultimately all the land of Israel. 36. This title has had some strange twists and turns throughout the centuries, being passed from hand to hand. The last possessor of this title (along with many others) was the Emperor Franz-Joseph II of Austria. By his time the title was purely honorific and wholly without substance, Jerusalem having become for centuries no more than a provincial town in the vast Turkish Ottoman Empire. 37. Today the term "The City of David" refers exclusively to that area in Jerusalem, south of the Temple Mount, where David's capital was located. 38. See Chapter 40. 39. As, for example, the massacre following the conquest of Moab (see Chapter 25). 40. Or from the Citadel inward. Millo, a word of uncertain meaning, seems to come from the root meaning, "fill." It is always referred to as "The Millo." In our current state of knowledge, the best explanation seems to be the one first proposed by the late Dame Kathleen Kenyon, and made increasingly plausible by the subsequent findings of Yigal Shiloh and Eilat Mazar, is that the reference is to what is known today as the Stepped-Stone Structure, a massive terraced construction on the eastern ridge of the City of David, as tall as a twelve-story building and about 130 feet wide at the top. It is one of the most imposing structures to survive from ancient Israel. Dame Kenyon suggested that the term "Millo" might refer to the stone and soil fill of the terraces supporting the structure. The Stepped-Stone Structure curves arround the northeast comer of the hill on which Jerusalem is sited so as to encompass and buttress the area on the top of the slope. Mazar is of the opinion that the purpose of the massive structure was to support the podium on which the "house" referred to in verse II was built (Mazar, Preliminary Report on the City of David Excavations 2005, p. I8). These matters will be made clearer in the next section. But this is only conjecture. Considering the pace of ongoing excavations, by the time

294

THE PATIIS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

DAVID THE GREAT The defeat of the Philistines and their reduction to vassaldom, the conquest of Jerusalem and its establishment as the capital of the two kingdoms, and the consolidation of his reign have made David a power to reckon with in the region. So David waxed greater and greater, for the Lord, the God of hosts, was with him. Then Hiram, King of Tyre, sent envoys to David, and cedar timber, 41 and carpenters and stonemasons; and they built David a house. (5:10-11) Becoming a regional power has its perks. Along with diplomatic recognition, and the sending and receiving of diplomatic missions, comes both the opening of high-grade sources of supply and access to technological expertise. It also requires putting up a front commensurate with your status. Obviously the residence of the former ruler of Jehus, king of an insignificant city-state, is insufficient for the ruler of two full kingdoms besides Jerusalem. For someone of his status nothing less than a palace42 will be adequate. And only the best and most up to date will do. Tyre, the leading city of Phoenicia (the present western Lebanon), was one of the greatest commercial centers in the ancient world. The Lebanon Mountains were the source of cedar wood, the most prized and expensive construction lumber then available. Along with the timber come the carpenters and wood workers with the expertise to tum the lumber into supports, beams and elegantly fashioned paneling, and stonemasons to build the stone shell, columns and their capitals, etc. It is a complete package. Although not mentioned, it probably also includes architects, or at least sets of plans. Phoenicia is at the forefront of the luxury building trade. Israel can't begin to compete in expertise, much less the far more backward Judah. In 2005, in one of the most exciting archaeological discoveries of recent years, Eilat Mazar discovered what may prove to be King David's palace. 43 Provisionally called "The Large-Stone Structure,"44 with inner walls between six and eight feet wide, and a giant outer wall 21 feet thick, it dwarfs traditional Israelite construction. This massive structure was built at the beginning of Iron Age Ila not long after the start of the tenth century BCE, the time when David ruled all Israel. Surprisingly, it was not built within the confines of Jebusite Jerusalem but just outside of the city's you read this new knowledge may have altered completely our understanding of the word "Millo." When Samuel was written, the term was obvious and needed no explanation. I Chronicles II :8 adds and Joab renewed the rest of the city. The Hebrew term used means literally brought to lifo and could mean anything from "repaired" to "regentrified." In Nehemiah 3:34 the word as it is used there seems to mean "salvage." Perhaps it refers to the construction of a new neighborhood; more on this in the next chapter. Whatever its precise connotation, it seems that a major urban renewal project was initiated with Joab, a human bulldozer if there ever was one, in charge. 41. Literally cedar trees. 42. The term house as used here means a palace, that is a royal residence. As we have already noted, David's palace represents a radical break from the more modest Israelite architectural tradition. It obviously had much more floor space than even the largest of Israelite houses and also towered above them, as we can learn from the episode in which David, from his rooftop, was able to look down onto the roofs of neighboring houses (see Chapter 28). This triumphalist style of architecture had to be imported, along with the materials needed to construct it. It proved to be only the first of such monumental structures to be transplanted into Israel by her new elite. More on the socio-political function of this monumental architecture later. For a discussion of traditional Israelite architecture see Excursus IV which follows Chapter 7. 43. Eilat Mazar is the granddaughter of the founding father of Israeli archaeology, Benjamin Mazar. Besides teaching at the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University, she is a Senior Fellow of the Shalem Center Institute for the Archaeology of the Jewish People, on whose behalf she is conductiong the excavations. The information in this section is based on her article "Did I Find King David's Palace?" p. 16-27, 70, and on the Preliminary Report on the City ofDavid Excavations 2005, esp. p. 15-19. 44. As distinct from the "Stepped-Stone Structure."

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

295

northern wall, against what was probably "The Stronghold of Zion" that dominated the northeast corner of the city. 45 The Large-Stone Structure was built on a platform of bedrock that had been leveled centuries previously, but had never been built upon. 46 The northeastern side of the building was built directly on the podium supported by the Stepped Stone Structure. At the foot of the podium were found ashlars47 as well as a beautiful capital of a column, carved in a proto-Aeolic style48 that had fallen from the Large-Stone Structure. This capital is the most beautiful proto-Aeolic example of its kind ever found in Israel, surpassing even those from later structures in Megiddo and Samaria, testifying to the elegant appearance of the "house." As Mazar sums up, this "was not just any public building, but a structure that was clearly the product of inspiration, imagination and considerable economic investment."49 As yet we have no idea how large the building was. Only continuing excavation will reveal its full dimensions. But we do know that the building remained in use for over 400 years: bullae50 found in and at the foot of the remains, just meters apart, bearing the imprints of the personal seals of Jehucal the son of Shelemiahu and Gedalyahu the son of Pashhur, ministers in the last government of the Kingdom of Judah, evidence that the building was still functioning as a government center on the eve of the Babylonian destruction (586 BCE).51 A structure of such size and elegance could only have been constructed by foreign architects and craftsmen; it could only have been commissioned by a monarch. That it is constructed outside what were then the walls of Jerusalem testifies to the sense of military supremacy and security felt by David and his court, and suggests that plans have already crystallized for expanding the city northward (a program that will be brought to completion by David's successor, Solomon). When the Phoenician team is finished, David will have a palace that can compare favorably with some of the best in the region. Then David knew that the Lord had indeed established him king over Israel, and had exalted his kingdom for the sake ofHis people Israel. (5:12)

There is nothing like a fancy new residence to establish your status to all and sundry, and not the least, to bolster your own self-image. With an enhanced residence goes an enhanced harem:

45. See note 35 above. 46. On the basis of pottery shards Mazar provisionally dates the leveling of the area to the Late Bronze Age (about 1500 BCE; the leveling could be as early as the Middle Bronze Age (about 1800 BCE), roughly the same period as the construction of the Gihon Spring Fortress Complex (see note 26 above). 47. Carefully hewn rectangular building stones, prefitted at the quarry. This style of building stones, originally Mycenaean, was introduced via Cyprus to Phoenicia in the late 13th early 12th centuries. From what appears their earliest recorded use in Jerusalem at the time of David, they were to become standard for the construction of monumental public buildings throughout the United Kingdoms. 48. Capitals representing the drooping fronds of palm-tree crowns (the "tree of life" motif common in the Late Bronze Age). The style is sometimes known as "proto-Ionic;" the latest fashion is to refer to it as "palmette." I have used "proto-Aeolic" because that is the designation Mazar uses. 49. Mazar, "Did I find King David's Palace?" p. 24. 50. A lump of soft clay, stamped with a seal which leaves its impression, and when it hardens becomes itself a seal for some item such as an official document. 51. Jehucal the son of Shelemiahu and Gedalyahu the son of Pashhur are known to us from the Bible. Jehucal was part of a delegation mediating between King Zedekia and the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 37:3, 38:1), while Gedalyahu was one of a group of ministers who recommended to the king that Jeremiah be put to death for sedition in time of war (Jeremiah 38:1-3).

296

THE PATHS OF GLORY: DAVID TRIUMPHANT

Now after he came from Hebron, David took additional concubines and wives from Jerusa/em/2 and yet more sons and daughters were born to him. And these are the names of[the sons] that were born to him in Jerusalem: Shammua, and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon, and Ibhar, and Elishua, and Nepheg, and Japhia, and Elishama, and Eliada, and Eliphelet. 53 (5:13-16) In this appendix to the six sons born in Hebron no mothers are listed. We shall subsequently learn of only one. The rest the author deems unnecessary; their sons are too far down the list to be serious contenders for the throne. With almost no exception, from the end of the reign of David until the end of the Biblical period, the name of the mother of each reigning king is dutifully recorded. As the saying goes, David is "feeling his oats." With the consolidation of his position new options are opening up. How he will use his opportunities now becomes the focus of the narrative.

52. 1 Chronicles 14:3 reads in Jerusalem. 53. This list is repeated with minor variations in 1 Chronicles 3:5-8 and 14:3-7. l Chronicles 3:9 adds All these were the sons of David, besides the sons of the concubines; and Tamar was their sister. She is the only daughter mentioned because she figures prominently in the subsequent unfolding of events. As to why only sons are listed, see the section entitled "Intermission in Hebron" in Chapter 20.

CHAPTER23

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER The great and glorious masterpiece of man is to know how to live to purpose: all other things, to reign, to lay up treasure, to build, are at most, but little appendices and props.

Michel Eyquem Montaigne, Essays

How can one describe the new capital of the two kingdoms, the City of David? The city that David took from the Jebusites would have appeared to our eyes incredibly tiny, yet in those days it was considered a serious city. Its contours were determined in the eighteenth century BCE (Middle Bronze II B) when its massive city walls were built. This also was the time when the underground tunnel system designed to keep the city supplied with water, even when under siege, was perfected. We have discussed this water system in the last chapter. The walls and water system were so well constructed and so fitted to their purpose that they were to remain in continual use for over a thousand years. 1 The erection of this wall and water system combination must have required huge inputs of manpower and wealth, testifying to a sizeable and economically vibrant population in the eighteenth century. The evidence that Jerusalem maintained its importance in the Late Bronze Age fmds expression in the Amarna letters, 2 where we find correspondence between the ruler of Egypt and the king of Jerusalem, one Abdi-Heba. At this period the city-state of Shechem shared with Jerusalem the control of the hill country and the central mountain ridge: Shechem dominating the northern half while Jerusalem dominated the southern half. The appearance of the Israelites at the end of the 13th-beginning of the twelfth century BCE, which coincided with the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age, marked a radical change in Jerusalem's fortunes. Unlike her sister highland city of Shechem, Jerusalem proved immune to repeated attempts by the conquering Israelites to reduce her to submission. But though the city itself remained impregnable, her dominion over the southern half of the Canaanite highlands melted away before the Israelite onslaught leaving her Jebusite inhabitants in control of no more than the city itself and its immediate environs. From master ofhalfthe highlands, Jehus, as Jerusalem had come to be known, found herself reduced to a small city state, a beleaguered island in the 1. Even when they were superceded in the 8th century BCE they were not dismantled but were retained as supplementary systems until the entire city was demolished by the Babylonians in 586 BCE; a useful existence of 1200 years. 2. This hoard of cuneiform tablets from the Egyptian Foreign Office Archives of the 14th century BCE contains correspondence between the Pharaohs Amenophis III and his successor, Amenophis IV (better known to history as the heretic king Akhenaten) and various vassal kingdoms that made up the eastern portion of New Empire Egypt (Canaan and Syria).

298

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

midst of the encroaching Israelite sea. This was the city that David, by his conquest, inherited, and out of which he created the capital of his United Kingdoms. 3 This city, though a perfectly respectable city-state, was obviously inadequate as the capital of two kingdoms, and even more unable to fulfill its future role as the hub of an empire. 4 For one thing, it would have to house a much larger administration and military force than did either Jehus or its Canaanite predecessors. For another, it lacked the symbols deemed necessary for a serious capital. We have already seen one of the first steps taken by David to remedy this second defect: not long after moving to Jerusalem he arranges for a large palace to be built, appropriate to his status as overlord of all Canaan. 5 It was at this time that the monumental construction of what has become known as the "Stepped-Stone Structure" took place. 6 This edifice, as tall as a twelve-story building, is so massive that it could only be supported by the eighteenth century fortification wall, itself built of enormous stones, located near the middle of the mountain ridge's eastern slope. As mentioned in the last chapter, its purpose was to provide a platform on which David's palace was built. This was an enormous undertaking, testifying to the plenitude of manpower and wealth made available by the unification of the two kingdoms and his victory over the Philistines. As there was no room in overcrowded Jerusalem, he builds it outside the city walls, thus taking the first step in the city's northward expansion. 7 It appears that the pressure of a rapidly expanding population soon led to the creation of new areas of residential housing: the first being a new neighborhood on the eastern slope of the city below the Fortress of Zion. Excavation of several of these houses reveals that they were built of partially dressed limestone blocks, some two and a half feet long. Their walls were more than three feet thick, and remains of imported Cypro-Phoenician pottery were found there. This was obviously an upper class neighborhood. That even this proved insufficient to meet the needs of a rapidly expanding population is evidenced by the construction of a second neighborhood on the eastern slope, this one outside the city walls. These houses served a poorer class of people than the affluent new neighbor3. Eilat Mazar is of the opinion that David "chose Jerusalem as his capital city in no small part due to the enormity of its fortifications and its historical role as a ruling capital city" (Mazar, Preliminary Report, p. 14). 4. There has been a marked tendency to underrate the size and population of pre-Israelite Jerusalem. Its total area is usually given as ten acres or less; actually when we remember that the Canaanite walls enclosed almost half of its eastern slope the area increases by about 50 percent. The usual assumption is that the western walls hugged the rim of the saddle, but due to scanty archaeological excavation of the western slopes and ambiguous results we are lacking firm data as to where exactly the western walls ran at this period. 5. David not only rules two kingdoms but Philistia as well, and several Canaanite enclaves are now either vassals or have been annexed directly to his kingdoms. 6. Previous estimates of the periods of construction and their dates have had to be totally revised subsequent to the 1978-1985 excavations of the late Yigal Shiloh (whose results are only now in the process of publication), and the currently ongoing excavations of Eilat Mazar. They have been able to establish that this complex structure (made up of a substructure consisting of stepped, terrace-like compartments filled with loosely packed boulders covered with compacted soil, this covered by a superstructure of roughly dressed limestone boulders laid in stepped courses) was constructed as a unit and that both it and the "Large Stone Structure" partially resting on it are part of the same construction. It has been possible to date the building of the Stepped-Stone Structure by means of extensive ceramic assemblages found under it to no earlier than the 12th century and no later than the lOth. However, taking into consideration that it is becoming increasingly clear that both the "Large-Stone Structure" and the Stepped-Stone Structure which supports it were part of the same construction, and that the "Large-Stone Structure can fairly definitely be dated to the 1Oth century BCE (the period of David), this would indicate that this also was when its support was constructed. (Cahill, "Jerusalem at the Time of the United Monarchy," p. 41-54, Mazar, Preliminary Report, p. 16-19, 64-7) 7. Being situated outside the city walls, the palace may seem unacceptably exposed. However, its very nature as a fortified structure serves it for protection. The vunerability will only be temporary. David's son, Solomon, will bring this phase of the city's expansion to its close by incorporating the palace and what is today known as the Temple Mount within new walls, more than doubling Jerusalem's size. We know of at least two monumental structures he erected in this new area: the Temple and a new palace (David's obviously was not big and grand enough for him). It would seem that his father's palace was then converted into a government building that remained in use until the Babylonian destruction.

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

299

hood within the city proper: thinner walls (only one and a half feet thick) made of undressed fieldstones, and a total lack of imported pottery, testify to their lower economic status. 8 Beyond dramatically demonstrating the rapid growth of the city's population, the existence of this unprotected neighborhood is also clear proof of the heightened sense of security David's political and military achievements have created. 9 Beyond these two new neighborhoods we know of one more, by inference if not as yet by archaeological evidence. Somewhere near the midpoint of his reign we find David walking on his palace roof and looking down on the roofs of the residences housing the elite of Jerusalem society; remembering that his palace is outside the walls of Canaanite-Jebusite Jerusalem we realize that a posh new neighborhood has sprung up in the proximity of the royal residence. 10 This is the extent of our current knowledge. The future may well reveal yet further surprises. From all this we can posit a dynamic and rapidly expanding city undergoing all the growing pains that are the inevitable price of acquiring the infrastructure and population demanded by its transformation from a provincial city-state to the capital of a rapidly expanding empire. Just in terms of population the thirty-year period that comes between David's conquest of Jerusalem and his last years will see the pre-Israelite maximum of perhaps 3,600 inhabitants more than doubled. 11 Solomon's long reign will see further increases. As we have already noted, in David's eyes Jerusalem's main advantages have been largely geographic: its location between the kingdoms of Judah and Israel though belonging to neither and its siting and fortifications that make it virtually impregnable. A subsidiary route that runs along the top of the mountain ridge from Shechem to Bethlehem, and then on to Hebron, here crosses the east-west road that runs from the Mediterranean coast up to the Jerusalem plateau, and then down to Jericho in the Jordan valley. Although these are secondary routes, not to be compared in importance with the "Via Maris" on the coast or the "King's Way" east of the Jordan, 12 yet they do have significance. And lastly, David is beholden to no one. Jerusalem belongs to him; it is his royal possession. But David is sensitive enough to realize that these advantages, while real, are far from sufficient to meet the demands that his two mismatched kingdoms will place on his capital. From their point of view its virtues are purely political and negative; having no prior associations, the site will not provoke mutual jealousy and animosity. But for Jerusalem to become a rallying point, a capital that will tug the people's imaginations and capture their loyalties, it will have to be much more than a political center. And here lies the city's fundamental failing. Unlike Hebron and Shechem, sites of ancient shrines, locales rich in history, the burial place of the forefathers of the people, 13 Jebusite Jerusalem contains neither shrine nor ancient tomb. Never having been a locale of Israelite settlement, it is vir-

8. Most of the information on pre-Israelite Jerusalem cited above, and especially on the Stepped-Stone Structure, is taken from Jane Cahill's two articles, "Jerusalem at the Time of the United Monarchies," cited above, and "Jerusalem in David and Solomon's Time," and Eilat Mazar's Preliminary report on the City of David Excavations 2005. 9. When the security situation will deteriorate in the 8th century due to the looming Assyrian threat, a new city wall will be constructed enclosing this neighborhood. 10. See Chapter 28. 11. This calculation relies on General Yadin' s estimate of population density in cities of those days (about 240 persons per urban acre), and his opinion that aproximately 25% of the population of an average city was composed of military personnel capable of defending it. When considering Davidic Jerusalem and the fact that, during his early days, the capital was David's main base for waging his wars (see Chapter 27), an even higher ratio of military personnel would probably have been necessary. (Yadin, The Art of Warfare In Biblical Lands, p. 19) 12. See Chapter 18, and especially notes 2 and 3, for a discussion of these routes and their critical economic importance. 13. Hebron contained the tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Sarah, Rebecca, and Leah). Shechem boasted the tomb of Joseph, the ancestor of Ephraim and Manasseh, the two largest tribes of the north.

300

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

tually bereft of any religious or national associations-the things that move men's hearts! 4 If David wishes to make of his city a capital that will stir the loyalties of his diverse peoples, he will have to remedy this deficit and provide his city with a spiritual dimension. This David now sets himself to do, aiming to transform Jerusalem into a new Shiloh, the new spiritual center of the nation.

THE LIBERATION OF THE ARK OF THE COVENANT Over fifty years have passed since the disaster of Eben-ezer and the destruction of Shiloh. For half a century the Israelite tribes, in the past united by having one central shrine, have been severed from their spiritual moorings. Samuel's religious revolution 15 has in part filled the spiritual void, but has perversely acted in a diametrically opposite manner to all that Shiloh had been. The central shrine had constituted a centripetal force, drawing the people together in spiritual unity. The religious revolution, with its emphasis on personal communion with God and its proliferation of local shrines has of necessity acted centrifugally, spiritual autonomy promoting local particularism. There is a desperate need for some kind of spiritual center. What had made Shiloh the central shrine of all Israel was the fact that it was home to the Ark of the Covenant. 16 It was the Ark that conferred upon Shiloh its sanctity. Where the Ark rested, there was sacred ground. Since the Ark of the Covenant is to be the focus of this chapter, it behooves us to achieve a fuller understanding of this most sacred of objects to ancient Israel. The Ark was an oblong chest, open at the top, made of acacia wood 17 with gold both inside and out. 18 It was three feet nine inches long, two feet four inches wide and two feet four inches deep. It stood on four legs placed at the four bottom comers. To each of the four legs was affixed a gold ring. 19 Through these rings two gold-plated poles were passed and, once so inserted, were left permanently in place. Their purpose was to allow attendants to hoist the Ark onto their shoulders for carrying, without ever touching the Holy Ark itself. The Ark was thus designed from the start to be portable. Closing the open chest was a cover made out of a solid slab of gold. Surmounting the cover, and an integral part of it, were the hammered gold representations of two "cherubim." These were not 14. The only prior link between Jerusalem and the Israelites was the tradition that, sometime, in the misty past, a priest-king of Jerusalem, by the name of Melchizedek, had once blessed Abraham, and in return the Patriarch had given a tithe to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18-20). The tradition that associated the ridge just north of the City of David with the site of Abraham's attempt to sacrifice Isaac (the Akedah, or binding of Isaac, as it is called in Jewish tradition) seems to have been unknown at this period. 15. See Chapter 5. 16. Shiloh did have historic associations going back to the days of the Conquest; it was there that Joshua had assembled the tribes to divide the Promised Land and assign each tribe its portion (Joshua 18-20). It is a moot question as to whether it was this national convention that determined the siting of the Ark's resting place, or whether the site of the Ark determined the site ofthe convention. Over time it was the fact of the Ark's presence in Shiloh that gave the town its paramount religious significance. 17. Boards made from acacia wood are very hard and durable, but light in weight. 18. The description given in Exodus is not fully clear. There are two possible interpretations: (1) that we are talking of a nest of three chests, with the main chest of acacia wood inserted into a slightly larger gold chest, with a third smaller gold chest inserted into the wooden one and serving as its liner, and (2) a wooden chest overlaid with gold on both inside and out. Both possibilities are supported by ancient Jewish tradition. Equally to the point, both models would have been familiar to contemporary Egyptian artisans. For the significance of this last point see note 20 below. 19. This reading is based on the opinion of the medieval Bible commentator Abraham Ibn Ezra (re Exodus 25: 12). It is given extra credibility by our having found a portable cedar chest in the tomb of Tutankhamen, with bronze rings for carrying poles attached to its base, and with the poles already inserted in the rings.

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

301

little Cupids (or Cherubs) but rather composite mythological creatures, part human, part beast, and part bird. They looked something like a sphinx, but with wings. These two "cherubim" faced each other from opposite ends of the cover, with heads slightly lowered, their full, outstretched wings, turned upward and meeting each other, sheltering the main body of the cover and the Ark below. 20 As we have previously mentioned, God was conceived as being enthroned invisibly above the Ark, the Ark itself serving as His footstool and the "cherubim" serving as the supports to His unseen throne. 21 This, however, was popular fancy. The true significance of the Ark lay elsewhere. The Ark of the Covenant had one purpose and one purpose only; to serve as the container for the stone tablets, inscribed with the Ten Commandments, which Moses had brought down from Mount Sinai. These were personally deposited, by Moses, in the Ark. It was they that gave it its name, the Ark of the Covenant, and by their presence made sacred the Tabernacle, the sanctuary that was the first shrine and place of worship of the newly freed Israelites. 22 As Nahum Sarna explains: It is the Ark and its contents, the symbol of the covenant between God and Israel, that give meaning

to the Tabernacle, for the religio-moral imperatives of the Decalogue constitute the foundation of Israelite society. 23 During the years in which the people of Israel wandered in the wilderness prior to settling in the Promised Land, the Ark had been housed in the Mishkan, or Tabernacle-a portable tent-sanctuary. 24 It was one of the two foci of the shrine, the other being the altar of sacrifice. They formed a reciprocal pair of religious symbols: through the altar the people of Israel reached out to their God; through the Ark, God reached out to Israel. Each complemented the other. So it had been in the wilderness; so it continued at Shiloh upon the settlement of the land. The destruction of Shiloh and the Philistine seizure of the Ark had broken this religious nexus. Deprived of their Holy Ark the people had felt abandoned by their God. Small wonder all the house ofIsrael mourned for the Lord (7:2) Samuel's religious revolution had only partially repaired the spiritual catastrophe. Bereft of the tangible symbol of the Covenant between God and Israel, the people had felt an aching void at the bottom of their souls; felt that their ties to their God had become more tenuous, less certain. Perhaps it is this sense of uncertainty that explains the fervor of the new religious worship that Samuel had promulgated/5 and the multiplication of shrines that served as an inadequate compensation for the loss the people felt. God had promised that, with the construction of the Ark and the Tabernacle, He would dwell in the midst of the people oflsrael. 26 The Ark and the central shrine were to be the tangible symbols of God's indwelling presence. With these central reminders either in rubble or under enemy control, nothing could really take their place. 20. It must be remembered that the Israelites had lived in Egypt for generations prior to the Exodus, and all their craftsmen (of whom they had in significant numbers) were Egyptian trained and of a high level of expertise. Thus while the direction came from Moses, the realization of the design of the Ark (and all the appurtenances of the original shrine) was implemented by means of Egyptian craft techniques and, by necessity, formed on the basis of Egyptian models. This fact explains many of the specific peculiarities of the Ark's construction. 21. See Chapter 3. 22. The Bible assigns all the events-from the liberation from Egypt, to the receiving of the Ten Commandments at Sinai, the ratification of the Covenant, or contract, between the people of Israel and their God, and the construction of the Ark of the Covenant and the Tabernacle-as taking place within the space of one year. From then until settling in the Promised Land, the Tabernacle had been the only place of worship. 23. Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary: Exodus, p. 159. 24. See Chapter 24. 25. It is significant to note that "nowhere in the story of Samuel can we find any indication that he was interested in the re-establishment of the Tabernacle and its ritual or in the restoration of the Ark" (Albright, Archaeology, Historical Analogy and Early Biblical Tradition, p. 56-57). Perhaps Samuel could never get over his early experience of the corruption that had surrounded these sacred objects of veneration. The disgust may have permanently scarred him. 26. Exodus 25:8.

302

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

The Philistines had well understood the danger the Ark presented to them. When it had proved impossible to keep it in their possession as war booty, they had made certain the Ark would not continue to cast its spell upon the souls of the Israelites. Returned to Israelite territory, it remained cut off from the people of Israel, reposing for half a century in what amounted to house arrest. Exiled to a barn near the town of Kiriath-jearim, bereft of shrine, attending priests, and pious pilgrims, the Holy Ark had been "neutralized." Now, with David's victories, the Philistine quarantine has been lifted. The Ark can at long last return home from its half-century exile, and resume its place in the hearts of the faithful throughout Israel. But to what home? Here we have a measure of David's religious daring. The natural place for the Ark is Shiloh, where it had resided since the settling of the land. But rebuilding Shiloh, now for the first time a possibility, has no place in David's plans. The memory of Shiloh is forever tainted by the corruption that had polluted its final years and, in the tradition that had grown up since those dark days, was indeed the cause of Shiloh's merited destruction at the hand of an outraged deity. 27 What David proposes is to break clean, make a new start, and by bringing the Ark of God to Jerusalem transform a political capital into a sacred city. But can the Ark confer sanctity upon a site with no religious associations, or even an Israelite past? David's attempt to break new ground is a very problematic undertaking. Who is he to create a sacred city by fiat? He is neither priest nor prophet. How can he presume to act in God's name and change the proper past; initiate a new order of things? It is only David's spiritual instincts that give this proposal promise of success.

David once again gathered all the chief men of Israel, thirty thousand 28 Then David arose and went, with all the people who were with him, to Baalah, that is, to Kiriath-jearim which belongs to Judah, 29 to bring up from there the Ark of God, which is called by the name30 of the Lord of hosts who sits enthroned upon the cherubim. 31 So they loaded the Ark of God upon a new cart, and brought it out of the house ofAbinadab that was on the hill. Now Uzzah and his brothers, the sons ofAbinadab, 32 were driving the cart with the Ark of God; Uzzah and his brothers were walking before and alongside of the Ark 33 And David and all the House of Israel were making merry with all their might before the Lord; with songs, 34 and with Kinorot, 35 and with harps, 36 and with hand-drums, and with castanets and with cymbals. (6:1-5) We must be careful when reading this narrative, not to attribute to David purely political motives. While these motives are undoubtedly present, they are dwarfed by, what to him is a great sacred event. After half a century the Holy Ark of the Covenant is being liberated from Philistine exile and is being returned to its proper place as the focus of Israelite worship. This is an event of national reli27. Another alternative would have been to bring the Ark to Gibeon where, according to the Chronicler, the original Tabernacle, or Mishkan was situated. See note 64 below. 28. It is probably no accident that this is the exact number of casualties suffered by the Israelites at the disastrous battle of Eben-ezer when the Ark was captured (I Samuel4:10). See Chapter 3. 29. Reading with 1 Chron. 13:6; MT Samuel reads, .from Baale-judah. 30. Reading with LXX; in MT the name is repeated twice. 31. See Chapter 3. 32. Reading with LXX; MT treats the word rendered his brothers as the proper name Ahio, thus reading Uzzah and Ahio, sons ofAbinadab. 33. Reading with LXX; MT reads: now Ahio was walking before the Ark. 34. Reading with LXX, Q; and 1 Chronicles 13:8; MT reads,fir-trees. 35. Plural of Kinor. See Chapter 10, note 40. 36. A hand-held oblong stringed instrument. On Assyrian bas-reliefs it is pictured as having five strings and being a little over two feet in length. 1 Chronicles 13:8 reads with cymbals and with trumpets. LXX reads with cymbals and with flutes (i.e. wooden recorders, not transverse flutes). All the instruments mentioned were standard throughout the Ancient Near East, and while we have little to no idea of what the music of those days sounded like, we have pictures of all these instruments and a fair idea of the sounds the instruments could make.

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

303

gious significance, and David has prepared carefully for this moment, building consensus and heightening the people's expectations. 37 The picture presented of the procession to Kiriath-jearim, and the bringing forth the Ark from its long solitude, is one of wild exuberance. This is a far cry from the stolid solemnity of Shiloh. We can clearly see how deeply Samuel's religious revolution has taken hold as we read of the music, the singing, the dancing, and the supercharged emotionalism that pervades the scene. The cart bearing the Holy Ark proceeds slowly, surrounded by the family that has guarded it all these long years, 38 while all around swirl wild exhibits of joy and exultation. And in the midst of this tumultuous progress-tragedy! But when they came to the threshing floor ofNacon, 39 Uzzah put out his hand to the Ark40 of God and grabbed it, for the oxen stumbled And the Lord was furious with Uzzah and He struck him down, because he put out his hand to the Ark, and he died there before God 41 (6:6-7)

The oxen stumble over the uneven ground, the cart swerves and tips and Uzzah, fearful that the Holy Ark may slip off the cart and crash to the ground, grabs the Ark to steady it-and drops dead! Is it a heart attack, or a stroke brought on by the excitement and intense emotionalism? That might be the way we would explain such things, but that is not how Uzzah's contemporaries see it. The author records their belief (which she shares) that God has struck Uzzah down for his audacity, as a non-priest, in touching the Ark. Only priests are allowed to touch the Holy Ark, and then only after proper purification. As a layman, the awful power of God that is focused in the Ark has destroyed him on contact. 42 The festivities come to screeching halt. David was angry43 that the Lord had burst forth against Uzzah (that spot is called Perezuzzah44 to this day), and David was afraid of the Lord that day; and he said: "How can the Ark of the Lord come to me?" So David was not willing to take the Ark of the Lord to him, to the City ofDavid, but diverted it to the house ofObed-edom, the Gittite. (6:8-10)

37. Our author skips over the preparation to focus on the events of the great day. The Chronicler, on the other hand, supplies us with some ofthe background that led up to the decision to bring the Ark up to Jerusalem: Now David consulted with the commanders of the regiments and the battalions; with every leader. And David said to the entire assembly ofIsrael: "If it seems good to you, and it is [the will] ofthe Lord our God, let us send far and wide to all our brethren who remain in all the territories ofIsrael, and with them to the priests and the Levites in the cities that have pasture land, that they may come together with us. Then let us bring again the Ark of our God to us, for we neglected it in the days of Saul. " And all the assembly agreed to do so, for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people. (1 Chronicles 13:1-4)

38. Abinadab was undoubtedly long dead, as probably was his son Eleazar-it can be no accident that he is nowhere mentioned. Uzzah and his brothers were either Eleazar's younger brothers (which would make them old men) or Abinadab's grandchildren. In Biblical usage the term the sons ofAbinadab could refer to his grandchildren as well as his sons. 39. 1 Chronicles 13:9 reads Chidon, Q reads Nodan. 40. Reading with 1 Chronicles 13 :9; 2 Samuel6:6 lacks the words his hand. 41. Reading with l Chronicles 13:10; the meaning ofMT is unclear. 42. That Uzzah had only the best of intentions was beside the point. We might understand their way of thinking a bit better if we were to imagine, in our terms, the Ark as a source of high-voltage electricity. No matter what his motives, anyone touching it without proper insulation would instantly be electrocuted. According to Numbers 4:15 and 20, even the viewing of the Ark by non-priests was perilous. Before the Ark was removed from the sanctuary for transportation the priests covered it, and even the Levites whose task was to carry it (by means of the carrying poles) were forbidden to either touch or look on it. From this we can assume that the Ark was covered when Uzzah and his brothers were transporting it. 43. The Hebrew term has the connotations of being distressed and being frustrated as well. 44. That is "the breach of Uzzah;" the picture is that of a flood of waters bursting through a dam, leaving a gaping hole or breach where once was a wholeness.

304

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

From an emotional high suddenly David, and all present, are catapulted into the depths. We can imagine the welter of emotions that surge through David: first shock and horror, followed by dismay, then anger and frustration, and fmally fear. Why did this have to happen to ruin this glorious day? That fool, Uzzah! Why wasn't he more careful? And then the awful thought: suppose this is an omen. Maybe God doesn't want the Ark to go to Jerusalem, and this is a sign of His displeasure with the whole project. David decides not to take the risk. The triumphal procession is cancelled. The Ark is once again warehoused; deposited for safekeeping in a private residence. And not just any private residence. After what happened to Uzzah no Israelite will have the Ark. It has once again become a hot potato. So it is foisted onto a non-Jew, a Philistine no less! 45 It would seem that in the aftermath of the Philistine defeats he is in no position to protest.

THE JOYOUS HOMECOMING David is not a person to easily abandon his purposes. We can be certain he keeps a close watch over the Ark, looking for some omen that will indicate to him (and enable him to convince others) that God's anger was directed exclusively against Uzzah and not against the projected move to Jerusalem. He probably is receiving regular reports on the situation. The reports are positive. Far from hexing the family, the Ark seems to have brought them good luck. This is all David needs to hear. The project can recommence.

Now the Ark of the Lord remained in the house ofObed-edom the Gittite three months, and the Lord blessed Obed-edom and all his household And it was told to King David, saying: "The Lord has blessed the house of Obed-edom and all that is his because of the Ark of God." So David went and brought up the Ark ofGodfrom the house ofObed-edom with rejoicing to the City of David Now when the bearers of the Ark46 advanced six paces, he sacrificed an ox and a fatling. 47 And David whirled with all his might before the Lord, and David was girded with a linen ephod 48 So David and all the House of Israel brought up the Ark of the Lord with shouting and with the sound of the Shofar. 49 (Now as the Ark of the Lord entered the City of David Michal, the daughter ofSaul, looked out of the window, and saw King David leaping and whirling before the Lord; and she despised him in her heart.) So they brought the Ark of the Lord, and set it in its place, in the midst of the tent that David had pitched for it; and David offered up burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. Then, when David had finished offering the burnt offerings and the peace offerings he blessed the people in the name of the Lord of Hosts. And he distributed to the people, to the entire multitude of Israel, men and women alike, to every one a loaf of bread, a portion ofmeaf0 and a raisin cake. Then all the people departed each to his house. (6:1119) 45. Gittite means that he is a native of Gath. He is now resident between Kiriath-jearim and Jerusalem, which had been Philistine dependencies. I Chronicles I5:I8, 24 and 26:4ff lists an Obed-edom who was a Levite, of the family of Korah, who became a doorkeeper for the Ark in Jerusalem. But he is not referred to as a Gittite, and there is no indication that these two references are to one and the same person. 46. David seems to have learned his lesson; there is a limit to the amount of religious innovation that one can get away with. This time he will do things "by the book." From now on the Ark will be carried. I Chronicles 15:2I5 indicates that David, as part of his elaborate preparations, made sure that only Levites, properly sanctified, would be involved: so the sons of the Levites carried the Ark of God on their shoulders by means ofpoles, as Moses had commanded by the word ofthe Lord ( 15: I5). 47. Q and 1 Chronicles read seven oxen and seven rams. 48. For a description of this garment see Chapter 2, note 2. 49. The ram's hom, more traditional than "new-fangled" instruments. But see below, note 58. 50. Reading with Vulg.; MT is unclear. Peace offerings were shared by the worshipers.

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

305

This time the procession and ceremony comes off without a hitch. David, to be absolutely certain of doing things right, has gone back to the desert period for his model. One could be sure that when things were ordered as they had been under the direction of Moses, all will be proper and in accord with God's will. So the Ark is carried by its poles on the shoulders of the Levites, just as was done in olden days (no more of this fancy modem transport by oxcart), and it is housed in a tent, even as it was at the foot of Mount Sinai. And doing it the right way works. Nothing goes wrong. The joy and fervor that accompany the redemption of the Ark from exile reach fever pitch, with David throwing himself heart and soul into the celebrations. Putting aside his royal robes, clad only in the simple garb of a common priest, the linen ephod, he works himself into a frenzy of exultation, dancing, leaping and spinning before the Ark, rejoicing with every fiber ofhis being before his God. 5 1 The expense of the ceremony surrounding the liberation of the Holy Ark is enormous, the handouts prodigal, but it is only fitting that it should be thus for so holy an occasion. Hundreds of animals are sacrificed, bread is baked by the ton while raisin cakes are piled into pyramids, ready for distribution. In the joyous mass meal that follows everyone present gets his or her share. At the conclusion of the meal the King blesses the entire assembly in the name of the Lord. The Ark of the Covenant has come home to Jerusalem, spreading its sacred aura permanently over the city. Well fed, with a sense of having participated in a soul-stirring event and having seen things to their proper conclusion, the vast multitude that has gathered for the liberation of the Ark trickles out through the narrow streets. Passing the city gates out into the countryside they begin the journey home. David, exhausted physically and emotionally from the strenuous exertions of the day, yet exalted at having realized the spiritual high point of his life, also turns homeward. It is time to share with his family the rapturous mood of the day.

Then David returned to bless his household (6:20)

THE TRAGIC AFTERMATH If there is one place above all else that a person might expect to find sympathy and understanding for one's deepest yearnings and ideals it should be in the confines of one's immediate family. If not there, then where? And yet all too often this is not the case. When one's family fails in this respect the blow is devastating. A failure so fundamental would seem to forbid the very use of the term "family" to human arrangements where the sharing of common goals and dreams is lacking. A common hotel-restaurant might be a better term for such an arrangement; without joint dreams human contact withers, and what remains is but an economic and physical nexus. If there was anyone whom David could have expected to share his exalted mood, now that Jonathan was dead, it would have been his dearest friend's sister, Michal, the love of his youth. She who had defied her father for love of him, who had snatched his life from sure death and had suffered deeply on his behalf-to her David now turns to join with him in celebrating the religious ecstasy of the glorious day. The reception that he receives is frigid. 51. Ifwe find this side of David's nature inconsistent with his role as a successful general we are simply reflecting the norms of our modem Western world. Nowadays, being an accomplished poet and musician (as David was), not to mention a dancer, would undoubtedly disqualify one for a military career. But this was far from the case in the culture of the Eastern Mediterranean World of the first millennium BCE. Cyrus Gordon draws the parallel with the 7th century Spartan general Tyraeus, who was both poet and composer, and also a renowned performer on the flute. He rebuilt the morale of the demoralized Spartan army, teaching them to perform complicated military maneuvers by training the troops to perform war dances while singing his poems to musical accompaniment! (He couldn't dance himself being lame.) He then led his army to victory on the battlefield. In that era the careers of poet, musician, general and dancer were not seen as incompatible with one another. (Gordon, "David the Dancer," p. 46-49)

306

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER We tum the clock back several hours:

Now as the Ark of the Lord entered the City of David, Michal, the daughter of Saul, looked out of the window, and saw King David leaping and whirling before the Lord; and she despised him in her heart. (6:16) Later in the day follows the denouement.

Then David returned to bless his household, and Michal, the daughter of Saul, came out to meet David, and said: "How distinguished is the King of Israel today, who has this day exposed himself to the view of his subject's house-maids, just like one of the guttersnipes52 would expose himself!" (6:20) If we want to understand what the author is telling us we should note that Michal is referred to, not as David's wife but as Saul's daughter; and this repeatedly. There is a terrible estrangement being suggested here. The young girl who had been madly in love with the glittering hero, and who had sided with him against her own father, is a changed person. As Tennyson put it:

The dirty nurse, Experience, in her kind Hathfoul'd me. 53 Dirtied and hardened by what she has been put through, the love that had made her radiant on her wedding day has dimmed and flickered out. And what is left is her father's daughter, a proud princess, looking with disdain on the boor who is her husband and now ruler of her father's kingdom. And as so often is the case, the very traits that so endeared him to her when in love are now the very things that set her teeth on edge. In the days of her romance it was David's very difference from the pattern of court formalism and the polished manners of the courtiers-his crude vitality, his unconventionality, his unrestrained enthusiasm and the breathtaking daring of his ways of getting what he wanted-that had so captivated her. Now, as she watches him dancing in an exuberance of religious ecstasy, the descriptions that come to her mind are in the realm of "acting like a drunken clown," "boorish behavior," "a performance unbecoming to a king." What especially seems to have gotten under her skin is the fact that David, clad only in a short, robe-like linen ephod, is exposing himself as he "leaps and whirls" before the Ark. "How utterly vulgar!" is her reaction, and she despised him in her heart. Cold contempt now rules in place of love. And with David's return she is unable to keep her feelings to herself. In the most hateful words that she can find, Saul's daughter throws David's behavior into his face. With biting sarcasm she compliments him-this piece of Judean riffraff-for the way he has added honor and luster to the crown of Israel by exposing himselfto the view of all the lower class girls in the street. How can she have permitted herself such remarks? The bitterness that has boiled to the surface must have lain long and deep to emerge so explosively. What was at the root of it? Was it her treatment at the hands of her father? Yet here she has reverted to the proper standards of behavior that she had learned from him. Could it have been the shock of disillusionment on fmding a mature and hardened husband in place of the youthful hero she remembered; a husband, moreover, too involved in affairs of state to have much time for her? Was it the agony of one, who had once been his one and only, who now must compete with younger and more attractive women for his affections? Or perhaps it was that then, as a princess, she had been able to patronize a young parvenu, and now David is the

52. The Hebrew term used means literally empty men; that is empty of all moral values and standards, people lacking all sense of decency or limits on their behavior. The term is commonly used to mean riffraff, rabble, dregs of society. It is an extremely insulting term.

53. The Idylls ofthe King, The Last Tournament.

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

307

king who can patronize her as the daughter of a has-been? All these, and perhaps other factors that we know nothing about, may have had their place in her reaction. The only thing that we can be sure of is that she still cares for David. No woman will feel shame for, or want to hurt, a man for whom she has ceased to care.54 Whatever stoked the volcano, the effects of the eruption are catastrophic. Little enough still holds them together, but these poor remains are now irrevocably tom to shreds. David's shock is enormous. Michal evidently knows how to get to him where it hurts. His backcountry origins seem to have been a sensitive point with him. And beyond the specific insult, the total lack of understanding that Michal's remarks reveal-of the glory of the day, of the spiritual side of his nature and what the redemption of the Ark and bringing it to its new home mean to him-must appall him. David is not a person to take lying down either vulgar insults or having his ideals trampled upon. His retort is furious. Then David said to Michal: "Before the Lord will I dance; as the Lord lives, 55 Who chose me instead of your father and all his House, appointing me rule;6 over the people of the Lord, over Israel, will I make merry before the Lord! And I will abase myself even more than this, and be contemptible in you; 7 eyes. But with the maids ofwhom you have spoken, with them will I get me honor!" (6:21-22)

With these words the breach is total. Words have been spoken on both sides that, once said, can never be unsaid. With icy premeditation, Michal has thrown into David's face the "vulgar behavior" that, she implies, would never have been done, or tolerated, by her father-a real king who knew how to behave, as a monarch should. And David, in hot fury, has thrown back at her that her precious father-indeed all her family and all that they stood for are past history. He now occupies their place, and he now sets the standards of what is behavior proper for a king. She can keep her standards and look down on him if she so pleases. If all she can see in his actions is vulgar display, that is her problem. The general population, the people in the street (the housemaids and scrub-ladies to whom she has alluded) can feel the spiritual uplift of the great day even if she cannot. They can understand what he feels and why he has danced before the Lord with all his might; and they honor him for his religious devotion. Pomp and ceremony are all right in their place, but in God's eyes humility is more becoming than decorum and pomposity. In effect, what David says to her is that, if all she can see in displays of religious ecstasy is vulgarity, then this is proof of a narrow and vulgar mind. After this there is no going back. As much as she is disgusted with him, so is he disgusted with her. He will never have anything more to do with her, never go to bed with her, never even touch her again. So Michal, the daughter ofSaul, had no child to the day ofher death. (6:23)

THE SACRED CITY Leaving these domestic disasters, let us return to the larger picture of David's enterprise that this episode interrupted. Having learned to temporarily temper his passion for religious innovation58 and 54. For this, as well as several other penetrating insights, I am indebted to Nora Lofts' poignant study "Michal." 55. Reading with LXX; MT lacks the words will I dance; as the Lord lives. 56.Nagid.

57. Reading with LXX, MT reads my. 58. The first attempt to transport the Ark by wagon, accompanied by laymen rather than Levites, and also possibly the orchestral accompaniment, were all seen as "new-fangled" innovations, departures from the way the Ark had previously been treated. These changes from tradition probably didn't sit well with significant sectors of the populace. In the public mind these innovations were felt to be the cause of the disaster that terminated this episode. David did not make the same mistake twice. But his desire for change was not abated. He simply had

308

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

to concentrate on the main aim, David has succeeded in getting his relocation of the Ark to Jerusalem accepted by the populace of his two kingdoms. Jerusalem is now the new Shiloh, the recognized religious center of both Israel and Judah. Streams of pilgrims will now flow to Jerusalem, and to Jerusalem will all eyes be turned for spiritual guidance. The first crucial step has been taken to transform this out of the way mountain fastness into a sacred city, whose influence will ultimately reach out to the whole world. David has begun a process that is to reach far beyond his immediate aims. His goal, in the frrst place, had been to rescue the Holy Ark from its exile and return it to its former status as the central symbol of the faith, and the focus of the worship of the faithful. Concurrently with this, he aimed to sever the Ark's ties with a corrupt and discredited past, and to relocate it in a new home- the City of David. And of course he expects to incidentally benefit politically from his acts, by giving to his capital the spiritual patina that will bring to it acceptance by the vast majority of the people. He himself will then gain the credit for the rescue of the Ark and finding it a new home. In all these aims he succeeds;59 but in the process he accomplishes things that are beyond his purposes, beyond even his horizons. He has irrevocably turned Jerusalem into more than just a sacred city, he has begun the process of transforming it into an eternal city. The Temple that his son will build to house the Ark of the Covenant will eventually be destroyed, rebuilt and destroyed once again. Time after time the city will be sacked and leveled to the ground, only to rise once again out of its ashes. Temples may be destroyed, the Holy Ark itself vanish in the passage of the centuries. Yet the faith in One God, Creator of heaven and earth, that Jerusalem will henceforth represent, the conviction ofthe worth and inherent dignity of every human being formed in the image of his or her Creator that it will now proclaim, and the promise of human redemption that the city will embody are to spread from Jerusalem in ever widening circles until they encompass the entire globe. In the fullness of time Jerusalem has become a sacred city for three world faiths. Hundreds of millions of people today see in this city a spot where heaven and earth meet; see it embodying somehow the message that man does not live by bread alone, but by every thing that proceeds from the mouth of God does man live (Deuteronomy 8:3). They hear Jerusalem declaring that there is more to life than getting and consuming, and that there is in the human being the possibility of transcendence. This timeless message has grown in resonance with the passage of the centuries. This is a future that David could not have foreseen, yet it is he who planted the seed. Without his vision this obscure mountaintop town would not have become Jerusalem the Eternal we. know today.

EXCURSUS VII: THE TENT SHRINE As we have noted, when David achieved his goal of housing the Ark of the Covenant in his city of Jerusalem, he set it in its place, in the midst of the tent that David had pitched for it. (6: 17) We are not told what kind of tent, but when we take into account the inherent conservatism of religious forms

learned to go slow and adjust the tempo of innovation to the public's capacity to absorb newness. As we shall see, when things settle down a bit David is to introduce a major series of changes in the format of worship, central among these grafting elements of Samuel's religious revolution onto the worship in his new shrine. The Chronicler credits him with the introduction of choral and instrumental music as a permanent aspect of Jerusalem worship. More on this later. 59. One of the results of bringing the Ark to Jerusalem was a heightened religious sense among the general public. This was mirrored by the increasingly common practice of giving children names containing the Name of God (i.e. Adonijah, Jeroboam etc.). This is attested both in the Biblical record and the archaeological records from the mid-tenth century onward. By the eighth century the practice was almost universal (Schniedewind,

Society and the Promise to David, p. 27-28).

REACHING FOR SOMETHING HIGHER

309

we would not be amiss in assuming that it closely resembled the original tent which had housed the Ark in the days of Moses. Of this tent we know quite a bit. The original tent, constructed at the foot of Mount Sinai, was alternatively called the Mishkan or the Tent ofMeeting. These terms apparently were synonymous. The term Mishkan (often translated as "Tabernacle") comes from the word shokhen, which means "to dwell," and is used especially oftemporary lodging in a tent. The tent was in the form of a rectangle, 45 feet long and 15 feet wide. 60 Its inside was divided into two parts by a curtain: the larger section, by the entrance, measured 30 feet by 15 feet, the smaller section, at the innermost recess of the tent, was 15 x 15 feet. This was the Holy of Holies where the Ark was housed. The outer area of the tent contained the Menorah, or sevenbranched lamp (we remember the young Samuel, who slept in the sanctuary, and whose duties included tending the lamp), 61 the table on which the showbread (or "display bread") was placed62 and a small altar on which incense was burned. The Mishkan was always pitched so that the end with the entrance faced east. Outside the Tent of Meeting in those days, directly before the entrance to the tent and about 35 feet distant from it, stood the altar on which sacrifice was made. 63 Considering the nomadic conditions under which the Israelites lived before settling in the Promised Land, housing the Ark of the Covenant (itself designed for carrying) in a sanctuary that was inherently portable made excellent sense. It was less reasonable to continue with the system once the people of Israel settled in the land of Canaan, with Shiloh becoming the permanent abode of the Ark. 64 But we have seen how hard it is to alter religious practices once they have had time to become established-even in so minor a matter as how the Ark is to be transported. Since this is the way the Ark had been housed in the distant past, so should it currently be housed; and so, for the time being, it is.

60. The two sides and the rear of the original Mishkan were constructed of gold covered boards of acacia wood, wedged into sockets to ensure stability. These, and the open top, were covered by curtains, with an additional protective cover made of leather. 61. See Chapter 2. 62. This too is familiar to us; it was from such a table in the similar shrine at Nob that Ahimelech the priest took the bread that he gave to the fugitive David; see Chapter 12 (especially note 31). It appears that all Israelite shrines were built to the same basic format as the Mishkan. Thus it is probable that the tent that David pitched for the Ark was of the same dimensions and the same ground plan as the Mishkan. 63. "Mobile sanctuaries are known to us from Arab Bedouin practices ... They are also documented in Phoenician and Egyptian sources, the latter from the period ofRameses II (ca. 1290- 1224 BCE). Furthermore, the method of construction described here in our chapters (Exodus 25-31) is now known to be based on well-established Egyptian techniques." (Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary: Exodus, p. 156) 64. We have already noted that all indications point to the existence of a Temple at Shiloh and not a tent (see Prologue, notes II and especially 16). The Chronicler informs us that the original Mishkan was situated in Gibeon at the time that David moved the Ark from Kiriath-jearim to Jerusalem. (I Chronicles 16:39, 21:29). Gibeon remained a major, if not the major, shrine in Israel until Solomon built the Temple, and moved the Mishkan and its furniture to Jerusalem. This might imply that after construction of the shrine in Shiloh the Mishkan was disassembled and kept packed up, and that the priests managed to evacuate the Mishkan prior to the Philistine sack of Shiloh-first to Nob, and then, after Saul's slaughter of the priests of Nob, to Gibeon (portability has some advantages after all). The possession of the Mishkan undoubtedly gave Gibeon prestige, but without the Ark it could have no valid claim to be the central shrine of the Israelites.

CHAPTER24

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD "But in truth, will God dwell on earth? Behold, the heavens, and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You; how much less this house" I Kings 8:27

Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for? Robert Browning, Andrea del Sarto

We have mentioned that, beyond Jebusite Jerusalem's lack of Israelite spiritual legitimacy (which called forth the striking remedial efforts we have been witnessing), David also faced a lack of imperial symbolism that would proclaim to all and sundry that this city is the capital of a serious power. We have seen David taking steps to correct this deficiency by having an up-to-date palace built to house him and his government. 1 What we will now propose is that the acts of establishing Jerusalem as his capital, building himself a palace and relocating the Ark within the City of David are but steps in a multi-phased program designed to fundamentally restructure the socio-political makeup of the people oflsrael, and to legitimate this new order of things. Accepting the inherent un-workability of the ad hoc confederation of tribes that typified the Age of the Judges, Israel has opted for monarchy. What this has amounted to in practice was a graft of a king onto the old order. But this is inefficient at best, inoperative at worst. David realizes that for monarchy to work as it should, society will have to be reorganized and rationalized. In a word, tribal society will have to give way to a nation state. This will require, among others, two very fundamental changes. In the first place, uniform laws, a uniform legal system and a professional judicial system to administer them will have to replace tribal law and local administration. And secondly, there must be a basic shift in the focus of loyalty: from family and clan to the state and the king. These are changes that will cut deep against the grain, violating everything that people up to now have done and known, and will be passionately resisted. These changes will be impossible to implement unless they can be powerfully legitimized. The coercive power of the state will be impotent unless, at the very least, a majority ofthe general public can be convinced that God Himself sanctions these changes. I. Palaces in the Ancient Near East were more than royal residences; they also housed key government officials and departments, functioning as the operative seat of government.

312

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

It is at this point that we can begin to grasp the larger political motives behind David's removal of the Ark to Jerusalem. As we have been acutely aware, the Ark of the Covenant served as the prime symbol of God's presence in the midst of His people. As such, as Carol Meyers points out, "the presence ofthe Ark in Jerusalem ... [would serve as] the major symbol in the religious sphere for sanctioning the reordering oflsraelite nationallife." 2 Had the tribes of Israel been all that David had to worry about, the installing of the Ark into its tent home in his capital, with all the attending dramatic pageantry, might well have been sufficient for his purposes. But they were not all: David now rules over his newly subservient Philistine vassals and the Canaanite enclaves as well. Nor may we forget his imperial ambitions: the period of David's imperial wars 3 almost certainly overlaps the events which are at present at the center of our attention. The Ark and its tent would have little resonance with the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites and Arameans who soon will outweigh in sheer numbers the Israelite base of his constituency. Nor will Israel's national saga-the memories of the Patriarchal Age, the annual commemoration of the Exodus from Egypt or the tales of the Sinai Theophany-make any serious impression on these gentiles. David will need powerful symbols, symbols that will speak to these constituencies, to reconcile these foreign peoples to the disabilities that their enforced subjugation to the Empire entails. It is precisely here, at the point where David begins to become a player on the larger board of the Ancient Near East that the well established practices of the region become relevant. It has long been recognized that the relationship between God, king, and temple in the ancient Near East was an intimate and essential one. One of the tasks of the king, as representative of a centralized community ... was to erect an earthly home for the deity who was the source of the bounty and stability that the populace hoped would prevail. Without the deity's presence in a temple building where he or she was accessible ... the authority of the king to rule his people was not clearly established... . On these grounds alone, one could assert that it would have been David's next logical step, after bringing the Ark to Jerusalem, to set about building a temple for it in conformity with ancient Near East attitudes .... Temples were the structures par excellence for communicating to a wide audience the authoritative rule of the regime responsible for erecting them. 4

It is in the light of David's political needs, as well as the general expectations of his Ancient Near East neighborhood, that we should view what is now to come.

THE DECISION Now it occurred [at a time] when the king had been dwelling in his house, and the Lord had given him rest from all his enemies around him, that the king said to Nathan the prophet: "See here, I dwell in a house of cedar, 5 but the Ark of God dwells within curtains. "6 And Nathan said to the king: "Go and do all that is in your heart, for the Lord is with you. ""(7: 1-3) Despite what we have been saying about David's political aims, we would be mistaken to view his proposal to Nathan as merely a piece if self-serving rationalization. By this time we have gotten to know David well enough to recognize his typical flair for uniting political and ethical motivations

2. Meyers, "David as Temple Builder," p. 363. 3. See Chapters 25 and 27. 4. Ibid., p. 364. 5. That is, cedar paneled: the walls were of stone. Houses were not built of wood in Biblical times; wood was used primarily to provide beams and posts to support the upper story and the roof, and for paneling, while walls were constructed of stone and bricks. 6. We would say today "under canvas," i.e. in a tent.

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

313

into a combined package. Beyond his political needs-not in themselves disreputable if we are willing to admit that he may truly believe that his program of restructuring Israelite society is for its benefit-we should also take seriously the moral unease that underlies his statement. He is now living in as costly and up-to-date an edifice as he can manage. And next door the Ark of the Covenant, symbol of God's presence, is installed in a primitive tent. 7 Is it farfetched to entertain the idea that the contrast between the way the king and God were "domiciled" is increasingly calling forth a sense of unease on David's part? No matter what the traditions, is it fitting that the Ark should be housed so much more poorly than the king, who is a mere mortal of flesh and blood? Political need and moral unease crystallize into a determination to act. We know from numerous Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic building accounts that there was a common format to the way the erection of a monumental temple was presented. Despite differences in style and content between them, a consistent five-part structure can be found in them all. The first step of this well-nigh universal pattern is the decision to erect a building, a decision requiring the express approval of the deity. The essential approval of the deity could be made in a variety of ways, such as through dreams, divination, natural portents, or prophetic revelation. However divine authorization may have been secured, it is clear that a monarch hoping to build a temple experienced great anxiety about receiving approval for a project so essential to securing his own regnal authority. 8

It is this requirement that prompts David's declaration to Nathan. 9 When do the events here related take place? While this episode continues the theme of the previous chapter, there has been a considerable lapse of time. Two elements in the narrative make this certain. The first is that we find Nathan as David's resident prophet in the place of Gad. We met the prophet Gad in the wilderness with David, and we will learn in due course that he was the prophet to whom David turned for at least the first decade of his reign. Gad then disappears for reasons unexplained; either he died or fell from favor. He is replaced by Nathan, who remains with David to the end ofhis life. At the very least, this would place these events well into the second decade of David's rule. Corroborative evidence is that David's palace is built and he is well settled in, 10 putting thenarrative no earlier than the end of the second decade of David's reign. We are told further that the Lord had given him rest from all his enemies around him. This would seem to indicate that it is a lull between the end of one round of David's imperialistic wars and the beginning of the next; possibly after the conclusion of the Philistine and Moabite wars and before the cascade of events that will result in the Aramean-Ammonite wars. (The Author will have to backtrack 7. We are not certain exactly where the tent was situated at this particular time, but the probabilities favor proximity to the royal complex. 8. Meyers, "David as Temple Builder," p. 369. 9. The four remaining steps are: (2) a description of the preparations for the construction project, including amassing the materials necessary for the building, the selection and preparation of the building site and the drafting of the requisite labor force, (3) a description of the edifice itself when complete, (4) a description of the dedication ceremonies, and (5) either a blessing for the king or a prayer by him. As we shall see, God's withholding of approval and deferring the project to the next generation leads to a divided implementation. David carries out only stage one and part of stage two: the amassing of building materials and the choice and preparation of the site of the future Temple (see note 34 below, I Chronicles 28:11-29:9 and Chapter 40); the labor draft and stages 3-5 will be fulfilled by Solomon (1 Kings 6:1-38, 7:15-8:66; 2 Chronicles 2:1-7:10). 10. It took Solomon seven years to build the Temple and thirteen years to build his palace. Granted that his palace was larger and grander than David's, but then he had a larger labor force at his command and more resources. So let us assume between seven to ten years for the building of David's palace.

3I4

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

in the next couple of chapters to sketch in all the events that she has skipped over.) It was this lull that gives David the opportunity to divert his attention from the military sphere and to focus on domestic policy, as well as to take stock ofhis situation and become more fully aware of the implications of the differences between his domicile and that of the Ark.

THE REFUSAL Knowing that he will need divine sanction not only for the construction of a temple but also for the break with the Tabernacle tradition of Ark domicile, David turns to his court prophet 11 for the necessary approval. Nathan's initial reaction is positive. Now there are those who consider Nathan as no more than a yes-man, but this evaluation may be very unfair to him; perhaps he too has been feeling just the way David does.

But that very night the word of the Lord came to Nathan, saying: "Go and tell my servant David: 'Thus says the Lord: You want to build Me a house, for Me to dwell in? For I have not dwelt in a house from the day that I brought the children of Israel up out of Egypt until this day, but I have moved about with a tent as my dwelling place. 12 In all the places I moved, with all the children of Israel, did I ever speak13 to a single one of the Judges 14 of Israel, those whom I appointed to shepherd my people Israel, saying: "Why didn't you build Me a house of cedar?" Now therefore, thus shall you say to My servant David: 'Thus says the Lord of hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep, to be leader 15 over My people Israel: and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make your name great, like the name of the great ones of the earth. And I will appoint a place for My people Israel, and will plant them that they may dwell in their own place, and be disturbed no more; wicked men shall a.fJlict them no more as they did in the past, from the time that I appointed Judges over My people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. What is more, the Lord declares to you that He, the Lord, will make you a house!" (7:4-11) Nathan's personal reaction is to give full backing to David's plan. But God has other ideas. That very night God speaks to Nathan and vetoes David's project. God has no need of a cedar-paneled dwelling; rhetorically he asks ifhe has ever reproved any of the prior leaders of Israel for not building Him a house? There is no rejection of David himself. He is referred to as "My servant;" his activities in securing the people oflsrael against their enemies are described as fulfilling God's purposes. God will make him famous. But David's project to build God a house is vetoed. Then follows a startling II. The practice of having a "prophet in residence," to whom the king could readily turn for spiritual advice, was to be repeated by many, if not most, of the subsequent rulers of Israel and Judah. These court prophets often were as much courtiers and politicians as men of God, trimming their sails to the prevailing wind. While some were true messengers of God, with the courage to stand up to the king and his court, delivering unwelcome messages, most seem to have sold their souls for the prestige of the position; they were later labeled as false prophets. In virtually all cases, the true prophet was an outsider, maintaining his or her integrity by not being part of the establishment. Nathan was one of the rare exceptions to this rule, and the record indicates that even he functioned mainly as a yes-man and intriguer except for the relatively rare instances when God gave him his marching orders. We are given only two examples in which he rises above his mediocrity to moments of greatnesshere and in the matter of Bathsheba-but in these he redeems himself for all time. I2. The Hebrew word used is Mishkan, which is also the name of the tent housing the Ark. See Excursus VII: The Tent Shrine at the end of Chapter 23. 13. Reading with LXX; MT reads speak a word I4. Reading with I Chronicles 17:6; MT reads tribes. I5. Nagid.

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

315

reversal. After reminding David that He has raised him from being a lowly shepherd to be ruler of Israel, and has ensured that all he did was successful, God announces that in place of David building God a house, God will build David a house-that is, a dynasty. 16

When your days are over17 and you lie with your fathers, I will raise up your offipring after you, one ofyour own issue, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be [like] a son to me; when he commits wickedness I will chastise him with the rod of men, with the afflictions of the sons of men. But I will not take My steadfast love from him 18 as I took it from Saul, whom I removed from before you. So your house and your kingdom will be sure before M/ 9 forever; your throne shall be established for all time. (7:12-16) This is the message Nathan is to convey to David, and to deliver it is no way to win friends, especially as it means going back on his too hasty endorsement. Yet when God commands Nathan is never lacking in courage. Braving the justified anger of his baulked monarch, he delivers God's words verbatim.

Thus did Nathan speak to David, according to all these words; according to all this vision. (7:17) Several issues arise out of this divine decree (there is really no other word for it) that Nathan delivers to David. In the first place, though God makes plain that He is in no need of a house, He has nothing intrinsically against having one built for Him. In essence David's reasoning is approved: considering what human beings are and how they tend to think, leaving the Ark of God in a tent will be perceived by many as disrespectful; as a slight to God. In the new conditions of a monarchy, with its dramatic rise in the standard of living, it will not be seen fitting for the king to be housed better than the symbol of God's presence. God signals His approval by giving permission for David's son to build God a house. The veto is not directed against the project but against David carrying it out.

Why? God gives no reason in His vision to Nathan. The Chronicler, writing much later, quotes a speech made by David in his old age, at the very end of his reign, to the assembled elite of Israel and Judah (which include his sons), in which he explains why he never built the House of God:

Then David the king stood up on his feet and said: "Hear me, my brothers and my people; "As for me, it was my intention20 to build a house ofrest for the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, for the footstool of our God, and I prepared to build But God said to me: 'You shall not build a house for My name, for you are a man of war and have spilled blood'" (1 Chronicles 28:2-3) He also reports David as having told Solomon:

"My son, it was my intention to build a house in the name of the Lord my God But the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 'You have spilled blood in abundance, and have waged

16. This is one of the meanings of the term; "the House of David" is equivalent to "The Davidic Dynasty." 17. Literally, when your days are filled up, i.e. when you die. 18. Reading with LXX, Syr., Vulg. and 1 Chronicles 17:13; MT reads but My steadfast love shall not depart from him. The word hesed, rendered here as "steadfast love" is also often translated as "grace" or "mercy." 19. Reading with LXX; MT reads before you. 20. Literally, it was with my heart.

316

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

great wars. You shall not build a house in My name for you have spilled much blood before Me upon the earth. "'21 (1 Chronicles 22:7-8)

Did David receive additional prophetic revelations, in which God explained why he had forbidden His beloved servant to build Him a house? It is possible, but does not seem to me likely. If there were further revelations they would most likely have come through Nathan the prophet. Now Nathan wrote a history of the reign of David, which is listed by the Chronicler as one of his sources. 22 Such messages as related to David's desire to build a house to God would almost certainly have been recorded in this book. Yet the Chronicler, with Nathan's book before him, quotes God's message to David exactly as our author does, and quotes no other message. So if there was such a revelation we have no record of it. It seems to me more likely that, brooding over the reason for God's veto, David eventually came to the conclusion that, as a man of war, it was not fitting for his blood-stained hands to build a house to God. His very success at his chosen profession had rendered him unworthy of such a holy task. This, he came to be convinced, was God's will, and he presented it as such to the public.23 This is a man with a guilty conscience. But surprisingly there is no trace of this reasoning in Samuel. Or not so surprisingly if we remember when the Book was written. One of our prime postulates is that David was still on his throne when the Book was "published;" in other words sometime during the last decade of David's reign. If, as the Chronicler states, David only went public with his reasoning at the very end of his life, Samuel was already in circulation and it was too late for the author to relate to David's announcement. 24 So if our author was unaware of the conclusions which David was ultimately to reach, how did she explain this stunning rebuke to his plans? To this question Carol Meyers makes an interesting suggestion: she finds the reason for David's failure to follow through on his temple-building plans not in the realm of theology but rather in the events related in 2 Samuel 24. These events-David's ordering a national census to be taken, the outbreak of a widespread epidemic and the dedication of an altar north of Jerusalem-she sees as connected chronologically and thematically with the events of our chapter. The historical data embedded in the Book ofSamuel's strange concluding chapter will have to wait until Chapter 40 of this book for an in-depth analysis, but while not accepting in full Meyers' analysis I find some of her thinking extremely suggestive. 25 She proposes that the purpose of 2I. Although most readers have understood these passages to mean that the sin of spilling much blood is the inevitable outcome of waging great wars, it is only fair to remark that David Kimchi (Radak) sees things differently. He insists that David is guilty of two unrelated sins: waging great wars, as well as the spilling [of] much [innocent] blood outside of the context of war. To this latter category Kimchi recalls to us Uriah's murder (see Chapter 28), the massacre of the priests of Nob (for which David admitted culpability: "/have caused the death of all the members ofyour father's house"-l Samuel22:22) and the murder of the innocent survivors of his raids in the Negev, while in Philistine employ, "Lest they should tell on us, saying: 'This is what David did!"' (1 Samuel21: II). Kimchi insists that these acts, as much as David's incessant warfare, disqualified him as a builder of a Temple to God. (Radak on 1 Chronicles 22:8) 22. (I Chronicles 29:29) This work, along with most of the works that served as sources for the Chronicler, have since been lost. Of all his sources only the Book ofSamuel and the Book ofKings have survived. 23. We should not overlook the possibility that this reason came to David in a dream, and that he attributed the dream to God. Dreams were an accepted means of ascertaining God's will (see Chapter 18). Either way, it is clear that David was not easy in his conscience over the moral price of the "glorious road" he had traveled. 24. This also implies a lack of later editing to retroactively "correct" the Book in the light of later developments. 25. Meyers proposes that the events related in 2 Samue/24 took place in close proximity to the events related in our chapter (2 Samuel 1), and concludes that it was the outbreak of an epidemic that convinced Nathan and David to postpone the building of the Temple until the next generation (Meyers, "David as Temple Builder," p. 371-372). I think this thesis founders on the fact that the prophet who plays a central role in 2 Samuel24 is Gad, while that of our chapter is Nathan. This means that the events related in 2 Samuel 24 preceded those of 2 Samue/1, and by a considerable stretch of time. But I think Meyers is right in seeing a connection between the two narratives, though not the immediate causal connection she insists upon.

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

317

David's census was to prepare the administrative ground for the mobilization of forced labor battalions (in Hebrew mas) to provide the workforce for building the Temple. In Chapter 40 I will argue that the primary purpose of the census was military: to facilitate the creation of the army reserve system that was to make possible David's wars of conquest. 26 But one purpose does not exclude the other. As we have had cause to observe, David was a complex personality, his actions and programs often stemming from multiple motives. It seems to me perfectly reasonable that the census, implemented near the end of the first decade of his reign, while having as its immediate purpose the upgrading of his military machine, was simultaneously laying the long-range statistical basis for the mobilization of a conscripted labor force in the more distant future. The two are not mutually contradictory. In the latter part of his reign David will indeed institute conscription of Israelites for the purpose of forming labor battalions to implement state projects. These periodic conscriptions will eventually become so institutionalized and central to the policy of the government that a cabinet position will be created to oversee the implementation of the unpaid labor force. 27 But whatever his original intention, in practice forced labor is not to be used for religious purposes during David's reign. It will redound to Solomon's shame (though it is doubtful if he felt any) that he will build the Temple with what amounts to slave labor. 28 My suggestion is that the author is less interested at this stage of her dramatic epic in the actual implementation of David's temple program than in his motivations. 29 It is these that the author finds deeply problematic. I do not think it is farfetched to see the presentation of David in this episode in the light of the tragedy of Moses. Just as Moses was denied his fondest dream, that of entering the Promised Land, so is David being denied his dream ofbuilding the Temple ofGod. And if indeed the parallel applies, then the reason for the refusal is arrogance. Moses betrayed overweening arrogance at Meribah, 30 and David, by planning a temple to serve the same purposes that his Ancient Near East contemporary rulers erected their temples to serve-as tools for achieving political and egocentric aims-is betraying the beginning of a similar arrogance: in this case that of a budding Near Eastern tyrant. In both cases pride is humbled by being denied. What I think the author of Samuel is implying is that God is teaching David a lesson. From the very beginning of David's religious projects he has been plagued with mixed motives. Both his bringing of the Ark to Jerusalem and his plan to house it in a temple are, on the one hand acts for the sake of God, and yet simultaneously acts meant to aggrandize himself and further his political aims, not least of which are to legitimize, and thus establish, "his house"-that is, his dynasty. And once again, by indirection, the author is raising the issue of the misuse of the sancta of religion for worldly ends. God's veto pulls David up short. This is the first half of the lesson: this is not the way to get what you want. Then comes the second half: God grants David his deepest desire as an act of hesed, of grace? 1

26. See Chapter 25, and especially the Appendix to the chapter: David's War Machine. 27. See the section in Chapter 35: "The Power Elite." 28. I Kings 5:27-32. 29. Indeed, she has gone out of her way to remove the events of the census, the epidemic and the dedication of what is to become the altar of the Temple from their chronological place in the narrative and to reserve them for the conclusion of her work. 30. In the account in Numbers 20:1-13, the sin of Moses is not that he struck the rock though commanded only to speak to it, as is often assumed, but that he ascribed the miracle to himself and Aaron, and not to God. In his rhetorical pronouncement to the people: "Hear now, you rebels, shall we get water for you out of this rock?" (20: 10), Moses publicly arrogates to humans divine powers; he puts himself and Aaron in the place of God. This arrogance is duly punished: And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron: "Because you did not believe in Me [sufficiently] to affirm My sanctity in the sight of the Children of Israel, you shall not lead this congregation into the land that I have given them." (20:12) This reading follows the analysis of Milgrom, JPSTC Numbers, p. 448456. 31. See note 18 above.

318

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

To David's good deeds to date-his uniting the People of Israel through voluntary union, not by force, and his liberation of his people from foreign domination-God's response is the reward of personal power and fame. His apparently intended emulation of his contemporary tyrants, purchasing legitimacy by using religious sancta as tools to achieve his political aims, is checkmated. His good intentions, on the other hand, God freely rewards with something ephemeral and non-personal, yet of infinitely greater worth in David's eyes. He wants to build God a house, and so God will build David a House-he will be the founder of a dynasty. Unlike the tragic figure of Saul, whose royal career began and ended with him, David will have descendants continuing to reign in Jerusalem for centuries.32 While the best act can be sullied by bad intentions, the best motives can lead to the greatest of recompenses. This does not mean that David's descendants will necessarily have an easy time of it. They will face their own challenges and moral dilemmas, and their failures will bring catastrophes upon them and their people. When punishment is due, God will not hesitate to mete it out. But through all the upheavals that are to come the dynasty will endure. This is to be the greatest legacy that David leaves to his children's children. One last consideration: this promise was to have repercussions that would reverberate far beyond even David's descendents. The Promise to David is, perhaps, one of the most central texts to both the Jewish and Christian traditions. It has continually captured the imagination of both academics and apocalyptists .... notjust by its obvious importance to the emergence of the Davidic dynasty, but even more because of what it became after the demise of the Davidic line. The Promise to David was a constitutional text. That is, it was an idea and also a text through which Israel would define itself as a nation, as a people, and as a religion. In this respect it functioned something like the Magna Carta or the Declaration of Independence. Certain texts have the power of engendering a national identity. The Promise to David became such a text. 33

THE SERVICE OF THE HEART There is no doubt that Nathan's announcement that God has vetoed his plans is a stunning setback to David. It is only the further news that the project is only deferred, that his plan is, in essence, acceptable and that his successor will be permitted to execute it that helps David bear this blow and accept it. 34 The real "sweetener," however, is the promise that he will found an everlasting dynasty. The tragic ending of the House ofKish must have led David to brood on the question of how fleeting and insubstantial is all human endeavor, and on how long his own House would last. Saul had labored and built, only to have all his accomplishments snatched from his sons to fall into the hands of a hated stranger. Was this to be David's fate as well? Thus Nathan's announcement that God has promised that his descendants will inherit the fruits of his efforts is the fulfillment of a dream, and indeed one of the purposes of his plan to build a temple. The gratitude he feels to God is enormous; his heart is full to bursting. For David to feel grateful to God means that he will have to express that gratitude. Knowing David as a gifted poet, with a proven track record of magnificent religious compositions, it would be natural for us to expect him to give vent to his feelings through the composition of a psalm. But we

32. Despite the eventual end ofthe rule of David's descendants, Tradition holds that a yet greater culmination will be in store for the Davidic line-the Messiah is to spring from the seed of David. 33. Schniedewind, Society and the Promise to David, p. 3. 34. The Chronicler informs us that David went to great effort and expense to put aside large supplies of costly materials to be used by his son in the building of the Temple; also that he drew up plans for the building (see note 9 above).

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

319

would be disappointed. David does give expression to his feelings, but in extemporaneous prayer rather than in the high literature of religious poetry. So before we examine what David pours forth on this occasion we need to digress, and clarify the place of prayer in the lives of the people who inhabited the Biblical world. From the evidence in Scripture, prayer was an everyday occurrence in the Biblical era. Everyone prayed: king and commoner, priest and layman, man and woman. This was not because there were daily worship services or set times for prayer. From everything we know, there were none at that period.35 Prayer was individual and spontaneous. People prayed when "the spirit moved them"-that is, when the situation in which they found themselves induced them to turn to God. At times, when the occasion was formal (such as a visit to a shrine) a person might feel the need of a formal and suitably majestic language. Then he or she, if capable, might compose a prayer in verse. If not (and most people lacked the necessary ability and skill) they could choose from a stock of compositions (we call them psalms) to find the words to express their own feelings and yearnings. But most prayer was neither formal nor composed. It was extemporaneous, uttered on the spur of the moment; an outpouring of the heart. The Bible is full of such prayers. 36 Some are short, fervent petitions, such as the cry of Moses to heal his sister's sickness.

"Please, God! Heal her, please!" (Numbers 12:13) Or David's heartfelt plea in his extremity:

"0 Lord, please: turn the advice ofAhithophel tofoolishness!"37 (15:31) On the other hand, we find long and rambling monologues, such as the prayer of David that we will shortly analyze. We recall that our book opened with a spontaneous prayer, the anguished cry of Hannah at Shiloh begging for a son:

"0 Lord of hosts, if You will look upon the affliction of your maidservant, and remember me, and not forget Your maidservant, and will give to Your maidservant a son, I will give him to the Lord all the days ofhis life, and no razor shall touch his head. " (1 Samuell: 11) When we compare this rambling and redundant outpouring with the polished poetry of her subsequent psalm of praise-"Hannah's Prayer"-we begin to understand how unpremeditated, how spontaneous the prayer of the average person was. Here we come to the root of the conception of pra~er in ancient Israel: what counted was not form, polish, or vocabulary, but content and sincerity. 8 It was held as a given that anyone could pray to God and be heard. One did not need fancy

35. The only sector of the population that engaged in formal daily worship was the priestly class. Their formal worship, however, was not prayer but sacrifice. Regular obligatory prayer worship probably came into being, at the earliest, during the Babylonian exile. 36. Moshe Greenberg, in his Biblical Prose Prayer, lists 97 prayers which are quoted in full or in part (not including Psalms), and another 43 references to persons praying without recording the specific words of their prayers. 37. See Chapter 32. 38. Sincerity is the key condition of worship in Israel. Both the Psalms and the prophets insist that sincerity is the mark of true prayer. Just a few examples are:

The Lord is near to all who call upon Him, To all who call upon him in truth [i.e. sincerely]. (Psalm 145: 18) For the reverse side of the coin, the unacceptability of insincere prayer, we have this depiction of the generation of the wilderness, whom God wrote off:

They flattered Him with their mouths;

320

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

words or the proper phrases (though it was nice if one could use them). All one needed was to be honest with God. If one were sincere, God would accept the intent and disregard the wording. 39 There is every reason to believe that almost all prayer was spontaneous and in everyday language. One common form of prayer was, of course, petition; a request for some benefit. All three of the prayers noted above are of this type. But there were other kinds as well. Another need that prayer served was thanksgiving, and one of its forms was the public testimonial to God's glory. The simplest way to understand this extremely common prayer-declaration is to use a human example: let us say that an individual that we shall call John has done Sarah a good turn; rather than thank him directly she invokes God's blessing upon him. Examples of such invocations abound in the Bible; one with which we are familiar comes from a text we have already examined. We remember that when David, while on his way to kill Nahal, was stopped by Abigail, he was immensely grateful to her for saving him from committing the rash act. Instead of thanking her directly, he made the following public declaration in her presence:

"Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, that sent you to meet me this day. And blessed be your good sense, and blessed be you, who have kept me this day from blood-guilt; from avenging myselfwith my own hand.... " (1 Samuel25:32t0 Now when we remember that, in the eyes of the Israelites, God was endowed with personality, it should not surprise us that a benefit from Him, or anything seen as a mark of His favor, would evoke a similar response. For an example of this, let us continue with the tale of David and Abigail. We recall that, shortly thereafter, Nahal, Abigail's husband, suffered a stroke and died. Upon learning this, David was deeply grateful to God for His having been the one to remove Nahal from this world. He expressed his gratitude thus:

"Blessecf1 be the Lord Who has avenged the insult I received at the hand of Nahal, and kept back His servant from evil; and the evil of Nahal has the Lord returned on his own head" (1 Samuel25:39) This is a prayer of thanksgiving to God for having made things "come out right," without David having had to dirty his hands. This is the way most spontaneous prayers of gratitude to God were phrased. Moshe Greenberg puts the matter thus: when biblical man experiences an answer to his prayer, he celebrates it by publicly extemporizing a benediction of God ... the happy recipient of divine bounty expresses his gratitude (I know of no better word for the feeling) through the benediction. Scriptural characters experience any fortunate tum

They lied to Him with their tongues. Their heart was not steadfast with Him; They were not faithful to His cavenant, (Psalm 78:36-37) while the prophet reproaches his generation: For this people approaches Me with their mouth, And honors Me with their lips, But their hearts are far removed from Me. (Isaiah 29:13) 39. The surest proof that this was the accepted view of prayer is the fact that both David and Hannah, proven masters at the composition of magnificent poetic prayers, had no compunction in pouring out their hearts to their God in rambling, everyday language. Literary language is all very nice, if one has the time. If not, if the pressure of one's feelings is such as to demand immediate turning to God, everyday language would do. 40. See Chapter 15. 41. The term blessed (Hebrew baruch) when used of humans means obviously "blessed by God." But when used of God, as in this prayer and the one previous, its meaning would seem to be "praised." So it is used in the Psalms, where the term barach ("bless") is synonymous with hal/el ("praise"): as in Psalm 34:2, 145:2, andespecially 113:1-2. Thus this prayer might be rendered: Praised be the Lord who has avenged ...

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

32I

of events, any unexpected good, any successful issue of a momentous undertaking as a benevolent action of God on their affairs, and their regular, grateful response is by benediction. 42

Though this was the most common form of spontaneous thanksgiving, one to which David often resorted,43 yet longer and more verbose prayers of thanks were frequently employed with distinct and elaborate formats. Such was the type of prayer that David was moved to make upon receiving Nathan's message from God. The exhilaration that he felt must have been too great to permit the slow process of composing a formal psalm of praise; he had to express himself and thank his God at once. On the other hand the news was too momentous for him to feel that a simple benediction would meet the occasion. David's extemporaneous prayer was the result. This prayer is the third longest prayer recorded in the TANACH, 44 or Hebrew Bible, and deserves our attention as much as would a psalm. David does not utter it on the spot (presumably in his palace) immediately upon hearing the news from Nathan. He repairs to the tent he has pitched and delivers his prayer before the Ark. This is not necessary. David knows full well that God can be prayed to at any time and place; has he not turned to God from many strange places during his outlaw years? Even prayer emanating from the precincts of a pagan temple can reach the ear of God. 45 But then, as now, people feel closer to God and feel more comfortable praying to Him in "His house" than elsewhere. So Hannah uttered her prayer in the court of the Shrine at Shiloh, and waited until she could return there before rendering thanks to Him for having answered her. And so David leaves his palace to express his gratitude, as close as he can get to the symbols of God. Then King David came and sat before the Lord, and said... (7: !Sa) Seated46 before the Ark, his prayer pours forth from him in waves, unpremeditated and unrehearsed. Yet spontaneous as the prayer is, there is an inner logic to it. In the first place David bases himself on the message of Nathan, in which God twice refers to him as "My servant." In his prayer David repeats and insists upon this definition of him. Beginning with a declaration of his lowliness and worthlessness, he repeats no less than seven times that he is only God's servant. Conversely he focuses repeatedly upon God's greatness, addressing Him no less than eight times as "Lord God" (and three further times with titles of ascending grandeur). The point is to defme a relationship that will result in a common ground of interest. For David, as we shall see, is not only thanking God; he is asking for something too. And he is telling God that it is as much in God's interest to grant what is being requested as it is in David's. Let us see what it is that David wants, how he leads up to it, and how he sets about to get it. David begins with his utter worthlessness: Who am I, 0 Lord God, and what is my house? (7: 18b) What more can David say to You? You know your servant, 0 Lord God (7: 20)

42. Greenberg, Biblical Prose Prayer, p. 31. I am indebted to Prof. Greenberg for much of this analysis of Biblical prayer. 43. Another example was his utterance on learning that Solomon was crowned king, and the succession crisis was over: "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, who has placed a successor to sit upon my throne, whom I can see with my own eyes." (I Kings I :48) See Postscript: The Death ofthe King. 44. See Glossary for an explanation of this acronym for the Hebrew Bible. 45. Samson's last prayer was uttered in the Temple of Dagon, which he then brought down on his head and the heads of all the Philistines there assembled (Judges 16:28). 46. David's posture is unusual. This is the only recorded instance in the Bible of one praying seated. Either one prayed standing, hands and eyes raised on high, or one bowed down and prayed prostrate. Why he adopted this posture is unclear.

322

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

Certainly in comparison with God, or with any absolute standard, he is nothing. It is God Who is everything. It is He Who is great, as His deeds testify: You are great, 0 Lord God, for there is none like You; there is no God besides You, even as we have always heard. (7:22) We have always known this, and no one thinks otherwise. One has only to look at the history of the relationship between God and Israel to appreciate how great God really is: And who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation upon earth, whom God went to redeem to be His people, winning Himself renown; doing for them and for Your land great and tremendous things; driving out nations and their gods. (7:23) This capsule review of all that God has done for the people of Israel-freeing them from Egyptian slavery, giving them the Promised Land, driving out their enemies from before them along with their gods-these tremendous deeds have made God's name famous throughout the world. And to cap it all: And You have established Your people Israel as Your own people forever, and You, Lord, have become their God. (7:24) You have entered into a covenant, a permanent relationship with Israel: we are Your people, and You are our God. The greatness of God boggles the imagination; before such awesomeness what indeed is David and all his accomplishments? Yet despite this God has taken note of David, Who am L 0 Lord God, and what is my house, that You have brought me thus far? Yet even this seemed small in Your eyes, 0 Lord God; You have also spoken of Your servant's house for a great while to come. (7: l8a, l9a) Being nothing, David is insisting that whatever he has made of himself is not his doing but God's; it is God's grace. And if all this were not enough, God has topped all these gifts with yet a further one the promise of an everlasting dynasty. Is this the way God deals with lowly man, giving him rewards so far beyond his deserving? Is this the law ofmankind, 0 Lord God? (7: 19b) If David does not deserve all these gifts, then only God's grace can explain the bounty that is his: According to Your own heart have You wrought all this greatness, making it known to Your servant. (7:21) All this is preamble, setting the stage. Now we get to what David wants and why he thinks he can convince God to give it to him. David is overwhelmed by God's promise. He really feels that he doesn't deserve it. It is so great in his eyes that he would never have dared to ask for it. Only because God took the initiative and promised it to him does he even have the nerve to bring up his request. For You, 0 Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, have revealed to Your servant, saying: 'I will build you a house.' Therefore Your servant found the courage to pray this prayer to You. (7:27) What does David want? God has made David a promise that David can hardly believe. What he wants is for God to keep His promise, not to go back on His word. And his request is based on two

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

323

premises. For the ftrst we go back to the way he addresses God as "the Lord God" and the way he harps on his status as "God's servant." He is stressing, indeed insisting that the relationship between them is one of master and servant; more than this, of a great lord to his vassal. Being a great lord in those days involved noblesse oblige, an obligation to behave nobly to your servants and vassals. A great lord does not break his word; it is beneath him, it would detract from his greatness. A great lord is generous to his vassals, often beyond their deserving, but once the servant has received a gift it is his. The lord won't snatch it back. This is what underlies the lord-servant relationship to which David returns again and again in his prayer.

And now, 0 Lord God, You are God and Your words will come true; and you have spoken this good thing to Your servant. (7:28) One more argument yet remains to David; that because of their relationship they share a common interest: to preserve the good name and reputation of God. God's good name depends on His not breaking His word, of keeping His promises. It is, of course, in God's interest to preserve His reputation, David suggests. Because of their relationship, as a good servant David is concerned and solicitous of his Lord's reputation. So let both of us make sure that no harm befalls it.

And now, 0 Lord God, confirm this word that you have spoken concerning Your servant and his house forever; do as You have spoken. And may Your name be glorifiedforever, [that men may] say: 'The Lord of hosts is the God of Israel', and may the house of Your servant David be established before You. (7:25-26) Now may it please You to bless the house of Your servant, that it may be before You forever; for You, 0 Lord God, have spoken, and with Your blessing may the house of Your servant be blessed eternally. (7: 29) In essence the prayer may be summarized thus: despite the fact that I am so undeserving You have, out of the goodness of Your heart, promised me a beneftt beyond all expectation. You are my Great Lord; I pray You, behave as a Great Lord should and keep your promise. Because You are my Lord and I am Your servant we both care for Your good name. I pray You, don't diminish it by not delivering on Your promise. This is a prayer born out of immense gratitude for the promise of an unbelievable beneftt for which David would never have dared ask, struggling with disbelief that such good fortune could be his. Behind it lies the feeling: "Having brought me so high, please God, don't let me down. And now, having analyzed the prayer, verse by verse, to elicit its meaning, let us put the pieces together and see what the entire prayer as it poured out from David's mouth looked like.

Then King David came and sat before the Lord, and said: "Who am L 0 Lord God, and what is my house that You have brought me thus far? Yet even this seemed small in Your eyes, 0 Lord God; You have also spoken of Your servant's house for a great while to come. Is this the law ofmankind, 0 Lord God? And what more can David say to You? You know Your servant, 0 Lord God For Your word's sake, according to Your own heart have You wrought all this greatness, making it known to Your servant. Therefore You are great, 0 Lord God, for there is none like You; there is no God besides You, even as we have always heard. 47 And who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation 47. Literally: according to all that we have heard with our ears.

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

324

upon earth, whom God went to redeem to be His people, winning Himself renown/8 doing for them 49 and for Your land great and tremendous things: driving out nations and their gods before Your people, whom You redeemed from Egypt. 5° And You have established Your people Israel as Your own people forever, and You, Lord, have become their God. And now, 0 Lord God, confirm this word that You have spoken concerning Your servant and his house forever; do as You have spoken. And may Your name be glorified forever, [that men may] say: 'The Lord ofhosts is God over Israel,' and may the house of Your servant David be established before You. For You, 0 Lord ofhosts, the God of Israel, has revealet/1 to Your servant, saying: 'I will build you a house. ' Therefore Your servant found the courage52 to pray to You. And now, 0 Lord God, You are God and Your words will come true; and You have spoken this good thing to Your servant. Now may it please You to bless the house of Your servant, that it may be before You forever; for You, 0 Lord God have spoken, and with Your blessing may the house of Your servant be blessed eternally. (7:18-29)

0 SING UNTO THE LORD A NEW SONG With David's prayer the author concludes this narrative of the redemption of the Ark, its domiciling in Jerusalem, of David's desire to build a Temple to house it and the outcome of his wish. Indeed, anything added on at this stage of the narrative would be, from her point of view, an anticlimax. 53 Even so, for the benefit of the reader who is interested in the broadest view of David's character and accomplishments I will presume to tack on a postscript. This contains information that is illuminating, yet which the author did not see fit to include, probably because to the people of that time it was too self-evident to be worthy of special mention. 54 In Chapter 6 we discussed at length Samuel's religious revolution, which transformed the spiritual landscape of Israel, broadened the base of religion among the common people, and introduced, among other elements, ecstatic religious fervor to worship. Some of the means, we remember, were singing and instrumental music. These forms of worship had been created by Samuel to compensate for the loss of the Ark. We have seen that when the Ark was brought to Jerusalem, it was accompanied with what amounted to a whole orchestra and ecstatic song. This indicates how deeply these new forms have influenced the Israelites. They have taken root, and the return of the Ark did not render them either superfluous or obsolete. Now that the Ark has been reestablished in Jerusalem, and a new

48. Literally, to make a name for Himself. 49. Reading with Targ. and Vulg.; MT reads for You. 50. Reading with LXX and I Chronicles 17:21; MT reads before Your people, whom You redeemedfor Yourself from Egypt.

51. Literally, have revealed to the ear of Your servant. 52. Literally, has found his heart. 53. But, as we shall see, this is not the author's last word on the subject, which will have to wait until the end of Samuel. There, at the conclusion of her work, the author re-examines David's intention to build a Temple from a radically different perspective than that displayed here. What her conclusions are, and why she waits until the end of her magnum opus to deliver them, will have to be put on hold until Chapter 40. 54. The Chronicler, to whom we are indebted for the data, was writing centuries later and was trying to establish the pedigree of the forms of worship that had become traditional among the Jews of his times.

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

325

central shrine is in the making, somehow the new forms and the old will have to fmd a way to coexist. To this task David sets himself. In the midst of all the politics and wars that have crowded David's career, it would be well never to lose sight of the fact that he is, in his own eyes and the eyes of his contemporaries, as much a religious figure as a politician and warrior. Indeed it is the religious side of his career that has proved to have the longest lasting effects upon Israel and upon the world. It is for these that he is chiefly remembered today. Some of this legacy is due to the decisions that we are now about to discuss. Upon establishing the Ark in its tent in Jerusalem we are informed that David immediately initiated a regular regime of music and song before the Ark. This was to begin the merger of the old forms with the new; the old-sacrifice--continuing as before, autonomously, and the new now attached to the Ark of the Covenant. For the second half of David's reign the Ark reposed in a tent near the palace, while the sacrificial service was performed at an altar about three-tenths of a mile north of the city (as it was then), on a high point on the mountain ridge. 55 It would seem that it is at this altar that Abiathar the priest officiates. (There is another altar at Gibeon, where the original Mishkan is situated. Zadok the priest officiates there.) 56 Thus, at the beginning of the process,. the old religious forms and the new are separated physically. It was David's intention to bring them together into one shrine; it is his son Solomon who will finally achieve this merger with the building of the Temple. From then onwards sacrificial worship will become inseparable from instrumental music and song, not only in Jerusalem but also in all major shrines in the two kingdoms. 57 To achieve his goal David has to insure a level of performance and content, in music and song, appropriate to the holy venue of a shrine dedicated to the worship of God. 58 This will require the professionalization of the performing musicians and singers. It will also require establishing a repertoire worthy of performance in sacred surroundings, guaranteeing that nothing vulgar, profane or smacking of paganism will ever be voiced. David achieves this by establishing a guild of singers and instrumentalists whose permanent duty will be to ensure the "service of song" before the Ark ofthe Lord.

And he [David] appointed certain of the Levites to minister before the Ark of the Lord; to invoke, to commemorate, 59 and to praise the Lord, the God of Israel. Asaph was the chief,

55. The events surrounding the establishment of this altar will be related in Chapter 40. It is on this spot that Solomon will build his Temple. 56. I Chronicles 17:39-40; also see Chapter 23, footnote 64 above. We are not informed why David did not move the Mishkan to Jerusalem at the same time that he brought up the Ark, but rather constructed a new tent, probably modeled on the old one, to house the Ark. Gibeon thus remained a major shrine, presided over by Zadok. Zadok is destined to become a major player in years to come. 57. The prophetic books abound with references to music and song in connection with sacrificial worship. Examples are: Isaiah referring to song, as in the night when a fostival is hallowed (30:29); and Amos, when denouncing, in God's name, hypocrisy in worship, adds alongside sacrifice Take away from Me the noise ofyour songs; to the melody ofyour harps I will not listen. (5:23) 58. Possibly one of the reasons that music had been conspicuously absent from religious worship in Israelite shrines prior to David's innovations was its prominent place in the worship at pagan shrines. Music, choral and instrumental, was an integral part of the worship of all of Israel's neighbors, and thus intimately connected in the popular mind with idolatry and orgiastic revels. Israelites could never forget the tales of their great lapse into idolatry at the foot of Mount Sinai, where the worship of the golden calf was accompanied by emotion-laden song. It took Samuel several generations to accustom Israelites to emotion-packed musical services. But merging this musical worship with the austere sacrificial service (the priests observed total silence during their officiation at the sacrifice) undoubtedly provoked serious opposition. David's immense prestige (and power) could override the protest, but only if he could prevent lapses that could be perceived as imitating the pagans in either content or orgiastic practices. The very blurring of the distinctions between the worship of the God of Israel and the way Israel's pagan neighbors worshiped their gods demanded bending over backwards to make certain that what was done was "squeaky-clean." 59. This term, literally "to call to mind," seems to be used as a musical term in the headings to Psalms 38 and 70 and may mean here "to chant."

326

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

and second to him Zechariah . . . with harps and kinorot. 60 And Asaph sounded the cymbals ... So he [David] left Asaph and his brethren there before the Ark, to minister before the Ark continuously, as each day required . .. And with them Heman and Jeduthun had trumpets and cymbals for music, and instruments for sacred song. 61 (I Chron. 16:4-5,37, 42)

Establishing this Levitical guild of musicians and singers is a masterstroke on David's part. He creates a professional orchestra and choir that will outlast the Babylonian exile62 and continue to serve in the second Temple until its destruction; enduring a total of over one thousand years, a record for a musical institution. This guild will serve as a model for other shrines in ancient Israel, and ultimately provide a musical heritage for the Western world (musicologists are of the opinion that Gregorian chant is based on the original Temple music). But over and beyond his securing a high level of vocal and instrumental music, David accomplishes a second aim as well: through music he institutionalizes great poetry as an integral part of the formal worship of God. Poetry has always been the most elevated form of prayer. We have noted how great poets (Hannah and David among them) have composed poetic prayers (psalms) in such a way that they could serve as vehicles for average people, providing them with the soaring language with which to express their feelings and needs. But these were meant for individuals in private situations, not for public use in formal worship. In a radical departure from the previous conventions, the guild of"Asaph and Co." has been mandated to compose prayers as well as perform liturgy. It is to collect and institutionalize a liturgical repertoire, and compose new psalms to add to it. The Book of Psalms lists Asaph as the author of 12 of its compositions63 (perhaps his talent as a poet is one of the key factors leading to David's choice of Asaph to head the guild), while the trumpeters and cymbalists Heman and Jeduthun are credited with one psalm each. 64 While continuing to serve the individual need for prayer, religious poetry now becomes a medium of the formal and regular worship of God-in a word, a liturgy. There will be eventually a specific psalm designated to be recited (that is sung) for each day of the week. 65 There will be psalms to be sung on the various holidays, 66 psalms designated for lay singing, 67 and psalms designed to be chanted antiphonally, a choir of Levites alternating with a group of laymen and lay women. 68 David has begun the process that is to develop into the liturgy of the Synagogue and the Church. The contrast between the service at Shiloh and that of Solomon's temple, when David's reform will come into full effect, will be extreme. Formal worship has been immeasurably enriched, both emotionally and aesthetically. And because the Levitical singers need an anthology of the psalms used in the sacred service, the Book ofPsalms will be born; the Levitical psalm anthologies becoming the basis ofthe Book ofPsalms we know today. 69 60. Harp (in Hebrew Nebel). For a description of this instrument, see Chapter 23, note 36. For the kinor see Chapter 10, note 40. We have taken the liberty of omitting the names of the members of that original orchestra, retaining only the names of the head musician (the conductor?) and his chief assistant. 61. Literally ,for the songs of God. 62. Among the returnees from the Babylonian exile were 128 singers, the descendants ofAsaph. (Ezra 2:41) 63. Psalms 50, 73-83. 64. Heman, Psalm 88; Jeduthun, Psalm 39. 65. Psalm 92, entitled A Psalm, a Song. For the Sabbath Day, is the only psalm specifically so designated in its preface. According to Jewish tradition 6 other psalms were designated for the remainder of the week and continue to be recited in daily worship services to the present day. They are, in the order of the week from Sunday through Friday: Psalms 24, 48, 82, 94, 81 and 93. 66 Such as Psalm 47 for Rosh Hashanah (the New Year Festival), Psalms 113-118 for the three Pilgrim Festivals (Passover, Shavuot, Sukkot) etc. 67. Such as the pilgrim Psalms 120-134. Also Psalms 95-100. 68. For example Psalm 24. 69. Due to their use in the Temple liturgy, many of the psalms are prefixed with titles that contain instructions as to when and how they are to be used, and with regard to the music that is to accompany them. K. A Kitchen insists that the use of titles and the terminology used for various kinds of psalms was normative in the Ancient

TO BUILD A HOUSE FOR GOD

327

It will be as much for his success in the institutionalizing of the use of psalms for liturgical purposes, leading directly to their dominant position in the service of Synagogue and Church today, as for his poetic genius in their composition, that David will become known as "the sweet singer of Israel."

Near East centuries before the time of David and continued for centuries thereafter. Many of these titles, however, are poorly understood. "It should be noted that these psalm headings are obscure because they are ancient [emphasis in the original]-being no longer fully understood when the Psalms were translated into Greek ... in the third or second century B.C. Full liturgical usages of Solomon's temple fell out of use for over haifa century while it lay in ruins (586-538 and following); not all of that ceremonial would be restored at the opening of the Second Temple in 515 ... So ancient headings passed out of active use, and thus out of currency.... All this gives us the conceptual setting of what we find in descriptions of Hebrew usage as preserved in I Chron 15-16, 25 when the ark was installed in Jerusalem and musical provision was planned for the temple. There is nothing artificial here, it is precisely what one would expect." (Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament, p. 1067)

MAP 25.1 THE ARENA OF THE WARS OF EMPIRE • Hamath

I I

'

I JERUSALEM

*

Hebron•

~of\.'P

~~~.

)~

Beer-sheba

,'

*Kir-moab( I ~·Bozrah I

To Egypt aproxlOO ml

~----

~~0

\

I

)

I

I

• Ternan \

I

\

\

, I

\

I

10

20

30

40

I

I

I

I

so I

miles

CHAPTER25

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE War is the trade of kings

John Dryden, King Arthur

All empire is no more than power in trust.

John Dryden, Absalom and Achitophel

The multiple strands that make up David's character weave a dense and complex pattern. The author, in trying to do justice to the often conflicting aspects of his unique personality, has laid emphasis now on one side, now another, in her chronological depiction of David's progress from shepherd to king. We have seen him portrayed as an idealistic and courageous youth, taking on a giant and triumphing over him; we have been shown a talented musician employed by the court as a therapist; we have observed the ambitious young man, by sheer ability and daring, rising relentlessly, despite murderous political intrigue and the mental instability of his sovereign. Forced to flee, we behold a born leader of men struggling with the pressures of life as an outlaw, patiently building a base for the future. At the same time the author portrays David's growing spiritual sensitivity, his ethical concerns and his development as a remarkable poet. And in conjunction with all this, we have been shown the emergence of a brilliant military commander and an inspired politician. In this complex portrayal the author has maintained a chronological framework, and has attempted to show each of the developing aspects of David's character in relation to the whole; to present a balanced picture of a complex man. With the conquest of Jerusalem, and its establishment as the capital of the two kingdoms, this more or less balanced developmental narrative comes to an end. From this point onward the author ceases trying to give an even-handed picture, and turns to a new literary device-focusing on isolated aspects of David's character with neither reference to chronology nor consistent presentation. It is as though the effort to hold on to all the strands at one time was proving too much; the author begins to pull separate threads out of the tapestry of David's life, and to examine each one in tum, in isolation from all the others. We have just concluded examining, with the author, one such theme; the spiritual side of David the king. We have followed his restoring of the Holy Ark to the centrality of Israelite worship, his domiciling of it in Jerusalem, and the transformation of his tiny capital into a sacred city. Our attention was then focused on David's intent to build a Temple to God, God's veto of the project, and His promise. Our narrative concluded on religious high ground: David seated before the Ark of God,

330

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

pouring out his heart in prayer. We have been so swept along by this tale that it is with a shock we discover that between seven and twelve years have slipped away; we learn this was not David's sole preoccupation during this extended period, and that other very different concerns were also competing for his time. The author, having finished her tale of David and the Ark, now drops this theme to pick up another, turning back the clock in so doing to the previous starting point, the establishment of Jerusalem as his capital. And this new narrative, running concurrently with the old, presents a startlingly different picture of David. It is almost as if the author is saying to us: "I give up. I can't present a coherent picture of my hero any more. All I can do is present the disparate pieces. See what you can make ofthem. See if you can fit them together into an understandable whole." The impression we may get by the sudden transition between the last chapter and this, the first of several sharp breaks that will occur during the rest of the book, is that the author is presenting us with a Jekyll and Hyde portrait. In Robert Louis Stevenson's famous story, the scientist, Dr. Jekyll, invents a wonder drug that enables him to disentangle the complex mixture of his nature. This permits him to be alternately either the pure, idealistic and high-minded scientist or an unadulterated egotistical and lascivious creature-the dark side of his nature. By dealing with various sides of David's character disparately, the author achieves an effect similar to that of Stevenson's parable of the human condition. We have just been seeing David as the high-minded Dr. Jekyll. The author now introduces him as Mr. Hyde. While this may simplify the author's task, and make things easier for us as well, we must never allow ourselves to forget that this is only a literary device. In real life there is no such wonder drug available. David did not metamorphose from one character into another. All the aspects of his complex nature operated simultaneously, now one more evident, now another, but all inseparable parts of the same deep person. In focusing on the spiritual side of David we have not been viewing a saint; in shifting the spotlight to David the warrior, become an imperialist, we will not be viewing an ogre. With this prologue we enter into a brief summary of a bloody imperialist epic spanning the better part of a generation. 1

THE WARLORD: MOAB We have been returned to the days of David's great political triumph, when he successfully concluded the civil war by inducing the elders of Israel to elect him as their king. Then begins the desperate struggle-to-the-death with the Philistines, a conflict that, had we full information (we have only a few tantalizing glimpses)/ could fill an entire action-packed book. This epic our author disposes of in one laconic sentence:

Now after this David smote3 the Philistines and subdued them; and David took hegemony out ofthe hand ofthe Philistines. 4 (8:1) 1. Though David's career was, to a high degree, a military one, in which he spilled blood in abundance and waged great wars (1 Chronicles 22:8) the author devotes surprisingly little space to them; 14 verses suffice for her brief summary. We have already noted this singular lack of interest in military affairs. Only the necessity of providing the background that will allow us to understand the Bathsheba affair makes it necessary for the author to go into detail over the opening phases ofthe Ammonite-Aramean wars (see Chapter 27). 2. See Chapters 22, 36 and 38. 3. The Hebrew vayach means literally "to strike," "to smite;" when used in this context it means inflicting an irreversible defeat on someone; achieving total victory. 4. See Chapter 22, notes 18 and 20. It is worthwhile to note that the defeat ofPhilistia, and its reduction to vassaldom, brought its vast grain fields into the ambit of the Israelite economic system. It seems likely that one of the primary effects of this availability of plentiful grain supplies was to accelerate the shift already taking place in Israel from mixed subsistence agriculture to a specialized cash-crop economy. This Jed to major increases in agricultural efficiency. This is one of the key factors that lies behind the dramatic population surge that will

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

331

Following the successful conclusion of the Philistine wars and their aftermath-the conquest of Jebusite Jerusalem (a campaign too minor to figure into this catalogue of "great wars"), and the consolidation of his rule over his two kingdoms-David is now, for the first time, free to engage in "foreign affairs." First on his agenda is Moab.

And he smote Moab. He measured them off with a line, 5 forcing them to lie down on the ground; two lines he measured out to be put to death, and one full line to live! And the Moabites became servants to David, bringers of tribute. (8:2) Moab is the kingdom directly east of Judah, on the other side ofthe Dead Sea; it is not only singled out as the first target but, after being defeated, is subjected to horrifying massacre. We are told that the Moabites are forced to lie on the ground, in rows, and these rows are divided into equal sections by measuring cords: two measures are put to death and every third measure spared. We are usually shocked by the ancient practice of decimation, but there only one man in ten is put to death; here it is two out ofthree.6 What can explain such savagery? Putting to one side the atrocity, which was far more common then than now, 7 what is so surprising is the contrast between David's treatment of Moab and his treatment of the conquered Philistines. Despite the long and bitter wars, including the rigors and humiliation of defeat and occupation at their hands, David's relations with the Philistines are gentlemanly, recruiting what prove to be some of his most loyal soldiers from among his defeated foes. David and his Philistine enemies always treat each other as respected adversaries. Further, it is even more surprising to find David waging war against Moab. He is part Moabite himself, and as we may remember, he entrusted his parents and other members of his family to Moab for safekeeping while he was on the run from Saul. 8 But perhaps here lies the key to our problem. We would have expected a joyous family reunion when David ascended the throne of Judah, and it was safe for them to return, but instead we hear nothing. From the time David conveyed his family to the king of Moab they vanish, as if into a black hole. All the Medieval Jewish commentators draw upon an ancient tradition that insists that, despite having granted them sanctuary, the Moabites turned and murdered David's aged parents, some of his brothers and all of their women and children. Only one brother was said to have escaped, succeeding in fleeing to Rabbath-ammon. Rashi finds corroboration of this tradition in the fact that we never hear of David's family leaving Moab. Radak insists that this is a war of revenge, to which he adds that David's wish is not merely to defeat, but also to humiliate the Moabites. We are far from being able to be certain that this is the case, but there definitely seems something very personal about this whole horrid business. If this is not what was behind it, then there must be some other strong factor at work, of which we know nothing. 9 Moving beyond the question of what drives David to inflict this horror on the Moabites, some of whom are his own kinsmen, there lies an equally perplexing problem-why did our author see fit to

characterize the reigns of David and Solomon. (For the background to this footnote see Excursus II following Chapter 4: How they Lived in Those Days). 5. A measuring line; a cord of a fixed length, possibly with knots measuring off intermediate lengths. 6. Decimation was a Roman practice, often inflicted upon their own military units when they had seriously under-performed. The unit was lined up, counted off, and every tenth man was executed. 7. For example King Mesha of Moab, commemorating his ninth-century conquest of the Israelite city ofNebo, boasts of "slaying all [the population], seven thousand men, boys, women, girls and maid-servants, for I had devoted them to destruction for [the god] Ashtar-Chemosh." (The Moabite Stone, line 15. In Prichard, ANET, p. 320) 8. See Chapter 13. 9. The Maharal of Prague (Rabbi Judah Loew, b. 1525, d. 1609), quoting the Talmudic dictum "From the forest itself comes [the handle of] the ax that will hew down its trees," suggests that beyond his familiy's involvement, it is David's Moabite ancestry that provides the motivating force underlying the uncharacteristic savagery of his campaign.

332

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

include this information in the first place? She gives no particulars about the aftermath of the Philistine wars; what little we know we have had to infer from indirect evidence. Even more to the point, the Chronicler, when he deals with the Moabite campaign in his parallel passage, omits all reference to the bloodbath. He merely states:

And he smote Moab, and the Moabites became servants to David, bringers of tribute. (1 Chronicles 18:2)10 Why doesn't our author simply record the campaign and leave it at that? That she doesn't seems to me significant; this is information that she wants us to have. I am left with the feeling that she is horrified, and can't bring herself to cover up what has taken place by keeping quiet. On the other hand, it might be too dangerous to condemn the slaughter openly; David was still alive when she wrote, and very much capable of taking action if he felt he was being maliciously defamed. But David is fair; a simple statement of the facts, while not exactly winning the king's favor, will bring no retribution. So the author presents the facts, neither explaining nor offering excuses, and leaves it to the reader to draw his or her own conclusions. There is one last factor that bears considering: this war seems to have squandered a one-time opportunity. There is a long history of enmity between Israel and Moab, dating from their earliest contacts. From the first, Moab exhibited extreme hostility to the Israelites, repeatedly warring with them, and at various periods even conquering and ruling parts of Israel. 11 The ascent to the throne of Israel of a king who is, in part, of Moabite descent might be a chance to start anew on a different basis. But perhaps we are being unrealistic. Whatever it was that tore the relationship of kin feeling and trust that led David to put the safety of his family into the hands of the Moabites, the future is now set in stone. Israel and Moab are now fated to remain implacable enemies throughout the Biblical age.

THE WARLORD: THE ARAMEANS Next in the catalogue, the war against Hadadezer, involving the most monumental series of campaigns David was ever to wage, brings his armies sweeping to the River Euphrates, more than 350 miles north of Jerusalem. This war would be completely incomprehensible were it not for the detailed background, and the account of its first phase, given in 2 Samue/10. In Chapter 27 we will examine what leads to this war, its disastrous opening, how it eventually sucks in all the Aramean kingdoms southwest of the Euphrates in an attempt to crush David, and how he ultimately triumphs over them all. Here we will have to be satisfied, for the moment, with the large picture: the background events that set the stage upon which the action occurs, and the final outcome. During the twelfth and eleventh centuries BCE, the Age of the Judges in Israel, waves of Aramean tribes surged out of the Arabian desert; northward into the region of the Middle Euphrates and westward towards Syria and the Northern Trans-Jordan. Settling down in this fertile arc they formed a series of kingdoms, among these Aram-Damascus, Aram-Beth Rehob, Aram-Beth Maacah, the Land of Tob, and Aram-Zobah. 12 Of these the Iast-Aram-Zobah under its king Hadadezer13has by David's time established dominion over most of its Aramean sister kingdoms, which have be10. The wording clearly indicates that his source was Samuel. He simply quotes our passage, deleting all mention of the massacre. It seems to have stuck in his craw. (In the original Hebrew the Chronicler made slight changes probably due to the deletion.) 11. See Judges 3:12-30 for one example: the 18 year subjugation of central Israel by Eglon, King of Moab, and its eventual dramatic liberation by the Judge Ehud ben Gera. 12. In all these cases Aram signifies the ethnic composition of the kingdom. Thus they could be rendered The Aramean Kingdom ofDamascus etc. 13. In 1 Chronicles 18:3-10 the name is rendered as Hadarezer, which, upon comparison with various inscriptions, seems more correct.

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

333

come vassal to it. In terms of that period, the extent of Aram-Zobah's hegemony is huge: from the Northern Trans-Jordan to the Euphrates, while its sphere of influence seems to extend even beyond that great river. It is this huge power that David finds himself confronting, probably very much against his will. Skipping to the bottom line (which is all that is dealt with in 2 Samuel 8) David beats them all and fmds himself the ruler of a polyglot patchwork of Aramean states reaching to the banks of the Euphrates. David smote Hadadezer, son of Rehob, king of Zobah, to establish his power on the River Euphrates. u And David captured from him one thousand chariots, seven thousand horsemen, 15 and twenty thousand infantrymen. And David hamstrung all the chariot horses, except for one hundred that he kept for himse/f. 16 (8:3-4) As we shall discover, what is being described briefly is simply the penultimate battle that breaks the Arameans and ends the war with their surrender, leaving David as undisputed ruler of all the Aramean kingdoms. 17 This is a monumental victory, all the more so considering that the Aramean armies are mainly chariot armies, 18 and David's army is composed mainly of foot soldiers. In modem terms we could describe it as armor versus infantry, with the infantry beating the armor. What David does with the horses captured is instructive. To hamstring (or hough) horses is to cut the tendons in their rear legs, and so to prevent them from ever running again. These horses can be used as draft animals, to pull wagons, but will be useless for military purposes, i.e. pulling chariots. This underlines something that we already know, that David's army consists of infantry and that he has no use for the thousands of trained chariot horses. While he wants to make sure that, should any of them fall into enemy hands, they could not be once again used against him, it is significant that he keeps a small proportion of the total in fit condition for military use. Evidently David is building the nucleus of a chariot unit, or perhaps several units-the basis of a future chariot corps. By Solomon's 14. Reading with 1 Chronicles 18:3 and LXX. MT reads to turn his hand against the River [Euphrates]. The phrase that we have rendered to establish his power on (literally to establish his hand) may also be rendered to raise his monument at the River Euphrates. In all cases the overall meaning is clear: the Euphrates becomes the effective northern border of the new Davidic Empire. 15. Reading with 1 Chronicles 18:4. MT Samuel reads captured from him one thousand and seven hundred horsemen. 16. Or possibly except for horses sufficient/or one hundred chariots. In Hebrew the same term is often used both for chariots and for chariot horses. If the former is the case, since the normal complement for a chariot was two horses, with one kept as a reserve, the total would come to 300. 17. There are serious discrepancies between the figures given here for the number of chariots, horsemen and infantrymen killed and/or captured and those given in 2 Samuel 10. To make things more complicated the Chronicler gives yet another two sets of figures. These differences go back to the very earliest days of the texts, and while they may have their roots in scribal copying errors, it is possible that they are rooted in discrepancies in the archival sources used by the authors of Samuel and Chronicles. We have tried to pick the figures that make the most sense; whatever figures are chosen, the overall picture remains the same. 18. The chariot was the tank of its day, used as a highly mobile firing platform and, in mass, as a shock weapon; that is, in direct charges upon lines of foot soldiers, smashing through them and trampling them down. The Aramean chariot was a relatively light, two-wheeled vehicle, pulled by two horses. It was manned by two crewmen: the driver, and another usually armed with bow and arrows, spear and sword. When used as a mobile firing platform the chariot would be driven from vantage point to vantage point, permitting the bowman to direct a withering fire of arrows on the most vulnerable or critical points of the enemy lines. When the chariot was employed as a shock weapon in a mass charge, the crewman would put aside his bow and stab and slash at enemy soldiers with spear and sword. Thus enemy soldiers who were not knocked down and trampled in the charge would be cut down from the swiftly passing chariots. Wherever the ground was relatively flat, and thus suitable for chariot warfare, they tended to dominate the battlefield. Their main drawback, besides cost (chariots and horses were very expensive), was that they were difficult to manage, and crew members needed extensive training; thus only long-term professional soldiers could use them effectively.

334

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

time the Israelite Army will have completed a transition from infantry, as the favored arm, to chariotry. Chariot regiments are to become the mainstays of Solomon's army. The author also informs us that one of Hadadezer's many vassals, Aram-Damascus, is singled out for special treatment. Unlike most of the Aramean kingdoms, whose surrenders are accepted, leaving their rulers on their thrones in exchange for the payment of tribute 19 and political subservience, it seems that the king of Damascus is deposed and replaced with political officers who rule in David's name. 20 Is it because Aram-Damascus is one of the most powerful of the Aramean states and a close neighbor of Israel, or is it due to the key role of Damascus in the Arabian trade and its function as the junction of the Via Maris and The King's Highway? The role it played in the world trade of those days may have been the factor that prompts David to take personal control of this economic pivot point.

Now when Aram-Damascus came to the aid of Hadadezer, king of Zobah, David smote twenty thousand men of the Arameans. And David placed governors in Aram-Damascus, and the Arameans became servants to David, bringers of tribute. So the Lord gave victory to David wheresoever he went. (8:5-6)

THE WAGES OF WAR And so we pass from the fields of slaughter to the spoils of victory, or as we would say nowadays-to war reparations. As ever, the loser must pay the price of his defeat.

Then David appropriated the shieldi 1 of gold carried by the servants of Hadadezer, and brought them to Jerusalem. And from Tebah, 22 and from Berothai, cities of Hadadezer, he took a huge amount of copper. (8:7-8) The shields were either overlaid with gold or they were solid gold. They must have been of immense value, and could only have been used in ceremonial parades; if solid gold they would have been too soft to provide serious defense against iron weapons. The gold shields were probably the accouterments of the royal bodyguard, or of a ceremonial guard unit. The word nehoshet, copper, is also used in the Bible for its alloy, bronze. That may be its meaning here. The amounts must have been huge and the value enormous. The Chronicler informs us that these ingots were used eventually by Solomon to make the two pillars that stood at the entrance to the Temple he built, as well as the "great sea," a giant bronze 23 water reservoir for the use of the priests. This last, according to modem calculations based on the figures given in I Kings 7, must have weighed about 30 tons. When this is added to the amounts needed for the pillars we begin to get some idea of the sheer quantities of the loot. Our author now sees fit to impart to us several further pieces of information. 19. Basically a heavy tax delivered, in a lump sum, on an annual basis. In those days successful wars were expected to pay for themselves and to yield a handsome profit. 20. The Hebrew term used is Netzivim, previously rendered as "political officers" and here rendered as "governors." We remember this institution as one used by the Philistines to rule Israel in the period before Saul. Note I Samue/10:5 and 13:3. 21. The term used in Hebrew is not the usual word for shield. It may refer to breastplates. Rashi translates the term as "quiver." 22. Reading with Syr. and LXX; MT reads Betah. 1 Chronicles 18:8 lists the names of the cities from which David took the copper as Tibath and Cun. Tebah, Berothai and Cun, the main cities of Hadadezer, were located in the northern part of the Lebanon Valley. 23. If the metal ingots taken by David were pure copper, then they must later have been alloyed with tin to produce the bronze for the Temple construction.

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

335

Now when Tou, 24 king of Hamath, heard that David had smashecf5 the entire army of Hadadezer, Tau sent his son Joram 26 to King David to greet him, and to congratulate him on his victory in his war with 27Hadadezer-for Tau had been at war with Hadadezer. Now he [Joram] brought with him articles of silver, of gold, and of copper. These also King David dedicated to the Lord, along with the silver and the gold that he carried ofl8 from all the nations he had conquered: from Edam, 29 and from Moab, and from the Ammonites, 30 and from the Philistines, and from Amalek, and from the loot of Hadadezer, son of Rehab, king ofZobah. (8:9-12) Hamath is a Hittite kingdom in west central Syria, north of Aram-Zobah. It is one of the successor kingdoms left over from the breakup of the once mighty Hittite Empire. 31 Bordering on AramZobah, Hamath has been subject to extreme pressure by the increasingly powerful Arameans, and has been at war, more or less continually, with Hadadezer. The defeat of his perennial enemy by David is like manna from heaven for beleaguered Hamath. The king, upon learning of Hadadezer's defeat at once dispatches a top-level diplomatic mission, headed by his own son, to make terms with the new dominant force in the region. Seeing that they are natural allies, it is likely that they propose to David a mutual defense treaty directed against their common enemy, the Arameans. Though we are not told so, there is no reason to assume that David doesn't accept the offer. The high value of the "sweeteners" brought by the mission would suggest that Hamath recognizes David's primacy in the region, and accepts being included within David's sphere of influence as an independent, allied state. Thus the entire region from the Negeb northwards to Tiphsah, on the Great Bend of the Euphrates River, 32 and between the eastern desert and the Mediterranean is now, in one form or another, either subject to David's rule or connected by alliance with him. 33 Only two blocks remain to be cemented into place to complete the edifice that David has, almost by accident, called into being: Ammon and Edom. Ammon will be dealt with at length in Chapter 27, where we will discover that this kingdom was the domino whose fall triggered the entire chain reaction that in aggregate we call "The Aramean Wars." With the victory over the Aramean kingdoms, Ammon falls into the bag, and joins the list of David's conquests. Though the author does not see fit to give us a detailed accounting, the list also informs us that David must have launched a campaign against Amalek, and from this time onward the Amalekites cease to be a military factor in the Negeb Southlands. The southern border, the soft underbelly of Judah, is finally secured from nomadic incursions, and for the first time, the southern resources of Judah can be developed. 34 Which brings us to Edom. 24. Reading with LXX and I Chronicles 18:9. MT Sam. reads Toi. In all cases we have rendered this name as it appears in LXX and 1 Chronicles 25. Literally, had smitten. See note 3 above. 26. Joram is an Israelite name ("The Lord is exalted")! 1 Chronicles 18:10 gives his name as Hadoram ("Haddu is exalted") which, considering his Hittite identity, makes very good sense. It has been suggested that for the purposes of his mission the Hittite prince adopted the name Joram out of deference to the God of the victorious Israelites. 27. Literally that he had fought with Hadadezer and has smitten him. 28. Reading with I Chronicles 18:11. MT Samuel reads that he dedicated. 29. Reading with LXX and I Chronicles 19: II. MT Samuel reads Aram. 30. Literally the children ofAmmon. 31. See Chapter 16, note 7. 32. As related in I Kings 4:24, Tiphsah was the northernmost extremity of the Empire. 33. The one possible exception being the Phoenician kingdoms in what is currently Western Lebanon, but even here we will find reason to believe that at least the most important, Tyre, is allied to David. 34. It is from this point that the real development of the Negeb begins. Tel Masos, the previous southern hub of the Arabian trade, is abandoned and Israelite Beersheba and Arad become the new economic, population and administrative centers of the region. Under David and Solomon they are fortified and large government complexes rise at their cores.

336

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

THE WARLORD: EDOM South of Moab, and separated from it by the wide and deep canyon of the Zered River, 35 lies the Land of Edom. The earliest mention of Edom appears in Egyptian records from the time of the Pharaoh Merneptah (1224-1214 BCE). 35a Before that the Egyptians knew the land by the name of "Seir."36 Both names appear frequently in the Bible. The Land of Edom is divided into two distinct geographic regions. 37 The first is the continuation of the high, rolling and in part fertile plateau on whose northern portion Moab is situated. This plateau, rising at times to above 3,500 feet, possesses abundant rainfall and is eminently suitable for dry-farmini. However winter conditions in the highlands can be brutal, with freezing temperatures andsnow. 3 The other half of classical Edom consists of the lowlands, known as the Arabah. The change from the highlands is dramatic as one descends more than 5,000 feet to a region below sea level: this is a desert furnace with conditions diametrically opposite to the highlands but no less brutal. 39 The Arabah is a deep cleft in the earth which includes the Dead Sea, and runs to the Gulf of Akabah where the port of Elath40 is currently situated. It contains one of the richest sources of copper ore in the entire Eastern Mediterranean. It was here, based on the mining and industrial production of copper, that the state ofEdom rose. The Bible lists eight kings who ruled in Edom before the rise of the Israelite monarchy (Genesis 36:31-39, 1 Chronicles l :50-57). This would imply that Edom emerged as a coherent state between 150 to 200 years before the Israelite state first emerged with the crowning of Saul. The recent excavations at Khirbat en-Nahas, 41 about 30 miles south of the Dead Sea, lend credence to this claim of priority. Khirbet en-Nahas has proved to be a major mining and copper smelting site, including workshops and a large number of buildings to house the labor force. High precision radiocarbon dating has established that major metallurgical activities took place in the area during the twelfth and eleventh centuries BCE (Iron Age 1). A second phase of major production is dated to the tenth century (the beginning of Iron Age II) when a major fortress was built to protect the site, and continued into the ninth century BCE. Looking at a broader canvas, when the center of eastern-Mediterranian copper production in Cyprus collapsed along with the rest of civilization at the end of the Late Bronze Age (c. 1400-1200 BCE),42 Edom's copper production-which had flourished previously during the Early Bronze Age (c. 3,6002,000 BCE)-was resurrected. Control of lowland-Edom copper production at the beginning of the Iron Age provided a catalyst for the emergence of Edom as a "super-chiefdom," if not as a state supported by a complex copper mining and processing apparatus.... What seems clear is that, at least by the beginning of the Iron Age, Edom was a complex society with the ability to construct major

35. Currently named the Wadi al Hesa 35a. In the Papyrus Anastasi VI an Egyptian frontier officer reports: "We have finished letting the Bedouin tribes ofEdom pass the fortress ... to keep them alive and to keep their cattle alive." (Prichard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, p. 259) 36. "Seir" seems to have been a geographic designation, later superceded by the ethno-political name of the state. The term Seir remained as the name ofthe mountain ridge. 37. There will be a third part, the Negeb, but this lies in the future. Edom will only conquer and settle parts of this region in the 8th to 6th centuries BCE. 38. Besides the narrow corridor of fertile land, this mountainous plateau includes such well known sites as Petra. 39. See Chapter 14 for a description of the comparable conditions on the shores of the Dead Sea, a northern extention of the Arabah. 40. In those days the port was known as Ezion-geber. 41. "Ruins of Copper" in Arabic. At present we do not know what the site was called in ancient times. 42. See "The Peoples of the Sea" in Chapter 3 for an overview of this catastrophe.

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

337

buildings, defend itself with strong fortifications and create a technologically sophisticated organization to draw copper from ore and thereafter to manufacure objects with it. If it could do this, there is no reason to doubt that it could also field an army."43

It is this land, with its mineral and industrial wealth, that now becomes the focus of David's attention. 44 To this is the added attraction that Edom lies athwart both the east-west Arabian trade routes45 and the north-south King's Highway. Whoever dominates this region controls both of these lucrative trade arteries. Economic considerations seem to be the paramount factors in David's decision to wage a war of conquest. The Edomites, worshipers of a pantheon of deities headed by a god called Kos, were an ethnically heterogeneous, Hebrew-speaking people. The Israelites considered them to be distantly related to themselves, but the two peoples were hostile none the less. 46 As long as the Amalekites effectively controlled the Negeb southlands, the relationship between the Israelites and the Edomites had largely been a theoretical question. Now that David has permanently broken the Amalekite power, creating a common border with Edom, it becomes a live issue. The outcome is the Edomite war. Edom was a very powerful kingdom, and David does not have an easy time of it. Our author relates: Now David gained wide renown47 when he returned from smiting Edom 48 in the Valley of Salt-18,000 [Edomites]! And he placed governors in Edom; in all of Edom he placed political officers and all Edom became servants to David So the Lord gave David victory wherever he went. (8: 13-14) While David gets the credit for the hard-won victory, it seems that he does not head the campaign in person. Joab is in overall command,49 and the Chronicler informs us that Abishai, his brother, is the general who actually defeats the Edomites in a decisive battle in the Valley of Salt. 5° The royal house is abolished (the sole survivor being a small child by the name of Hadad, who is

43. Levy and Najjar, "Edom and Copper," p. 35. I am indebted to this article for much of the material in this section. 44. The highlands were of little interest to David nor, for that matter, were they to the Edomites. All indications are that the Edomites only began to settle and farm the highlands intensively in the 8th century BCE, about 200 years after our present period. It is this fact that has led scholars, who focused their attention almost exclusively on the highlands of Edom-what Levy and Najjar term a "highland bias" (Ibid., p. 28) or a "highland-centric" view (Ibid., p. 33)-to assert that Edom did not emerge as a state until the 7th, or possibly the 8th century BCE. The excavations at Khirbat en-Nahas have necessitated a total revision of what was only yesterday held to be an established certainty. 45. See Chapter 5, note 16 and Chapter 9, note 18. 46. Esau, believed to be the progenitor of the Edomites, was remembered by the Israelites as the twin brother of Jacob (Israel), their own ancestor-note especially the comment in Joshua's farewell address: I [God] gave unto

Isaac Jacob and Esau; and I gave unto Esau Mount Seir, to possess it; and Jacob and his children went down into Egypt. (Joshua 24:4). On the other hand the Israelites remembered with bitterness the accounts of how, after the Exodus from Egypt, the Edomites refused them passage through their land, forcing them to make a wide detour through the desert that entailed much suffering (Numbers 20:14-21 ). 47. Literally, made a name for himself 48. Reading with LXX, Syr., and I Chronicles 18:12. MT readsAram. 49. Psalm 60:1. The number ofEdomite casualties is here given as 12,000. 50. Now Abishai, the son ofZeruiah, smote Edom in the Valley of Salt, eighteen thousand [men]! (1 Chronicles 18:12) The Valley of Salt, a marshy flat at the southern end of the Dead Sea, is currently known as the Wadi esSeba.

338

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

spirited away to Egypt) and the country is ruled by royal officials appointed by David.51 conquest ofEdom opens the route to the Red Sea and completes the Davidic Empire.

The

THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF EMPIRE The establishment of a regional empire dominating the land bridge between the two ancient seats of civilization in the Near East, Egypt and Mesopotamia, is a political accomplishment of immense significance - indeed a tour de force. Dazzled by this achievement, the tendency to overlook its economic consequences, while understandable, can be very misleading. The economic consequences are every bit as important as the political, and in some ways they are even more so, for they are to determine both the form the empire takes and its ultimate fate. At the first, these consequences fall into three main categories; in order of ascending importance they are plunder, tribute, and commerce. The amount of loot, or plunder, taken by David is immense. Its economic consequences, however, are negligible. The reason for this seeming contradiction is that instead of putting the bullion-the gold, silver, and copper-into circulation as money, David "dedicated it to the Lord," effectively burying it. 52 Being "dedicated," that is devoted to religious purposes, it can be used neither for capital investment nor for furthering trade. We have noted that the copper will ultimately be employed to construct parts of the Temple of Solomon. The rest of the bullion will be similarly used: to make vessels for Temple use, to gold-plate the interior of the shrine, etc. Transformed into building materials, on a par with stone and wood, the plunder is not used for economic purposes and has no economic effect. 53 Tribute, on the other hand-taxes from the conquered kingdoms and from the vassal states-has very decided economic uses. It will largely fund David's government and his growing standing army. It makes possible costly long-range projects, such as fortress construction, and the conversion of the army from infantry to a largely chariot force. As long as the tribute flowing in from conquered provinces and vassals more or less covers ongoing government expenses, David is able to keep Israelite taxes low. The Israelites do not take kindly to taxation, and find even relatively nominal imposts galling. When, during Solomon's reign, grandiose building projects and a profligate court push expenses far beyond tribute income, taxes become a major cause of public unrest and of growing opposition to the regime. By keeping his court relatively modest, and restricting his outlays largely to military and administrative necessities, David is able at first to avoid adding the burden of heavy taxation to the other internal problems that trouble his regime. But as the years pass, the steadily increasing gap between tribute income and government expenses begins to reach dangerous levels. This might seem surprising, since one would expect the rise in commerce, and the wealth it generates, to cover this shortfall, and more. Indeed, it is in the field of commerce that the profoundest impact of empire is felt. By creating a political bloc that stretches from the Egyptian border to the Euphrates, and from the Mediterranean to the desert, in one fell swoop David has seized a monopoly over virtually all international trade. We have already

51. We are also informed in 1 Kings 11:16 that Joab presided over a massacre of the male population ofEdom (presumably those of military age). Assuming these atrocities occurred, our author, for some reason, is silent. 52. Not only was there no paper money in those times, neither were there coins. Coins were first minted in Lydia (in Asia Minor) in the 7th century BCE, a good 300 years or more after the age of David. Up until the introduction of coinage, precious metals, when used in commerce, were weighed out on scales. Thus designations such as "one shekel" or "one-half shekel" refer not to specific coins but rather to units of weight. 53. It could be argued that had this loot not existed, Solomon would have had to spend huge sums to purchase the precious metals used in the Temple. I believe this argument is specious, for after the Babylonian Exile, the impoverished returnees found themselves perfectly able to rebuild the Temple without Solomon's lavish gilding and embroidery. If one is poorer, one makes do with less.

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

339

discussed the vital importance of the Via Maris and its alternative, The King's Highway, to international trade. Just partial control of the Via Maris had been a matter of economic life or death to the Philistines. Now David controls them both, and for their entire lengths. 54 All trade moving between Egypt and Mesopotamia has to go through his hands. Moreover, he now has a port on the Gulf of Aqabah, potentially giving him access to Arabia, East Africa, and even India. His son will capitalize brilliantly on all these opportunities. Beyond this stranglehold on international trade, the control of the Arabah opens the resources of this rich region, especially its copper deposits, to David's use. This is the beginning of the Israelite mining industry-the famous "King Solomon's Mines"-and its attendant metallurgy works. Commerce and industry begin to make their first inroads into the lives of almost exclusively agricultural and pastoral economies. The basis has been laid for an economic boom. And yet, if one looks beneath the surface, the picture is not as positive as it seems. In the first place, the economic effects of empire prove to be far from even. It has been said that those who have, get; that is, the better off you are, the more you are able to benefit from economic opportunity. This proves to be the case in the two kingdoms. The Northern Kingdom of Israel, by far the richer and more populous, is the principle beneficiary of the addition of trade and commerce to what has previously been an agricultural economy just emerging from subsistence level. The funneling of international commerce through Israel stimulates the birth of a commercial class, and accelerates the shift from subsistence agriculture to "cash crops" for the export trade. All this fuels the growth of urban centers; happily sited villages grow into towns, towns into cities, and existing cities expand with previously undreamed-of population and wealth. Yet Judah, the Southern Kingdom, throughout this more than half-century, is virtually unaffected. We see little, if any, growth in her urban centers, nor do we detect significant alteration in her pastoral economy. She remains a sort of Appalachia, a stagnant and backward region appended to a wealthier and economically expanding neighbor. As the wealth of empire passes her by, leaving her relatively untouched, the gap between Judah and her sister kingdom continues to grow wider. This is to have serious repercussions. Another economic consequence, among the many engendered by empire, deserves mention: the effects, long term, of the inevitable growth of the arms industry. David has managed to keep his military budget low by the expedient of keeping the numbers of his professional soldiers to the absolute minimum needed for a fast-reaction force, and relying for his campaigns on a call-up of reserves which cost him virtually nothing. 55 But reserve soldiers have to be equipped, as do regular troops. At the very least this involves providing offensive arms (swords, spears, bows and arrows, etc.) as well as defensive ones (shields, helmets, body armor, etc.). The technological basis for weapons production exists. Agriculture demands a variety of metal tools, and many villages and towns have blacksmith shops with forges to manufacture them. 56 This base must have been greatly expanded to meet the demands of the military. From providing for the needs of local subsistence farmers, the forges now send most of their production to equip distant garrisons, and to fill storage depots with equipment for reserve units. At the first, this massive increase in production creates a local boom due to the combined effect of soaring export production and its multipliers: the secondary jobs and income that arise from serving the workers and their families, the

54. See Chapter 18, especially notes 2-4. Needless to say, the revenues from this control (import and export licenses, tolls, taxes on the trade, etc.) went exclusively to the government. At a later stage the government itself got into the business, using its monopoly of the trade routes to launch itself as an active middleman, buying in one foreign market and reselling in another, with large profits earned from the transactions. 55. See Excursus VIII: David's War Machine at the end of this chapter for a description of how David's military machine functioned. 56. We remember how the Philistines dismantled this industrial base to keep Israel disarmed (see Chapter 8). With independence, the Israelites must have rapidly revived this industry.

340

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

surge in demand for raw materials, and the subcontracting of parts of the production process inherent in making arms. 57 But there are two problems with booms generated by rapid growth in arms production. The first is neatly summarized as follows: It is important to understand ... that prolonged military production does not create prolonged eco-

nomic booms. Once the multiplier effects of the military work are assimilated, things settle down ... And once a city, or any other settlement, comes to depend upon prolonged military work as an appreciable, normal part of its economic base, the military production must be maintained indefinitely or the economy shrinks. 58 And, of course, military production does not continue indefinitely. Sooner or later more than enough helmets have been produced to equip all the soldiers, regulars, and reserves alike. And besides, the government is beginning to run short of funds to meet current expenses. So inevitably the boom years are followed by recession. There is a further problem associated with the arms industry. Previously, the forges had produced axes, plowshares, hoes, and pruning hooks. These are tools that enable farmers to produce food. The production is an investment in the creation of further wealth. The production of arms does not lead to the production ofwealth. The outcomes of arms production are economically sterile. It takes several decades before the pinch begins to be felt. When it is, it leads to increased efforts at fund raising and pump-priming-ever expanding government sponsored commercial enterprises and ever-rising taxation-all ultimately to no avail. The economic boom fades, and the strain of holding the empire together becomes increasingly severe as the gap between revenues and expenses grows to unmanageable proportions. Jacobs observes: Successful imperialism wins wealth. Yet historically, successful empires such as Persia, Rome, Byzantium, Turkey, Spain, Portugal, France, Britain, have not remained rich. Indeed, it seems to be the fate of empires to become too poor to sustain the very costs of empire. The longer an empire holds together, the poorer and more economically backward it tends to become. Imperial powers that are only briefly successful because they lost their colonies and conquests early on, like Germany and Japan, or those that abruptly contract into only a very small home nation, like the Netherlands or Austria, seem to be the luckier ones.... The very policies and transactions that are necessary to win, hold, and exploit an empire are destructive ... and cannot help but lead to ... stagnation and decay. Imperial decline is built right into imperial success; the two are part and parcel of each other. 59 Such proves to be the case here. With Solomon's death, the Empire that his father had built collapses of its own weight.

THE GOVERNMENT Having completed her survey of David's empire building, our author now focuses attention once more upon Jerusalem, concluding the overview with a note on the government that David has created. The clock is being turned back again. While not from the very first days of his rule, the list of David's cabinet with which we are presented dates from a fairly early period. By the time the great wars are

57. Secondary industries supplying the raw material for the arms manufacturers, or providing component parts, would have been mining and refining to produce the metal (iron and bronze) for the forges, woodcutting and carpentry to make the spear poles and arrow shafts, tanneries to make the leather for the shields, etc. 58. Jacobs, Cities and the Wealth ofNations, p. 185-6. 59. Ibid., p. 182.

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

34I

over things will have changed, and his government will reflect these changes. These we will examine later. Here is David's early cabinet: Now David reigned over all Israel; and David administeredjustice and equity to all his people. Now Joab, the son ofZeruiah commanded the army; And Jehoshaphat, the son ofAhilud, was Mazkir; And Zadok, the son ofAhitub60 And Ahimelech, the son ofAbiathar, 61 were priests; And Seraiah62 was Scribe; And Benaiah, the son ofJehoiada, commandec/3 the Cherethites and the Pelethites; And David's sons were ministers without portfolio. 64 (8: 15-18)

The opening line of this concluding paragraph can be read in two ways: either as a conclusion of what went before, or as a preface to what is to come. If as a conclusion, the author may seem to be implying that, in contradistinction to the way he treated the Moabites, Edomites, Ammonites, 65 the Arameans, etc., David treated the Israelites fairly, doing justice to all. If, on the other hand, we read this passage as a preamble to the survey of the government, we are being told that, in those days, David took his position as court of final appeal seriously. We have already drawn attention to the fact that in ancient times a king spent a goodly amount of his time actually serving as a judge, hearing cases and rendering judgment. 66 The author may also be drawing attention to something that everyone knew in those days, that David has instituted the first organized judicial system in ancient Israel.67 By the end of his reign it seems that all capital cases are being tried in the "King's Courts;" David's restructuring oflsraelite society has been proceeding apace. 68 So besides being Chief Executive and Chief Commander of the army, David is Chief Justice as well. Turning to the government itself, the first thing that we notice is that Joab, as commander of the army, holds pride of place in the cabinet. This is not surprising seeing that, in these early days, the main business of the government is war. We also notice, with surprise, another general in the cabinet, albeit in last place: Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada. He is listed as commander of the Cherethites and the Pelethites: that is, the foreign mercenary troops. 69 Joab is overall commander, and has specific re60. Not the Ahitub, grandson of Eli, whom we know as the father of Ahijah, Saul's chaplain at the Battle of Michmas (see Chapter 8), and of his brother Ahimelech of Nob fame (see Chapter 12); 1 Chronicles 5:30-33 preserves Zadok's lineage which is separate from the House of Eli. See also note 70 below. 61. The names are reversed; Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech. Thus Syr. 62. In 1 Chronicles I8: I6 his name is listed as Shavsha. Note that, most unusually, in neither list is his father's name given. This has fed the speculation that he was a foreigner, possibly an Egyptian, recruited for his expertise. 63. Reading with 1 Chronicles 18:17 and Targ., Syr., and Vulg.; MT reads and. 64. Reading with I Chronicles I8:I7, which reads more literally: And David's sons were the chief officials in the service ofthe king. This seems more reasonable than 2 Samue/8: I8, which reads priests. 65. The Ammonites, who seem to have been overlooked in the Imperial catalogue, have not been forgotten. They will be given special treatment in Chapter 27. 66. See Chapter 5, note 24. 67. The author does not see fit to mention things that everyone knew unless she has a specific reason for doing so. We have to tum to the Chronicler (I Chronicles 23:4, 26:29-32) to learn that, by the end of David's reign, the government bureaucracy had grown to 6,000 men, and that among these were judges. The whole bureaucracy was divided into separate groups, each group responsible for a given district. This would seem to imply that the judges also were appointed to specific districts. Whether there were appellate courts, or whether the king served as the only court of appeal, we do not know. 68. See the opening paragraphs of Chapter 24. 69. As part of his duties, Benaiah also commanded the royal bodyguard, a position of high trust. David's mercenaries, recruited from among his defeated Philistine subjects, are repeatedly referred to in the rhyming phrase,

342

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

sponsibility for the regular army. He is Benaiah's boss. That Joab's subordinate should have a seat in the top government council is very unusual, and perhaps evidences a desire on David's part to dilute Joab's power by playing off Benaiah against him. We know that David had been unable to rid himself of Joab when he wanted to. And it is as well that he had not, for in the opening phase of the Aramean War Joab proved himself a general of genius. Without him David would probably have lost his crown. But despite all that we have said, we should keep an eye on Benaiah; he is a man with a future. Next, it is well to notice another pair, the priests Zadok and Abiathar. Religious matters obviously play a large part in David's thinking for him to allot the number three and number four slots to priests. Note also the interesting fact that Zadok, a newcomer to our narrative (though we· have learned from the Chronicler that he was in charge of the Mishkan-the tent shrine-in Gibeon), takes precedence over our old. acquaintance, Abiathar, the comrade of David in his wilderness days. Zadok, too, we shall discover, is a comer. 70 The number two and the number five positions in the cabinet are held by persons responsible for civil administration. The Mazkir (literally "reminder") is the Secretary of State, responsible for promulgating royal decrees and seeing to their implementation. He is also responsible for foreign affairs and diplomatic correspondence, and may have other duties as well. The Scribe (Hebrew Sofer) is the personal secretary to the king, and holds the position of Cabinet Secretary. It is he who draws up the agenda for cabinet meetings and keeps the minutes. He probably is in charge of the royal archives as well. Because he constantly has the king's ear, and sets the order in which items are discussed by the Cabinet (and because he can "bury" items by putting them so low on the agenda as to insure that they never come up for discussion) he is in a position of immense power. 71 The end of the list is very interesting: David's sons regularly sit in on cabinet meetings. Probably this right is limited to the six sons born in Hebron; at this stage only they would be old enough. I have rendered the term used in the text "Ministers without Portfolio" because they have no listed departmental duties. These may simply be training positions for the young men, each of whom is a potential successor to the throne. If so, they would probably have no say in the discussions; they would be there simply to learn how things are done. This is the inner government that runs the two kingdoms and the Empire; a balance of two members representing the military sphere, two the civil sphere, and two the religious. I think that the author presents it here to act as a sort of base line, the starting point from which to chart the develop-

the Keraitee and the Plaitee: the former, the Cherethites (i.e. Cretans) lived in the "Cherethite Negeb," the Plaitee (Pelethites) is probably a corruption of the name "Philistine," to make it rhyme with Kraitee. Many of the "Pelethites" apparently came from Oath. See Chapter 22, note 18. 70. Unlike Abiathar, we know very little about the background of Zadok, and this despite the fact that he carne to hold a position as high as that of Abiathar. He first turns up in a listing of persons who flocked to David during his first days in Hebron (1 Chronicles 12:28); there he appears among a contingent of priests headed by one Jehoiada. F. M. Cross is of the opinion that there must have been an ancient shrine in Hebron, and Zadok was the representative of its priests. Since Abiathar came from a Northern, or Israelite line of priests (he was a descendent of Eli, and Shiloh was situated in the area of the Northern Kingdom), it made political sense for David to co-opt a second chief priest from the Southern Kingdom of Judah; especially as he hailed from the shrine of David's capital of Hebron (Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, p. 206-15). When David moved to Jerusalem he took both of them along with him, Abiathar ultimately becoming chief priest at Jerusalem, serving the Ark of the Covenant, and with Zadok occupying the position of chief priest at the sanctuary in Gibeon. This situation was to last until the end of David's reign. 71. The delineation of the duties and responsibilities of the Mazkir and the Scribe are based on the functions of the Egyptian officials who served as the models for these positions. The entire region had once been part of the Egyptian New Empire. As the Empire declined into its current impotence, the newly independent former vassal states continued to rule themselves largely by the Egyptian governmental models that they had learned. Though we lack direct evidence, it would seem reasonable to assume that in setting up his government, instead of reinventing the wheel, David adopted the general model prevalent in the region and adapted it to his specific needs.

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

343

ments that will come. When we next have a chance to examine David's government the changes will provide serious food for thought.

EXCURSUS VIII: DAVID'S WAR MACHINE Among the many severe challenges that David faced upon ascending the thrones of Judah and Israel was a structural military problem of major proportions. Ruler of two poor and backward kingdoms, he was surrounded by hostile states, most of which possessed armies superior to his in both technology and military proficiency. Like the Philistines, David's other neighbors relied on professional standing armies whose main arm was the chariot, the tank of those days. The forces in David's possession were simply not competitive. To comprehend the roots of David's problem we must understand the economics of ancient warfare. Professional soldiers cost money. Only a rich state could afford a large standing army and David's kingdoms lacked the resources to pay for one. To make matters worse, chariots were not only expensive but could only be used effectively by soldiers with extensive training-bringing us back to the need for a standing professional army. 72 Israel's solution in years past, to oppose quality with quantity by mobilizing large numbers of untrained civilians (a militia), clearly had proved unworkable under the new international circumstances. David's initial response was to build up a professional force. Using his tough battalion from the Wilderness days as the core, he augmented it with remnants from Saul's army and other volunteers, perhaps doubling or at the most tripling it in size. The successful conclusion of the Philistine wars led to a new source of recruits, and David built up a corps of foreign mercenaries-the Cherethites and Pelethites. 73 This combined force oflsraelite professionals and foreign mercenaries was of high quality, but far too small to meet the needs of an increasingly dangerous international arena. However, beyond this point David's fmancial straits did not allow him to go. How David solved his problem stands as an object lesson in administrative brilliance: the creative use of available resources to overcome economic restraints. David's major resource was a large mass of untrained civilians, mostly farmers, willing to fight but unable to absent themselves for long stretches of time from the farm. These David organized into a permanent reserve force. The following description of how this force worked rests on the ana1~sis of General Yigael Yadin, who bases his conclusions on the data supplied in 1 Chronicles 27:1-15. 4 The reserves were organized on a local basis, with individuals assigned to permanent units, all of equal size. The call-up to active service was by units, not by individuals. Every region or tribe was responsible for providing a given number of these basic units in proportion to its population of military age. The units were assigned to one of twelve central corps, each numbering approximately 24,000 men. While the unit commanders were locals, the senior officers of each corps were drawn from the regular army, assuring professional leadership. These corps would be called up to active service, on a rotation basis, one month a year. The purpose of this "national service" was to provide a month's intensive military training each year to the reserve units, and to provide a mobilized backup to the regular army capable of immediate action in times of emergenc_x. For a major campaign anything from several corps to the entire reserve army could be mobilized. 5 72. See note 18 above. 73. See note 69 above; also see Chapter 22, note 18. 74. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, Vol. II, p. 279-284. 75. We see this system in full operation during the Ammonite-Aramean wars. In its first phase, fought on the spur ofthe moment, the first battle ofRabbath-ammon involved only the regular army and the reserve corps on duty that particular month. For the second phase of the war, culminating in the battle ofHelam, the entire reserve

344

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE

This inspired system, which spared the State the costs of a large standing army that it could not afford yet provided masses of trained soldiers when needed, was the military machine that made possible the creation of the Davidic Empire. It also was to serve as the model for the armed forces of present-day Israel: It is no accident that the modem defense forces of Israel, established after thousands of years of exile, should today be organized on a pattern similar to that of the armies of David and Solomon. The Israel forces of today are also based on a relatively small regular standing army and a large militia army founded on exactly the same principles that governed the formation of David's militia. 76

army participated. In its last phase, the siege of Rabbath-ammon, the siege itself was conducted by the regular army while a number of reserve corps are mobilized and held in reserve at the forward base of Succoth, only to be thrown into battle in the final storming of the city (see Chapter 27). 76. Yadin, Ibid., p. 284.

CHAPTER26

INTERLUDE: KEEPING FAITH WITH THEM THAT SLEEP IN THE DUST "We have kept the faith!" we said; We shall go down with unreluctant tread Rose-crowned into the darkness!"

Rupert Brooke, The Hill

As the author has constructed her book, the cataloguing of David's wars and conquests wraps up this section of her presentation; the segment devoted to the public life of David the King. It begins with his ascent to the throne of Judah, continues with the civil war between the two kingdoms and his eventual crowning as King of Israel. 1 There follows the war of liberation from the Philistines, the conquest of Jerusalem, its establishment as the capitol of the two kingdoms, and subsequent transformation into a sacred city. Then follow the wars that led to the creation of the Davidic Empire. The description of David's cabinet, the men responsible for governing what David had created, closes this chronicle of David's public career. The time has now come, in the author's opinion, to tum the spotlight on David's private life. 2 But in order to shift gears the author has to perform two tasks. She has some unfinished business that must be gotten out of the way, and she has to prepare the background for what is to come. These two tasks serve the function of a transition from one section to the next, and form the burden of the next two chapters.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS On that almost forgotten day, when David fled Saul's court to assume the career of fugitive and outlaw, Jonathan had exacted from him a tragic pledge. Realizing that his father, and with him the entire House of Saul, had entered the curve of decline-while David's star was just beginning to rise-Jonathan was keenly aware of the possibility that David would one day supplant Saul as king.

l. See Chapters 20 and 21. 2. It is not as though we have not had glimpses of David's private life. But the author has subordinated the private life to the public. Now the emphasis will be reversed. It is the public events that will hereafter take second place.

346

KEEPING FAITH WITH THEM THAT SLEEP IN THE DUST

Having made clear that he would not stand in David's way, Jonathan yet saw fit to bind him with a terrible oath: that should David ever ascend the throne he would not murder Jonathan's children.

"If I be dead. do not cut offyour compassion3 from my House forever. And after the Lord has cut off every one of David's enemies from off the face of the earth, let not the name of Jonathan be cut offfrom the House of David. . . "And Jonathan made David to swear once again, for his love ofhim. 4 (1 Samue/20:14-11) At this point in time Jonathan's only son, Mephibosheth, 5 could have been no more than a toddler, but for all that, he was in direct line to the throne. Jonathan was thinking ahead. The day might come when this child would need protection. Jonathan had read the future correctly. With hindsight, we are in a position to know that by now David has arranged for the decks to be cleared. With only one exception, all the male members of the House of Saul that had been spared by the disaster of Gilboa, and by lsh-bosheth's murderers, have conveniently vanished from off this earth. This ghastly episode will be dealt with later. 6 Suffice it to say that at this time Jonathan's son, Mephibosheth is the single surviving male member of the House of Saul with a direct claim to the throne of his grandfather. A child of five when Jonathan died at Gilboa, the passage of the years has done its work. He is now a young man, with a son of his own. [One day] David said: "Is there anyone still/eft of the House of Saul, that I may show him compassion for Jonathan's sake?" Now there was a servant of the House of Saul, whose name was Ziba, and they summoned him to David The king said to him: "Are you Ziba?" And he said: "Your servant." And the king said: "Is there not still someone of the House of Saul, to whom I may show the compassion of God?" 7 And Ziba said to the king: "There is still a son of Jonathan; crippled offoot." And the king said to him: "Where is he?" And Ziba said: "He is in the house of Machir, son of Ammiel, in Lo-debar. " So the king sent, and brought him from the house ofMachir, son ofAmmiel, from Lo-debar. (9: 1-5) Does this imply that David is ignorant and seeking information? This is hard to accept. David is no political novice. He knows full well that so long as a single legitimate heir to Saul remains alive, he will be a threat to him. That is why, not long after ascending the throne of Israel, he was privy to the death of Saul's surviving sons and grandsons. Mephibosheth he had spared, both because he was Jonathan's son and because, as a cripple, he was no real threat to a warrior king. So he undoubtedly knows that Mephibosheth is alive, though he just may have lost track of what has become of him. Then what explains the sudden interest? We are not told, but might surmise a guilty conscience. We will be told in the next chapter how long-lasting is David's gratitude for some unnamed kindness (hesed) shown to him, in the past, by a neighboring king. But the hesed that he promised to Jonathan's children seems to have slipped his mind. He has kept the letter of his promise to his dear friend; he has spared his son's life. But is this all the kindness he owes to Jonathan's memory? The author is very reserved in relating this incident. She doesn't attribute any motives to David. She simply relates the facts, mostly through a series of short verbal exchanges; David states an interest, he locates a man who had once been a steward of Saul's, he finds out where Mephibosheth is living (at the estate of one of the great landholders in the Gilead) and summons him to Jerusalem. 3. Hesed, used here, and in our present chapter, has also the meanings of mercy, kindness, faithfulness and most especially loyalty (Sakenfeld, "Loyalty and Love," p. 222-224). See further Chapter 27, note 8. 4. For a fuller discussion of Jonathan's concerns, see Chapter 12. 5. His real name was Merib-baal (see Chapter 21, note 23). For the reasons why the author altered his name to Mephibosheth, see Chapter 20, note I. 6. See Chapter 36. This event took place early in David's reign. Why the grisly episode was removed from its chronological position in the narrative will also be discussed there. 7. That is, hesed similar to that which God exhibits: deep and never failing.

KEEPING FAITH WITH THEM THAT SLEEP IN THE DUST

347

And Mephibosheth, the son ofJonathan, son ofSaul, came to David andfell on his face and prostrated himself And David said: "Mephibosheth?" And he said: "Behold, your servant. " Then David said to him: "Don't be afraid, for I am going to act kindly to you8 for your father, Jonathan's sake. I am going to restore to you all the land that belonged to Saul, your father; and you shall eat at my table always. " Then he [Mephibosheth] prostrated himself and said: "What is your servant, that you should take notice of a dead dog like me?" (9:6-8) The frrst thing that strikes the eye in this exchange is Mephibosheth's fear. He is paralyzed by the certainty that this terrible king has summoned him from rustic retirement to consign him to the bloody fate of his uncles and cousins. His sheer terror is so blatant in the introductory salutations that David feels it necessary to explicitly try to calm him down, telling him that he has nothing to fear. This, and all the good news to follow, only marginally reduces Mephibosheth's anxiety. The interview ends as it began, with the young man flat on his face, mouthing protestations of how much of a nothing he is, unworthy of any notice, beneath contempt. 9 David, on his part, is defmitely uncomfortable. The terror of this only son of his best friend speaks volumes. He is being generous, but not excessively. And it has taken him a long time to wake up to his responsibilities. Where has David been all these years? The two are not only total strangers to each other, but also fearful ones at that. Each is deeply suspicious of the motives of the other; and as David makes clear, not only in his little speech but in his future actions, he really doesn't care a rap for the young man. His actions proceed from a sense of obligation to Mephibosheth's dead father. Upon assuming the crown, David acquired the royal estates of his predecessor, Saul. These were obviously extensive, and David has no intention of relinquishing them. What he is restoring to Mephibosheth are the family estates that Saul inherited from his father, Kish. These should have passed, by inheritance, to Mephibosheth through his father Jonathan. They are really Mephibosheth's, but all these years David has held them, forcing Mephibosheth to live on his host's charity. Now he is getting back what really, by law, should have belonged to him all the time. 10 But here David goes one step further. He grants Mephibosheth the extraordinary privilege of dining daily at the royal table. This has the force of a royal command. It is an invitation that one cannot refuse, and beyond the immense social prestige that it confers, it has two sides to it. On the one hand it is financially generous, providing Mephibosheth from now on with all his meals free of charge, a kind of royal pension. On the other hand it restricts Mephibosheth's freedom: he now will be constantly under David's eye. When we take into account the lack of a personal relationship between the two, one can wager a guess that Mephibosheth would gladly forego the pension could he absent himself from the royal table. But he most assuredly does not have the choice. For better or for worse, from now on Mephibosheth, for all his protestations, has ceased being a non-person; he is now an important personage at court. The matter, however, does not end here.

8. Literally, I am most assuredly going to act with hesed to you. 9. For the significance of the tenn a dead dog, see Chapter 20, note 31. 10. In pre-monarchic times it would have been inconceivable to expropriate the ancestral lands of a family. They were "entailed" and could only pass from father to child (see Chapter 31, note 14). With the advent of monarchy we are immediately confronted with the phenomenon of kings seizing property that by law and custom is the inalienable possession of families. Saul boasts of his expropriations with which he rewards his loyal followers (I Samue/22:7) while here we discover the family holdings ofKish unlawfully seized from his great-grandchild. This is exactly what Samuel feared when he warned that a king "will seize the best ofyour fields, and your vineyards and olive groves and give them to his servants" (I Samue/8:14), i.e., the reversion to the Canaanite system ofland tenure according to which all land was owned by the king and a few nobles while the bulk of the population eked out an existence as landless agricultural laborers. This process was to gain momentum with the passage of the years until it was to become one of the central evils denounced by the classical prophets.

348

KEEPING FAITH WITH THEM THAT SLEEP IN THE DUST

Then the king called Ziba, Saul's steward, and said to him: "Everything that belonged to Saul, and to all his House, have I given to the son ofyour master. You, and your sons, and your servants shall work the land for him, and you shall bring [him the produce] that the householti 1 of your master may have bread to eat; but Mephibosheth, your master's son, shall always eat breai2 at my table." (Now Ziba hadfifteen sons and twenty servants.) And Ziba said to the king: "Everything that my lord the king commands his servant, so shall your servant do." So Mephibosheth ate at David's13 table just like one of the king's sons. Now Mephibosheth had a young son named Mica; and all the members ofZiba 's household were Mephibosheth 's servants. But Mephibosheth lived in Jerusalem, for he regularly ate at the king's table; he was lame in both his feet. (9:9-13) At a stroke, Mephibosheth has become a wealthy absentee landlord. Constrained to live, he and his family, in Jerusalem so that he can daily join the king and his family at mealtime, someone must manage his estates at Gibeah for him. David appoints Ziba and his family to the task. 14 The income from the estate will enable Mephibosheth to maintain an establishment in Jerusalem befitting his royal status. If he keeps his nose clean, and can conquer his anxiety, he has a comfortable future ahead of him. The operative term, of course, is keeping his nose clean. 15 As long as he remains strictly apolitical he can almost be like a close relative of the royal family. We must not give in to a tendency to be overly cynical. Of course David is keeping a close eye on him, but by the standards of his days he is being extraordinarily generous. He could leave Mephibosheth to vegetate in the sticks, or he could have him killed; either alternative would be much cheaper. We might say that this is the least that he could do for the son of his dearest friend, and we would be right. To really fulfill the spirit of his pledge to Jonathan he would have to develop a loving relationship with Mephibosheth, but then he never develops any real relationship with any of his own sons. That is the way he is. Setting aside the long delay, and taking into account David's personal deficiencies of character, he does not come across at all badly in this incident. He has not betrayed Jonathan, and he has paid his debt to the dead. Having dispensed with David's debt to Jonathan's son, the author now begins to lay the foundations for her next section: the private life of the king. But while keeping in mind the author's purpose, we will be treating the coming narrative (fascinating in its own regard) as much as a supplement to the account of David's wars- enlarging and deepening our understanding of them-as a prologue to the debacle to come. We return to David, the Warrior King.

11. Reading with LXX; MT reads that the son ofyour master. 12. Bread, as the "staff of life," is often used as a synonym for food. Thus the phrase simply means shall always eat at my table. 13. Reading with LXX; MT reads ate at my table. 14. In all probability they were awarded a percentage of the harvest in lieu of wages. 15. The real danger lay in becoming a pawn, even without his consent, for those aiming to foment opposition to David's regime. He would have to actively distance himself from all those who might use him as a focus of a conspiracy to reestablish the House of Saul on the throne.

CHAPTER27

THE COURSE OF EMPIRE II: THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE On the idle hill of summer, Sleepy with the flow ofstreams, Far I hear the steady drummer Drumming like a noise ofdreams.

Far and near and low and louder On the roads ofearth go by, Dear to friends andfoodfor powder, Soldiers marching, all to die.

A. E. Housman, A Shropshire Lad If we are correct in our supposition that David's campaign against Moab was personal in nature, and not primarily caused by a desire for territorial expansion, it follows that, at least at this stage, David is not interested in empire. This should not surprise us. He has just completed a life-or-death struggle with the Philistines. What he now needs is time to be able to concentrate on his two main priorities. These are: establishing ftrm control over his erstwhile enemies, the Philistines (now reduced to the position of vassals), and consolidating his rule over his two kingdoms of Judah and Israel, and integrating them into a working whole. It is at this time that he takes Jerusalem and transfers his capital to it. It may have been at this time that he mounts his campaign against the Amalekites, finally removing that constant scourge ofthe southern borderlands of Judah. And, as we have learned, he has large projects for religious reform and regeneration in mind. My feeling is that the last thing he needs at this particular juncture is to be diverted into imperialistic adventures. In this reading, Moab is simply a settling of scores-a temporary diversion. But even if our reasoning is correct, however great the need for full attention to pressing domestic issues, David cannot afford to ignore the international arena. To the south there is no immediate threat. Egypt, which had once ruled the region, has long since collapsed into total disarray, and is impotent as a force outside its boundaries. It is to the north that danger lies. The consolidation of the Aramean kingdoms under the hegemony of Hadadezer has created a power that already overshadows all other states in the region. At the present, Hadadezer seems to be fully preoccupied with his struggles against the Hittite kingdom of Hamath, and with his northern frontier across the Euphrates. But

350

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

there is no avoiding the possibility that, at some future moment, his attention may turn southwards toward Israel, even as it had during the days of Saul. 1 David has taken steps to protect himself from future confrontation. While still in Hebron he had negotiated an alliance with the small Aramean kingdom of Geshur, which directly borders on Israel. 2 Thus he has provided Israel with a buffer between himself and Aram-Zobah to the north. With Philistia subdued, he is secure to the west. It is the eastern frontier that is worrisome. To the east lies Ammon.

THE DEBACLE AT RABBATH-AMMON The Ammonites, who had founded their kingdom about two centuries before the events of this chapter, were a largely nomadic, Hebrew-speaking people. The natural barriers of the Jabbok River and the desert fixed the kingdom's northern and eastern boundaries respectively. The western and southern borders, lacking rivers or mountains to define them, amounted to no more than vague definitions that were constantly in flux. In rough terms, the border between Ammon and the Israelite Gilead was a north-south line about forty miles east of the Jordan River. 3 The capital of the kingdom, Rabbath-ammon, was important as a juncture of the King's Highway. It was sited on high ground, at an altitude of2400 feet above sea level, and was located about 47 miles to the east of the Jordan River. The Ammonites are no strangers to us. We have already met them, under their King Nahash, laying siege to Jabesh-gilead. This was the campaign in which Saul, by defeating their army and raising the siege of Jabesh, launched his career as king of Israel. This war was far from being unique. It was only the most recent of a long series of attempts, by the Ammonites, to seize from the Israelites the rich lands of the Gilead to their west and north. These incursions, conquests, and subsequent liberations had punctuated the Age of the Judges. 4 The relations between Israel and Ammon have never been good, alternating between simmering hostility and violent conflict. To David, it is of vital importance that Ammon and Israel make common cause against the Arameans to the north of them; or, at the very least, that Ammon remain neutral should a war break out. An Ammonite alliance with Hadadezer would open Israel to a two-front war. Surprisingly, considering the past history of hostilities, alliance seems a real possibility to David. Besides the perceived common threat to both, he e1Uoys a good relationship with Nahash, king of I. 1 Samue/14:41 records Saul as having warred "against the kings ofZobah" among his desperate struggles to defend his fledgling kingdom. This must have been before the days of Hadadezer. See Epilogue to Chapter 8. 2. In those days alliances were cemented by marriage. King David's marriage to the daughter of the King of Geshur signaled an alliance concluded between the two states. See Chapter 20. 3. The southern border, even less defined, seems to have run somewhere between Naur, the southernmost Ammonite town, and Mephoath, an Israelite town to the south of it. 4. The detailed description of one such Ammonite conquest, and the subsequent liberation of the Gilead by the Judge Jephthah, is related in chapter 11 of the Book ofJudges. 5. This may have been the same Nahash who had conditioned his offer of peace on the willingness ofthe inhabitants of Jabesh to submit to having their right eyes gouged out! Many modem commentators are of the opinion that the personal relationship between Nahash and David stemmed from his attempts to weaken Saul's kingdom by giving various forms of support to David during his wilderness days. On the other hand, the medieval Jewish commentators are virtually unanimous in referring to the previously mentioned tradition relating to the murder of David's family by the Moabites. According to this tradition one member of the family, one of David's brothers, managed to escape the slaughter and found refuge in Rabbath-ammon. As they interpret it, this is the hesed, the kindness, to which we will find David referring. In our era, we tend to look for David's motivations in the realm of policy, raison d'etat. The medieval commentators usually sought for the roots of David's actions in the sphere of his personal feelings. Who is reading David's character more correctly is very much open to dispute.

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

351

past. 5

Ammon. Nahash seems to have done David some good turns in the His death thus suggests to David an opportunity to sound out the new regime, and hopefully consolidate with the son the positive relationship he has had with his father. So a diplomatic mission is dispatched to represent Israel at the funeral in Rabbath-ammon.

Sometime afterwards Nahash, 6 king of the Ammonites, 7 died, and Hanun, his son, reigned in his stead And David said: "I will show kindness to Hanun, son of Nahas h. even as his father showed kindnesi to me. " So David sent a delegation 9 to console him for [the death of] his father, and David's servants came to the land of the Ammonites. Now the Ammonite ministers said to their Lord Hanun: "Do you think that because David sent comforters to you that he honors your father? Has not David [really] sent his servants to you in order to investigate the city and spy it out, in order to overthrow it?" So Hanun seized David's servants, and shaved off half of[each man's] beard, and cut off their garments in the middle, at the buttocks, and sent them away! When it was told David, he sent [officials] to meet them, for the men were deeply humiliated And the king said: "Stay in Jericho until your beards have grown back, then return." (10:1-5) The reception the delegation receives quickly dispels any illusions David may have had. The delegates, undoubtedly some of the top officials of the Israelite diplomatic corps, are publicly humiliated: paraded through the capital, one side of their faces shaven and the other side bearded, and with their robes cut off at their hips, leaving the lower parts of their bodies fully exposed. So deep is their humiliation that David grants them leave of absence from their duties until they are presentable, and· can show their faces in the capitol without embarrassment. To treat an official foreign delegation in this manner can have but one outcome, and that the Ammonites fully understand this will shortly become evident. What leads them to this rash and irreversible action? At first glance it might seem a thoughtless act of bravado, on the part of an inexperienced youth suddenly raised to the throne. But we are clearly told otherwise. The action is taken on the advice of the ministers of state, probably in royal council. What we are witnessing is a deliberate declaration of policy; one of undisguised hostility to Israel. That David's mission could come to such a shocking denouement can only indicate to him how badly out of touch with international developments he is. For Ammon to declare war on Israel (for that is exactly what the humiliating expulsion of David's diplomats amounts to) means that Ammon must have realigned herself with the Arameans. She would never dare face David on her own.

6. Reading with 1 Chronicles 19:1; 2 Samuel! 0:1 omits the name Nahash. 7. Literally king ofthe children ofAmmon. The Ammonites are referred to in the Bible almost without exception as the children ofAmmon. We will translate this term as "Ammonites" unless there is a specific reason to render it literally. 8. The Hebrew word hesed, here rendered as kindness, has also the meanings of "loyalty," "faithfulness," "mercy," "compassion," and "grace." It usually refers to some act of undeserved generosity. The term is also used to refer to the act of comforting persons in mourning. 9. Reading with 1 Chronicles 19:2. 2 Samuel10:2 reads sent by his servants.

MAP 27.1 THE FIRST AMMONITE CAMPAIGN: PHASE 1 N

cD • Damascus

Dan

Tyre

ARAM- DAMASCUS

•

LANDOFTOB

,,. .J

Shechem

JERUSALEM

e

\s

*

~

.... ,

• Medeba

): Route of Israelite expeditionary force ..W/#/. . Route

of united Aramean army

0 I

10 I

20 I

30 I

40

miles

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

353

Now the Ammonites, realizing that they had become odious to David, sent and hired Aram-Beth-Rehob, and Aram-Zobah-twenty thousand infantrymen-and the king of Maacah with a thousand men, and twelve thousand men from To b. 11 ( 10:6) 10

At a first, cursory reading, this seems to imply that, awakening the morning after to the implications of what they have done, the Ammonites panic and quickly hire an Aramean mercenary army to defend them. And indeed so some critics have read this passage. But a few moments' reflection leads us to realize that this cannot be the case. In the first place, we already know that the treatment of David's diplomats is anything but an impulsive, hotheaded act. It is a coolly thought-out implementation of state policy. Secondly, one does not suddenly pick up the phone and order a complete Aramean army offthe shelf, as it were. Hadadezer, the overlord of all Syria, is not for rent---

Israelite attacks 0

5

10

miles

356

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

at this point Joab receives a nasty shock. He knows, of course, that he may have to deal with Aramean reinforcements. He undoubtedly has scouts out to the northeast, ready to alert him to any Aramean troop movements from Aram. He has not sent patrols to his southwest. Why should he? That is Israelite territory. But that is exactly where the Aramean army is lying in wait for him. So closing in on Joab from behind, they snap the trap shut. The Israelite army is cut off and surrounded! Joab does not lose his head in this crisis. 16 To quote General Yadin: "Joab was saved from certain annihilation by his brilliant leadership, lightning decisions, and the offensive spirit." 17 He splits his army, putting the reserve units under the command of his brother, Abishai, and ordering him to launch an immediate attack on the Ammonite army. He himself takes command of the best troops, the regular army units and the mercenaries, and facing around, furiously attacks the Aramean army to his rear. The arrangement between the two brother generals is: should either of them suffer a reverse, the other will immediately come to his assistance.

When Joab saw that the battle was set against him both in front and in the rear, he chose the best troops from all the army and set them in array against the Arameans. The remainder of the troops 18 he put under the command ofhis brother, Abishai, and set them in array against the Ammonites. And he said: "If the Arameans prove too strongfor me, you come to my aid And if the Ammonites prove too strong for you, then I will come to your aid Let us be of good courage and play the man for our people, and for the cities of our God May the Lord do what seems good to Him. " 19 (10:9-12) The courage hom of desperation carries the day.

So Joab and the soldiers who were with him engaged the Arameans in battle, who fled before them. Now when the Ammonites saw the Arameans had fled, they also fled before Abishai and entered the city. (10:13-14) Having succeeded in breaking the trap into which he had rushed headlong, Joab has neither heart to pursue the fleeing Arameans nor means to lay siege to Rabbath-ammon. He and his army are thankful to still be alive. After resting and savoring the extent of their stunning victory, the army packs up and goes home. The hasty and ill-conceived pre-emptive strike is over, but the war is only beginning. The next phase will require much thought and careful preparation.

THE BLOOD-SOAKED FIELDS OF HELAM David has some serious thinking to do. The brilliant leadership of his generals, and the elan and fighting ability of his troops, have staved off a total disaster, but despite this his situation is critical. Not only has he been completely caught by surprise, he has allowed himself to be maneuvered into a 16. The Chronicler informs us that the Aramean army was encamped at Medeba, 10 miles east of the Dead Sea and about 12 miles to the south of Joab's line of march. To have gotten into place in time to set the trap required moving down from the north, traversing Ammon east of Rabbath-ammon, and penetrating to Medeba from the eastern desert (a march of close to 80 miles from the nearest Aramean border and 80 miles further yet from Zobah). The army must have been waiting fully mobilized in the Land ofTob, and must have moved immediately following the expulsion of David's diplomatic mission from Rabbath-ammon. Joab simply passed them by in his march, never dreaming that an entire army could have gotten into Israelite territory behind him without his knowing. 17. Yadin, The Art of Warfare, p. 274. 18. Hebrew Am, i.e. militia. 19. Literally, May the Lord do what is good in His eyes. Having done all that is humanly possible, it is now up to God.

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

357

position with serious strategic liabilities. His entire eastern and northeastern frontiers are open to attack. Both the initiative and the element of surprise are in his enemies' hands. They possess freedom of maneuver, and can surprise him from any point on his wide perimeter (as he has just learned to his vast dismay). He is on the defensive, and his reactions from his base in Jerusalem are predictable. David's first priority has to be to change the deplorable situation to which his lack of foresight has reduced him, and to regain the initiative. This he achieves by a masterstroke-establishing a forward strategic base. The site he picks is in the Gilead, about 35 miles to the northeast of Jerusalem, on the far side of the Jordan. The valley of Succoth is ideally suited to his purpose. Lying astride the main communications routes between Jerusalem and Damascus (the major Aramean city closest to David's kingdoms), Succoth is also linked by secure routes to Northern Israel. The Valley is a natural fortress/ 0 and can be defended by a relatively small force against even a chariot-supported attack. 21 Furthermore, the Valley is a rich agricultural area, capable of supporting an army from its own production. 22 And of especial importance, the population ofSuccoth is politically reliable; loyal to the House ofDavid. 23 By establishing this forward strategic base David regains the initiative. He can now carry the war to the Arameans, invading their territory without over-stretching his supply lines. He has simultaneously driven a wedge between the Arameans and their ally, Ammon. By siting himself within close striking range of the communication routes between Rabbath-Ammon and the north, neither can now effectively support the other. He has split his enemies, and now can deal with each one separately. And by shifting back and forth between his main base at Jerusalem and his forward base at Succoth, David has regained strategic mobility and the precious element of surprise. His lines of attack are no longer predictable. Having thus seized the initiative David goes over to the offensive. This time he chooses not to try to dispose of the junior partner of the coalition against him, but to force a decision with his main adversary, Hadadezer. While David is engaged in these preparations, Hadadezer has not been idle. The unraveling of his carefully laid plans must have been a major shock. His worst fears have been realized. Far from being a mere long-range danger, David is a current threat of serious proportions. In his attempt at a "surgical operation" he has kicked over a hornet's nest. A major showdown is now in the offing, and Hadadezer resolves to meet it with all the force he can possibly mobilize.

Now when the Arameans saw that they had been smitten before Israel, they gathered themselves together. And Hadadezer sent [messengers] and brought out the Arameans from the far side of the River [Euphrates], and they came to He/am, with Shobach, Hadadezer's chief general, in command Now when David was informed, he mobilized all Israel, crossed the Jordan and came to Helam. And the Arameans drew up their forces against David and engaged him in battle. (10:15-17)

20. It is bounded on the west and the south by the Jordan and Jabbok rivers, to the east and northeast by mountains, and to the north by deep ravines. 21. An insecurely positioned base would require detaching a large force to hold it, seriously weakening the main army. In the case of Succoth, the army can operate far afield without fear that their base would be overrun in their absence. 22. Archeological evidence indicates that David established a metallurgy center here, turning Succoth into a base maintaining its own technological support services; manufacturing, servicing, and repairing the entire range of equipment used for fighting a war. The inhabitants of the Valley mainly grew grain and raised cattle. There were at least nineteen villages during this period. 23. So much so that when David will flee from Jerusalem in the face of Absalom's rebellion (see Chapter 33), it will be to Succoth that he will flee, certain that the population there will remain loyal to him and not join in the revolt. It is from this base that David will be able to resupply his army. The above analysis is based on Yadin, The Art of Warfare, p. 270-272.

MAP 27.3 THE BATTLE OF HELAM N

cD

Shecheme

...

•

.-

Mahanaim #I' '

----

----

,'~AMMON

'*

Rabbah

\

'•

---

Medeba

''

' ' ..... ----

Dead Sea

MOAB

..W#H~ United Aramean army under Marshal Shobach musters at Helam

==I•~ Fully mobilized Israelite army under the

direct command of King David advances from Succoth to give battle

0 1.__

10 20 __.1_ _.... 1_

30

___,I

miles

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

359

The first round saw forces from four Aramean kingdoms mobilized for the campaign against David. Realizing that they had badly misjudged the situation, all the Aramean states, whether under the direct suzerainty of Hadadezer or not, now put aside their differences and join in the common cause against David. Doubting that this is enough, Hadadezer succeeds in mobilizing even the Aramean states across the Euphrates, in Northern Mesopotamia, to come to his assistance. If the (probably) partial mobilization produced an army of33,000 men, we can only speculate on the size of an army made up ofthe armed forces of all the Aramean states of Syria, massively reinforced by contingents from across the Euphrates. That Hadadezer's general Shobach commands this vast array simply testifies to Hadadezer's being the most powerful state-the senior partner in the coalition. The site picked for the mobilization is Helam (the present-day Aalma), a spot on Aramean territory, over 60 miles northeast of Succoth, and about 50 miles due south of Damascus. The Arameans may have picked this site because the ground is suitable for the rapid maneuver of chariots?4 When the information reaches David, he mobilizes all the reserves of his two kingdoms and marches north. The two armies that engage at bloody He lam represent the full armed might of both sides. Both are staking everything on this one throw of the dice.

And the Arameans fled from before Israel, and David killed ofthe Arameans seven hundred chariots and forty thousand infantrymen, 25 and Shobach, commander of their army, was struck down, and he died there. (1 0: 18) David's victory is decisive/ 6 breaking once and for all Hadadezer's hegemony over Syria and the power of the Aramean states.

Now when all the kingdoms that had been vassal to Hadadezer saw that they were defeatecP by Israel, they submitted to Israel, and became their vassals; and the Arameans feared to give further aid to the Ammonites. ( 10: 19) From these remarks we can possibly infer that the Aramean army had been making an attempt to link up with their ally, the Ammonites. If so, David's base at Succoth paid off, enabling him to prevent the Arameans from effecting the juncture, and forcing the decisive battle to take place some sixty miles north ofRabbath-Ammon. The political aftermath of the victory reflects its decisive nature. Aram-Zobah is dismantled, and all the Aramean states, previously vassals of Hadadezer, surrender8 and transfer their allegiance to David. Except for Aram-Zobah29 and Aram-Damascus, the rulers are allowed to remain on their thrones. Political subservience and annual tribute (probably what they had been paying to Hadadezer) is all that is demanded of them. In one stroke David's hegemony stretches to the Euphrates.

24. This is a restricted area of some twelve miles of traversable ground between the deep gorge of the Yarmuk River and the natural barrier of the Trachona, a vast area of petrified lava blocks. It is a bottleneck oflong standing and has been the site of numerous battles over the centuries. 25. Reading with 1 Chronicles 19:18; MT Samuel reads 40,000 horsemen. 26. We are not given any figures for Israelite casualties, but though in no way proportional to those of the Arameans they must have been severe. This was a set battle and victories of this magnitude do not come cheap. 27. Literally smitten down. 28. The Hebrew has the sense of "they made their peace with the situation." 1 Chronicles 19:19 reads with David.

29. In Chapter 25 we learned of the loot taken from Aram-Zobah. We were not told explicitly that Hadadezer was deposed, but it is hard to see how the overlord of Syria and prime enemy of Israel could have been allowed to remain when lesser monarchs, such as that of Damascus, were deposed.

360

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

THE PAYOFF Having consented to be the pebble that started the avalanche, Ammon is now left alone, bereft of allies, to face David's wrath. But now occurs a pause, dictated by the seasons. The Aramean campaigns have consumed the summer and, with the start of the rains, roads and fields turn into impassable quagmires of mud. This is no time to begin a new campaign, so the army beds down until the spring. And just at this point the author drops her description of the military campaign and leaves us hanging. She has only painted the detailed picture we have been analyzing in order to prepare us with the necessary background for what is to come: the great crisis and turning point in David's personal life, which is the focus of the entire narrative. At the conclusion of the crisis, the author will briefly return to the bloody battlefields to wrap up the war. For our own part, in order to keep the two aspects of his life in sharp focus, we will jump to the conclusion of the campaign so that we can close the book on "David the Conqueror." In so doing we will be closing this phase of David's public career before shifting the focus to his private life. 30 When, in the course of her account of David's private life, our author sees fit to shift gears and return briefly to these events, we will return with her to the events we now will analyze, but then we will be seeing them in a surprisingly different light. With the ending ofthe winter rains, the season has once again arrived for "the trade of kings." Now it came to pass, in the spring of the year, 31 the season when kings go out [to war], that David sent Joab along with his troops, and all Israel, and they devastated the lancfZ of the Ammonites, and laid siege to Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem. (11: 1) Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and captured the capital. 33 And Joab sent messengers to David, saying: "I have fought against Rabbah; I have also captured the City of Waters. Now muster the rest of the troops, encamp against the city and take it, lest I capture the city and it be called by my name." (12:26-28)

Much is said in this account, yet we have to add from other sources to round out the picture. David has learned his lesson. Even against a second rate adversary he now will take no chances. He sends Joab not only with the regular army but also the entire reserve force (the author emphasizes all Israel). The campaign is a brutal one, involving a scorched earth policy-the countryside is laid waste. Then the regular army settles down for the protracted siege of Rabbath-ammon. 34 The laconic summary, Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and captured the capital, makes no mention of the bitter siege that drags out for more than a year. Neither the protracted suffering of both the cities' inhabitants and of the troops in the siege trenches, nor of the devastation when the city is stormed and put to the sword, are hinted at. 35 Instead, she concentrates on Joab's generous gesture toward David. Having stormed and taken a part of the city (either the fortified water sources of the 30. The Chronicler, who shows no interest in David's private life, but only in his public one, moves from the conclusion of the Aramean wars directly to the Ammonite campaign. 31. Literally, at the turn of the year (that is, at the spring equinox). According to the Biblical calendar, the New Year begins in April. 32. Reading with 1 Chronicles 20:1; MT Samuel lacks the words the land. 33. Literally, the royal city. 1 Chronicles 20:1 reads And Joab smote Rabbah and destroyed it. 34. Yadin, by an analysis ofthe contents of2 Samuel1l:l1, reconstructs this phase of the campaign as follows: the regular army troops conduct the actual siege of the city, while the reserve units, encamped at Succoth, are being used to keep an eye on the recently surrendered but still restive Aramean kingdoms to the north. With the entire Israelite reserve army keeping watch over them, it is no wonder that the Arameans feared to give further aid to the Ammonites. (10:19) (Yadin, The Art of Warfare., p. 274-275) 35. It is the Chronicler who informs us of this last fact. See note 33 above.

THE LOOSING OF THE BLOOD-DIMMED TIDE

361

city, or the city itself with the citadel yet fighting on), instead of pressing forward and finishing the job Joab pauses. He sends messengers to Jerusalem to urge his king to break free of his personal affairs and come and be the one to finish off Rabbah himself. David had taken Jerusalem, and it was now called "The City of David." It would create an uncomfortable situation, to say the least, if after the conclusion of the long and bitter siege, Rabbath-ammon would come to be called by the troops "The City of Joab." David heeds the call, leaves Jerusalem, and arrives before Rabbath-ammon (he must have gone via Succoth) at the head of the reserve army. The fall of the city and its sack soon follows:

So David assembled all the reserves, advanced to Rabbah, and fighting against it, took it. And he took the crown from off the head of their king; 36 its weight was one talent of gold, 37 and in it was a precious stone. 38 It was placed on David's head He also took out of the city an immense amount ofbooty. (12:29-30) The value of the crown must have been enormous, taking into account the weight of the gold and the obviously outstanding jewel embedded in it. The crowning of David is nothing more than a symbolic gesture of absolute over-lordship. There is no indication that David ever assumes the title of King of Ammon; indeed, not too far in the future we shall find Ammon ruled by an Ammonite king who is vassal to David and who pays him tribute. 39 And now to the brutal aftermath; the fate of the conquered.

Now as to the people who were in it [the city], he brought them out and put them [to labor] with saws, and iron picks, and iron axes; and set them to work making bricks. 40 And thus he did to all the cities of the Ammonites. Then David and all the troops returned to Jerusalem.

(12:31) The surviving population is put to work at forced labor. Taking into account the iron tools mentioned, and the prevailing practice in those days for treating a city taken only after long siege, it would seem that the Ammonites are forced to demolish the fortifications of their city, leaving it indefensible. The brick making would seem to indicate repairs being made to the city, perhaps patching up the damage done to numerous dwellings during the storming of the city and the subsequent "destruction" referred to by the Chronicler. The populations of the other towns of the Ammonites are similarly treated. 41 Having turned all of Ammon's fortified centers into open cities, "sitting ducks" should the Ammonites ever be so foolhardy as to revolt against the Israelites, King and army pack up and go home. The little shepherd boy has completed his transformation into the greatest conqueror of his day. Creator of an empire stretching from Egypt to the Euphrates, a power challenged by none, King David has reached the apogee of his career. His is now truly David the Great.

36. LXX reads the crown of Mi/com. Milcom was the name of the chief deity of the Ammonites. This may have been the name by which the royal crown was known. 37. The crown was made of solid gold weighing approximately 66 pounds. 38. Reading with Syr., Targ., Vulg., and 1 Chronicles 20:2; MT lacks the words and in it was. 39. Considering the weight of the crown, it would be impossible for David to wear it without support. Probably, for the brief duration of the ceremony several strong pairs of hands must have held it in place. 40. Literally, made them work with brick-molds. 41. Some of the ancient versions took this verse to mean that David tortured the Ammonites with saws, picks, axes, etc. So Josephus understood it as well. This interpretation has been generally abandoned these days as linguistically unsustainable. Some scholars are of the opinion that David reduced a portion of the population to the corvee, i.e. hard unpaid labor, while others think that the duration of the labor referred to was limited to the time of the demolition ofRabbah's walls, and ceased when David went home.

ACT FIVE

THE FALL OF THE KING

There's the cause on 't. Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, Like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.

John Webster, The Duchess of Malfi, V

The years, like great black oxen tread the world, And God the herdsman goads them on behind, And I am broken by their passing feet.

William Butler Yeats, The Countess Cathleen, IV

CHAPTER28

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR In the midst ofthejourney of this life, I found myself in a dark forest, For I had lost the right path. Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy

The two best-known episodes of David's brilliant life were both beginnings. His triumph over Goliath marked the beginning of his rise; his affair with Bathsheba signaled the beginning of the end. Following David's career has been like watching the ascent of a rocket. To paraphrase the poet Steven Spender: born of the sun he traveled a short while towards the sun, and left the vivid air signed with his honor. 1 The key to the description is the phrase "a short while." Man is but man, and sooner or later the natural force of gravity asserts itself. The Bible puts this fact of human nature thus:

For there is no man on earth so righteous, Who only does good and never sins. 2 Ecclesiastes 7:20 We have reached the pinnacle of David's ascent, and so also the turning point. The ascent towards the sun now turns into a descent towards earth. Whatever prompted David to the disastrous cascade of acts, each leading, with seeming irrevocability, to the next, that is to bring his life crumbling about him? How can we explain the folly that overtakes him, a folly out of character with all his previous life? Or is it so out of character after all? We recall the streak of ruthlessness in his nature that, by a willed focus on ethical principles, David has kept more or less in check since his wilderness days. We also recall his near lapse, fortunately aborted by Abigail's timely intervention, when in a hot fury he so lost control of himself as to set forth to murder Nahal and massacre all his household. Perhaps, on second thought, it is more reasonable to assume that the potential was there all the time. So our problem reduces itself to the question: what can explain David's present lowering of his guard, loosening the iron self-control that has served him so well for most of his life? Of the various possibilities two stand out. The first is the timing. As we have seen, after having been lured into a trap that almost cost him his army and his crown, David has made a spectacular comeback. He has ended by scoring the greatest triumph of his military career: the destruction of the l. "I Think Continually of Those Who were Truly Great." 2. The thought, in a more concise form, is attributed to Solomon at the dedication of the Temple; l Kings 8:46,2 Chronicles 6:36.

366

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

united Aramean armies and the conquest of an empire reaching to the Euphrates. This is an achievement to turn anyone's head. As Lord Acton has reminded us, power tends to corrupt, and David is now the most powerful person in the region. Perhaps he has reached a point where he feels himself above the law, one whose greatness permits him all things. There is a second possibility, to which our author may be hinting. The affair takes place while the nasty aftermath of the great triumph of the Aramean campaign, the mop-up of the Ammonites, is still in progress. As we recall, the author prefaces the episode thus: Now it came to pass, in the spring of the year, the season when kings go out [to war], that David sent Joab along with his troops, and all Israel, and they devastated the land of the Ammonites, and laid siege to Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem. (11:1) After his greatest victory David doesn't take the field and finish the job. He leaves that to others. He sends Joab to war; he stays home. Is the author, in calling attention to this uncharacteristic behavior (David has always been the hands-on field commander par excellence), hinting at burnout? David is no longer a young man; he is close to fifty years of age. 3 He may be growinf tired. Moreover, he may be suffering from "mid-life crisis," feeling a need to reassert his manhood. We can only speculate since the author, in a departure from her normal practice, neither tells us what David was thinking nor indicates what was motivating him. We can only keep various possibilities in mind as we follow, as it were from the outside, this breathless and sordid tale.

THE ONE NIGHT STAND After having set the scene by telling us that David has decided to sit out the Ammonite campaign in Jerusalem, the author, with no further introduction, plunges into her narrative. Now late [one day], toward evening, it came to pass that David arose from his couch and took a walk on the roof of the palace; and from the roof he saw a woman bathing. Now the woman was extremely beautiful. So David sent [for someone] and enquired about the woman. He said: "That's Bathsheba, 5 daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite. " So David sent messengers and took her; and she came to him and he lay with her. (Now she had been purifying herselffrom her uncleanliness.) Then she returned to her house. (11 :24) Talk of concise narration! The king gets up from his afternoon nap. Having nothing better to do he takes a stroll around the roof of the palace, which, being a monumental structure, towers over the roofs of the surrounding posh neighborhood. 6 From his vantage point he observes a naked woman bathing on a neighboring roof (why we will learn shortly). Aroused by her unusual beauty he sends for one ofthe palace staff to have a look and tell him who she is 7 (now there are two voyeurs on the 3. The reasoning we used for dating David's desire to build a House for God applies here as well. These events must have taken place, at the earliest, late in the second decade of his reign. See Chapter 24, especially note 9. 4. H. H. Cohen, in a very perceptive psychological reconstruction of David's possible mental state, comes to just this conclusion. Unfortunately, lacking sufficient data, this must remain no more than intriguing speculation (Cohen, "David and Bathsheba", p. 142-8). 5. Literally "lsn 't she Bathsheba?"-a question demanding a positive answer. For examples of this common Biblical way of emphasizing a positive statement, see Ruth 2:8,9. 6. See the end of Chapter 7, Excursus IV: In what sort of Houses Did Samuel and Saul Live?, for a brief discussion ofthe architecture of ancient Israel. 7. That David does not recognize Bathsheba by sight, considering her "connections," speaks volumes about how sequestered men and women have become, each in their separate social worlds. The easy commingling of men

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

367

roof looking down on the bathing beauty). The servant has no difficulty identifying her: "Sure, that's Bathsheba- you know, the daughter ofEliam. She's Uriah the Hittite's wife." So David sends messengers (note the plural) to her house to bring her to the palace; she comes, he beds her and sends her home. The king sees, asks, summons, takes and sends home. End of story. But things are not to go that simply.

And the woman conceived; then she sent and iriformed David, saying: "I am with child " (11 :5) And David has a problem. To fully appreciate the complications into which David's little escapade has precipitated him we have to return and re-examine the episode in detail. In the first place, who is this woman Bathsheba? That she is not just anybody, a person of no consequence, we could already have guessed from the fact that she is living in one of the most exclusive neighborhoods in Jerusalem, right next to the palace. But more than this, it turns out that she is a member of one of the best and most influential families in Jerusalem. Her father is one of the top career officers in the army, a member of the small elite group known as "The Thirty."8 Her grandfather, Ahithophel, is one of the most respected advisors to the king. 9 Her husband, Uriah, is also one of the top commanders in the army, and a member ofthe "The Thirty;" thus a close comrade of Bathsheba's father. (This is probably how Uriah came to meet and marry her.) Thus, should a scandal break out into the open it will not be something that can simply be brushed off. This would be a scandal that would reverberate through the highest strata of Jerusalem society. Of course "the affair" is common knowledge in the palace. David himselfhas involved several of the palace personnel in the matter; at the very least his fellow voyeur on the roof and the messengers he sent to fetch her. With so many in the know, it is a secret impossible to keep. This, apparently, does not cause David to lose any sleep. After all, the husband is always the last to know. But she is pregnant, and that is another matter entirely. The child cannot be passed off on her husband. He is away at the battlefront. And to make things more certain, she has just had her period prior to the "incident"-that is what the author is informing us when she makes the parenthetical remark that she had been purifying herselffrom her uncleanliness, that is, taking a ritual bath subsequent to her period.10

THE COVER-UP Before continuing with David's frantic efforts to cover his tracks we need to ask ourselves the question: why does he even bother? In the Ancient Near East (and in more recent times as well) and women typical of the village life of the pre-monarchical period, and still evident in the relations of Abigail and David, seems now, in Imperial Jerusalem, to be adapting to the more "Oriental" norm of the Ancient Near East. 8. These were men of proven exceptional bravery, what we might call "Medal of Honor" winners, who commanded the elite combat units in the army. Yadin is ofthe opinion that they formed a kind of supreme army council that was responsible for framing army regulations, deciding on promotions and appointments and handling other military matters. (Yadin, The Art of Warfare, p. 277). We will later be devoting an entire chapter to the exploits of this elite fellowship. See Chapter 39. 9. Though not specifically mentioned here, we know from 2 Samue/23:34 that Ahitophel was Eliam's father. Of him too we will be hearing much. See Chapter 32. 10. According to Biblical law it is forbidden to have intercourse with a woman during her menstrual period and for seven days following its conclusion (Leviticus 15:19,24, 28; 18:19; 20:18). At the completion of these days a ritual bath makes intercourse with the woman permissible. This is what Bathsheba was doing on the roof; it explains why it was clear to David that Uriah could not have been the father, and why she got pregnant so easily-she was right in her fertile period.

368

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

women-all women-were the legitimate prey of the monarch. If he should see a woman that he liked he simply took her. Being married to one of his subjects was no bar. In this David has simply acted like the typical Near Eastern tyrant against whom Samuel had warned. What is amazing is that David feels the pressing need to cover-up. The fact simply underlines how different Israel's monarchy was from the institution mankind had known from time immemorial. It cannot be stressed too strongly that in Israel the king was not above the law. The Ten Commandments applied to king and commoner alike. David is fully aware that sleeping with someone else's wife is adultery, and absolutely forbidden. 11 David knows that should the story escape the closely held confines of the palace he will not be able to rely on droit du seigneur, ''the lord's right." That attitude would win no acceptance in the eyes of the public. The scandal would seriously damage his standing with the population at large. One of David's strongest cards in winning public acceptance and fostering his popularity has been his image as a religious figure, a moral man, a politician with clean hands. The religion of Israel demands no less; dirtying his hands can have incalculable consequences. So David knows he can't let the knowledge of his "roll in the hay" get around. It is shocking how cynical David has become. He seems not to feel a smidgen of guilt or remorse. All he can think about is how to avoid a scandal. And the simplest way is to pass off his child on the betrayed husband. (As to Bathsheba-we will try to get to understand her a bit later-it is here worth noting that she seems perfectly willing to go along with the deception.) So the first step must be to get Uriah back from the front as fast as possible, and back into his own bed.

So David sent to Joab [saying]: "Send me Uriah the Hittite." And Joab sent Uriah the Hittite to David Now when Uriah came to him, David asked how Joab was doing, and how the troops were getting on, and how the war was going. Then David said to Uriah: "Go down to your house and wash your feet. " 12 So Uriah departed from the king 's palace, and there followed him a gift from the king. (11:6-8) The ostensible reason for recalling Uriah from the front is to have a high-ranking officer brief the king as to the progress of the siege. David goes through the charade with Uriah. Upon the conclusion of the briefing he thanks him, and instead of feeding him and sending him right back to the front, he gives him the night offto go home and be with his wife. Then, as a mark of special favor, he sends to Uriah's house a catered dinner for two from the palace kitchen, which is probably what the term a gift from the king means. And with that David gives a sigh of relief, metaphorically speaking, and closes the book on the episode. But he has not reckoned with Uriah the Hittite. Who is Uriah? We have already spoken of how the breakup of their ancient Empire had left many Hittites of military lineage at loose ends, taking service where they could. Uriah is one of several such that took service with David. From his name, which means "The Lord is my light," we learn that he has taken upon himself the religion of the lsraelites. 13 We shall shortly learn that his faith is not pro forma; he is a devout worshiper of the God of Israel. Uriah has made a good thing of his decision to serve David. Highly competent and brave, he has risen in the ranks to high command. He has risen socially as well, marrying into the best society. It is his tragedy that his gorgeous wife has caught the king's eye, while his religious convictions and personal integrity won't permit him to be David's "fall-guy." The conjunction of these two factors will seal his fate.

11. The seventh commandment, You shall not commit adultery (Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5: 17) was both sin and capital crime in Israel (cf Leviticus 20: 10). Betrayal of the covenant of marriage was seen as a sin against God, grouped with murder as one of the worst acts a human being could do. 12. Wearing sandals, one's feet got quite dirty walking around. Thus upon coming home the first thing one would do was to wash one's feet. Thus washing one's feet was a polite way of saying, "make yourself at home." The term probably had sexual connotations as well. 13. This is the opinion of Rodak. It is always possible, of course, that Uriah was born in the land oflsrael and had been given his Jewish name by his parents, who themselves had adopted the faith oflsrael.

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

369

Uriah doesn't go home; his wife and the catered dinner await him in vain. Instead he goes to the barracks by the entrance to the palace that houses the royal guard, finds an empty bed and spends the night there. 14 David must have assigned someone to keep an eye on Uriah, for it is reported to him where Uriah spent the night. This is an unexpected development. One can sense David's exasperation as he summons Uriah for an explanation.

But Uriah slept at the entrance to the king 's palace with all the servants of his lord, and did not go down to his house. When David was told, saying: "Uriah did not go down to his house, "David said to Uriah: "Have you not come from a journey? Why didn't you go down to your house?" Uriah said to David: "The Ark, 15 and Israel and Judah are stationed at Succoth, while my lord Joab and the servants ofmy lord [the king] are encamped on the battlefield,· and I should go to my house to eat, and drink, and lie with my wife? By your life, and by your soul's life, I will not do this!" (11 :9-11) There is more to this than the conscientious officer who, as a matter of principle, refuses to live it up at home while his comrades are sweating it out in the trenches. 16 We have mentioned that in ancient Israel one was consecrated to battle. While on active duty, Israelite soldiers would not touch women. 17 It is obvious that Uriah does not see being temporarily detached from the front for the purpose of briefmg the king as a leave of absence from active duty. Some soldiers would see a mission like this as a heaven-sent opportunity to have a good time. But Uriah is not the kind of person who cuts comers or twists events to his personal advantage. He will violate neither his vows nor his sense of duty by so much as a millimeter. And to make matters worse, there is an implied rebuke lying behind. Uriah's remarks; he seems to be indirectly asking, what is the king doing living soft and easy in Jerusalem while the army is in the field? Uriah can permit himself the insinuation because this is a man who has shared with his king the rigors of the field. What can David say in reply to Uriah's taking the high ground? He has been thrown doubly on the defensive. He can't order him to sleep with his wife. All that he can do is try again, in conditions even more shameful than before.

So David said to Uriah: "Remain here today also, and tomorrow I will send you [oft]. " So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. ( 11: 12) The idea seems to be that it will take another day to prepare the dispatches that Uriah is to take back with him to the front.

And David summoned him, and he ate and drank in his presence; and he got him drunk. And in the evening he departed to lie on his bed with the servants ofhis lord; he did not go down to his house. (11: 13) That afternoon David makes his last attempt. He invites Uriah to have dinner with him; Uriah can hardly refuse, especially if it is billed as a "working dinner." In the course of the meal, to break down his inhibitions, the king plies him with wine until he gets Uriah drunk. In his befuddled state, with his highfalutin principles drowned in alcohol, he will end up taking the fall into Bathsheba's 14. One of the few new structures (besides his palace) that we know David to have built in Jerusalem was a building to house his palace guard and his rapid reaction force. 15. It seems that no sooner has David recovered the Ark, after its long exile subsequent to its capture at the battle of Eben-ezer, than he has resumed the practice of using the Ark as a morale-builder (for the militia, note, not for the regular army which presumably doesn't need it). Some people never learn! See Chapter 3. 16. One thinks of the warrior king, Charles X of Sweden, who, while his army was in the field, slept on the ground like his soldiers. 17. See Chapter 12, note 32.

370

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

bed. One wonders how David sees himself at this moment. Does he see himself as he is, a panderer debauching and betraying one of his own loyal officers? Or in his panic to implement his cover-up at all costs can he even see himself? The ploy does not work. Drunk as he is, Uriah's integrity holds. As evening falls he staggers out of the palace to return to the guardroom. With receipt of the news David knows that the cover-up has failed.

THE CONTRACT That night, as Uriah sleeps it off, David has some serious decisions to make. Having failed in his efforts to make Uriah his "fall-guy," he now drops several rungs lower on the moral ladder. Uriah must go. If he can rid himself of him, then he can marry Uriah's widow. This solution has several advantages, not the least of which are that he can publicly acknowledge the child as his and he can have Bathsheba for himself; it seems that he wants her badly. 18 That it will involve murder is a very secondary consideration. When it comes to choosing between the comfort of a king and the life of a loyal subject there can be no question as to which takes priority. So David sits down at his desk and writes a letter; in modem criminal jargon, he takes out a contract on Uriah. So in the morning David wrote a letter to Joab, and he sent it by the hand of Uriah. And in the letter he wrote: "Place Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, then draw backfrom him, that he may be struck down and die. " ( 11: 14-15)

Making Uriah the unwitting bearer of his own death warrant gives us a yet further indication of the level to which David has sunk. It also says much about the character of Uriah that David has no fear about including this letter among the dispatches entrusted to him. He knows Uriah's integrity; it will never occur to him to open and read the dispatches entrusted to him. When Joab reads this "for your eyes only" dispatch he must have thought that his uncle had taken leave of his senses. 19 That David, for some reason, wants Uriah killed he can accept. That the king orders him, Joab, to be the assassin he can swallow; he has a strong stomach. But that uncle David gives orders that the "rub-out" be blatantly carried out in the eyes of the entire army is total insanity! The public murder of one of its heroes and top commanders can break the morale of the entire army. The troops would forgive Joab a tactical fumble or a lapse of generalship; they would never forgive him the murder of one of his own staff. So Joab covers his back; he carries out the intent of his instructions while disobeying his specific orders. So during the siege of the city, Joab assigned Uriah to a sector where he knew crack [enemy] troops were stationed Now the men of the city sallied out and fought with Joab, and some of the soldiers, the men of David, fell; and Uriah the Hittite also died ( 11: 16-17)

It seems significant to me that, when the author describes the sortie of troops from the city against the siege lines, she doesn't say that they fought with the Israelites but that they fought with Joab. Is she implying that Joab took personal command of the engagement? If so, by being on the spot, he is insuring Uriah's death by committing a gross tactical error, one that Uriah probably wouldn't have committed. When the sortie is beaten off, instead of allowing the Ammonites to retire back into the city, the Israelite troops pursue them to the very gate, bringing themselves under fire from the walls. This pursuit, as we shall see, is undoubtedly ordered by Joab, and proves fatal. A hail of arrows rains down on the exposed soldiers. Uriah, who is leading the pursuit, is especially vulner18. If his original plan to palm the child off on Bathsheba's husband had worked, was it David's intention to carry on an extended affair behind Uriah's back? 19. Joab was the son of David's sister. This made David his uncle.

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

371

able. It is unlikely that he can survive such a situation and he does not. 20 That many other soldiers die with him/ 1 well-that's the way the cookie crumbles. Joab, in making his report, knows all too well that he faces serious reprimand for so uncharacteristic a blunder. Field commanders have been demoted for less. He now has to cover himself, so he briefs his courier with care.

Then Joab sent a full report of the battle to David 22 And he gave orders to the courier, saying: "When you have finished your report of the battle to the king, should the king become angry and say: 'Why did you go so near the city to fight? Didn't you know that they would shoot from the wall? Who struck down Abimelech, son ofJerubbesheth? 23 Was it not a woman who dropped an upper millstone from the wall on him at Thebez, and killed him?24 Why did you go so close to the wall?' Then say: 'Your servant, Uriah the Hittite, is also dead"' (11:18-21) In other words Joab's message to David is that "this was no blunder but simply the carrying out of your instructions. Mission accomplished."

So the courier went and told David everything that Joab sent him [to say]. The courier said to David: "When the men got the upper hand of us, sallying out against us into the field, we drove them back to the entrance of the gate. And the archers shot at your men from the wall and some of the king's men died; Uriah the Hittite also died" Then David said to the courier: "Say thus to Joab: 'Don't let this thing bother you, for the sword devours one way or another. Intensify your e.fforti5 against the city and destroy it.' Encourage him." (11:22-25) David reacts to the "bad news" very well. Instead of getting angry he accepts the losses as the fortunes of war. "Don't get discouraged by reverses," he sends back to Joab. "In battle you have to expect things like this. Press forward, persevere, and triumph." Considering the instructions the courier got from Joab, one wonders what thoughts are passing through his mind as he receives David's instructions. And now the aftermath:

Now when Uriah's wife heard that her husband, Uriah, was dead, she mournet/6 her husband And when the mourning period was over, David sent and gathered her into his house, and she became his wife and she bore him a son. (II :26-27)

20. It is likely that the entire purpose of the sortie was to lure Israelite troops within range of the archers on the wall. It is a ploy that would only work with very inexperienced officers. 21. LXX puts the casualty list as approximately 18 dead, an extravagant loss for so minor an engagement. 22. Literally Then Joab sent and told David all the things concerning the war. 23. That is Abimelech, son ofJerubbaal. Jerubbaal was the original name of Gideon, given to him by his parents. For the reason that our author purposely altered his name see Chapter 20, note 1. 24. Literally so that he died. The Judge, Gideon, was offered the crown by a grateful people but refused it. His son, Abimelech, lacked the principles of his father, and after Gideon's death attempted to force himself upon Israel as her king. This abortive attempt to establish a monarchy by force ended ignominiously at the siege of Thebez when he incautiously approached the wall and was finished off by a woman who dropped a millstone on his head. The incident, related in Judges chapter 9, seems to have become a proverbial example of, among other things, stupid recklessness. 25. Literally make your battle stronger against the city. 26. Literally made lamentation over her husband.

372

THE BATHSHEBA AFFAIR

So all's well that ends well. David has pulled it off: with the unnecessary husband out of the way, David, observing the barest minimum of decent delay, quickly marries her (the clock is ticking and he really cannot delay too long and still credibly pretend that the child was conceived after he married Bathsheba). 27 Scandal is averted; she bears him a son and they all live happily ever after. There is only one slight impediment to this Hollywood ending, someone who has been studiously avoided up to now by all concerned-the righteous God Who cannot tolerate iniquity! The author, with deafening understatement, gives voice at last to her burning indignation over the entire sordid affair: But the thing that David had done was evil in the eyes of the Lord. 28 ( 11 :27)

27. The minimum mourning period is seven days. Full propriety would require at least a month prior to marriage (see Deuteronomy 21:10-13) but it is questionable if David could afford the time. 28. The usual rendering of this verse (But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord) to my thinking unacceptably softens the radical disapproval and condemnation expressed by the author in the original Hebrew. I therefore prefer to translate the Hebrew literally.

CHAPTER29

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE As for myself, I stand as Jove's huge tree, And others are but shrubs compared to me, All tremble at my name, and I fear none, Let's see who dare impeach me for his death? Christopher Marlowe, King Edward II, Act V

Heaven is above all yet; there sits a judge That no king can corrupt. William Shakespeare, King Henry VIIL Act III

Up until the final sentence of the previous chapter the author has been studiously nonjudgmental. She has reported the facts with neither comment nor reproof. 1 But, even without that damning final sentence, there is no disguising that what is being described is a sordid tale of criminal conspiracy and murder, a tale befitting the machinations of a Mafia chieftain. The language we have been using, and will continue to use, to describe these episodes smacks of the underworld. The terminology suits the deeds. It would hardly be appropriate for a Biblical commentary to dress up criminal acts and sordid motives in elevated circumlocutions. We must not suppose that these happenings are a closely held secret. The word has gotten around within the upper echelons of government; the palace is buzzing with the gossip. This does not seem to have particularly bothered David. After all, he is the king; he is David the Great; who will dare to call him to account?

I. Despite the dry reporter-like style of the narrative, much thought and literary skill has gone into crafting it. The key to the entire chapter is the repeated use of the verb to send. It punctuates the narrative like a sinister drumbeat: David sends Joab and the army to war; David sends for someone to enquire about the bathing beauty; David sends messengers to bring her to the palace; Bathsheba sends word to David that she is pregnant; David sends a message to Joab: send me Uriah; Joab sends Uriah to David; David sends a letter to Joab; Joab sends a report to David; the courier tells David everything Joab sent him to tell; David sends for Bathsheba to take her to wife. There is an enormous hustle and bustle, the players busily moving the pawns back and forth in an amoral game of intrigue. And now the last and most ominous drumbeat of all: God sends Nathan to present the indictment!

374

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

But there is an accounting to be rendered. In a righteous universe every crime has its punishment. Though David has forsaken his God, the Lord he has forgotten neither slumbers nor sleeps. It is a man of God, a prophet, who will take his life in his hands and present David with the bill.

So the Lord sent Nathan to David (12: 1)

THE CASE FOR THE PROSECUTION We have spoken about how central the function of dispensing justice was to the role of the king, in the Ancient Near East in general and in Israel in particular. 2 Unless he should be out of Jerusalem for various reasons, David would hold court, in his function as Chief Justice of the land, on at least a weekly basis. It is in this public setting that the prophet chooses to execute his mandate. We must try to visualize the scene. The court is open to the public. Anyone with a grievance can approach the king and lay his case before him. Needless to say, the lines are long and pressures will be brought upon government officials to use their influence to intervene and get specific cases dealt with out of their turn. This must be common practice, for Nathan (in his role of "prophet in residence" is a palace functionary) occasions no surprise when he steps forward to present the case of two anonymous litigants.

So the Lord sent Nathan to David, and he came to him and said: "There were two men in a certain city, one rich and the other poor. The rich man had very large flocks of sheep and herds of cattle, but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and reared; she grew up together with him and his children. She would eat from his own morsel of bread, and drink from his cup and lie in his bosom; she was like a daughter to him. Now [one day] there came a trave/er3 to the rich man; and he was unwilling to take [anything] from his own flocks or herds to prepare [a meal] for the guest who had come to him. So he took the poor man's lamb and prepared her for the man who had come to him. " David was furious with the man, and he said to Nathan: "As the Lord lives, the man who did this deserves to die!" 4 (12:1-5) Upon hearing this tale of blatant injustice, arrogance, and oppression David explodes with fury. 5 Of course this is no judicial verdict; the rich man has committed no capital offense. David is just blowing off steam. Having vented his indignation he settles down and gives his verdict.

"He shall pay for the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing and showed no pity. "(12:6) David's verdict is that the rich man must compensate the poor man four times the value of the lamb he has taken. 6

2. See Chapter 5, note 24 and Chapter 25, note 67. 3. Literally a walker. Is the use of this rare term (this is the only time it appears in the Bible) meant to recall to us David taking a walk on his palace roof (II :2)? 4. Literally "the man who did this is a dead man!" 5. There have been numerous attempts to tum the tale into a parable exactly paralleling the events of the Bathsheba affair. But these interpretations are all forced, and moreover I do not think that any exact parallel was ever intended. If the parallel were to be exact, the rich man would have had to have the poor man killed in the story. The aim of Nathan seems to me to have been more general: to arouse righteous indignation and condemnation over an incident of crass exploitation and injustice by the rich and powerful at the expense of the poor and defenseless; of the rich and powerful taking away from the poor the little they possess of which the rich, having more than enough, have no need. See also Chapter 30, note 6.

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

375

Having delivered his verdict, we can picture David looking expectantly at Nathan for him toreveal the name of the culprit so that the sentence can be carried out. And Nathan complies:

Then Nathan said to David: "You are the man!" (12:7)

GUILTY AS CHARGED In one shattering moment, condemned by his own lips, David has been transformed from judge into defendant. Nathan also has changed roles, from advocate into prophet-prosecutor, laying the charges and delivering the verdict of the Supreme Judge, God. Into the stupefied silence the voice of the prophet rings out:

"Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: 'It was I Who anointed you king over Israel, and it was I Who delivered you out of the hand of Saul. I gave you your master's house, and your master's wives into your bosom/ and it was I Who gave you the House of Israel and of Judah - and if that were not enough, I would add to you as much more. Why then have you despised the word of the Lord, to do that which is evil in My eyes? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword! You have taken his wife to be your wife, and him you killed with the sword ofthe Ammonites!' (12:7-9) As if murder and wife stealing were not enough, Nathan charges in God's name that David has exhibited rank ingratitude. God has given him everything, has made him what he is, and this is the way he pays Him back? This is adding insult to injury! Having laid the terrible charges, Nathan's voice rises to a crescendo as he delivers God's verdict:

"'Now therefore the sword will never depart from your House, because you despised Me, and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. ' Thus says the Lord: 'Behold, I will raise up against you evil out ofyour own house, and I will take your wives before your very eyes and give them to your neighbor; he will lie with your wives in the sight of this very sun! For you did it in secret, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun!'" (12:10-12) His mandate fulfilled, the punishment decreed, Nathan falls silent. He now waits for the skies to fall. And for his part, David, his cover blown, all his secret crimes paraded in the open, what will he now do to this prophet who has stripped him naked before his court and his people? Judging by Near Eastern precedents, Nathan's life expectancy would seem to be short. 8 Nathan waits in the silence to learn his fate. Coming out of shock the king speaks-and admits everything:

Then David said to Nathan: "I have sinned against the Lord" (12: 13)

6. This verdict is based on the law: If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or sells it [so that it cannot be restored to its rightful owner] he shall pay five oxen [compensation] for the ox, and four sheep for the sheep. (Exodus 21 :3 7) 7. A king, upon ascending the throne, inherited his predecessor's harem. See Chapter 20, and especially note 29. 8. Uriel Simon quotes Herodotus (III, 32) on the dangers of upbraiding a Near Eastern tyrant: when Cambyses (a Persian emperor) murdered his brothers his sister rebuked him indirectly by stripping off the leaves of a lettuce in front of him and asking him whether the stripped lettuce looked prettier than the full one. When he answered that it was prettier when the leaves were on, she said: "But thou hast done as I did to the lettuce, and made bare the house of Cyrus." Then Cambyses was wroth, and sprang fiercely upon her, and consequently she died. (Simon, "The Poor Man's Ewe-Lamb," p. 220, note 1)

376

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

Two men face their moments of truth together, Nathan with the courage born of faith in the justice of his mission and David with horror. The heavens don't fall because, for the first time in this entire sorry affair, David sees himself as he really is, and at this vision his worldly and cynical facade crumbles. David the Great, politician par excellence and empire-builder extraordinary proves to be, at his core, a man with a guilty conscience; a man who is revolted by what he has become. It is a broken man who makes full confession before his people and his God: "Guilty as charged. " 9

THE BREAKING OF A KING Terrible as is the doom pronounced upon him, it is important to note that God does not demand David's life. David's instinctive reaction to Nathan's story, "the man who did this deserves to die," applies with added force to his case. Murder is a capital crime. 10 Yet God has reserved another fate for David. Why? Perhaps David's confession and sincere repentance (that it was sincere we will learn) are enough in God's eyes to merit remission of the deserved sentence, ''to avert the severe decree," as it is saidY Does not the prophet Ezekiel repeatedly affirm that God does not desire the death of the sinner, but that he turn from his evil way and live? 12 There is a second possibility, one much more troubling in its implications: the possibility that David is being spared for something worse. The sentence decreed has the ring of a punishment tailored to fit his crimes. David killed Uriah with the sword; now the sword shall never depart from his House. He brought evil into Uriah's family; now from the midst of his own family evil will rise up to haunt him. He took a neighbor's wife behind his back and slept with her; now a neighbor will take his wives and sleep with them publicly! The author of the Book of Samuel seems to be of the opinion that the wages of sin are that one is to be forced to live with the consequences of one's sin. 13 David's destiny from now on is to have to live out his remaining years with the effects of his great sin. And the punishment will begin immediately. Then Nathan said to David: "The Lord has remitted your sin; you will not die. However, because you have treated the Lord with absolute contempt in this thing, the son that is born to you shall die. " 14 Then Nathan went to his house. (12: 13-15)

9. At this point there occurs a break in the Masoretic Text (MT). Moshe Greenberg is of the opinion that the blank space left after the words "/ have sinned against the Lorrf' indicates that here it is appropriate to add material suitable to the theme of David's confession and repentance. Greenberg suggests the possibility that Psalm 51 was here inserted. Be that as it may, the psalm is certainly appropriate to David's mood. For those who are interested we will discuss Psalm 51 in Appendix 2 on page 545, and analyse there the significance ofDavid's statement that it is against the Lord that he has sinned. 10. So, for that matter, is adultery in Biblical law. See Leviticus 20: I 0, Deuteronomy 22:22. 11. The phrase comes from the Unetane Tokefprayer in the Jewish High Holy Day liturgy. 12. And you, son of man, say to the House of Israel: "Thus have you said: 'Our transgressions and our sins are upon us and we waste away because ofthem; how then can we live?"' Say to them: "'As !live,' says the Lord, 'I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his [evil] way and live; turn back, turn backfromyour evil ways,for why will you die, 0 House of Israel?"' (Ezekie/33:10-11). See also Ezekie/18:23, 30-32. 13. Though sin may be forgiven due to sincere repentance, the consequences of that sin, especially one done by a figure so public as David-defamation of the name of the holy God-can be erased only by public punishment. 14. The term to treat [the Lord] with contempt is the same phrase as previously used to describe the attitude of Eli's sons to the ritual of the sanctuary: the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord, for the men dealt contemptuously with the offering of the Lord. ( 1 Samuel 2: 17) See Chapter 2. This verse contains a Tikun Sofrim, an intentional scribal censuring of the text (see Glossary). The text is here rendered as in the original. The censured version, which is the basis of many translations (AV, ASV, JPS-1917 etc.) reads because you have treated the enemies ofthe Lord with absolute contempt ...

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

377

This is hitting David where it really hurts. If there is anything that David cares for more than himself it is his children. In the chapters to come the author will spell out the extent of his love for them, a love that knows no limits. David's remaining years are to be an agony of watching his family deteriorate, his best-loved children dropping by the wayside, one by one, with nothing that he can do to stop it. His fate is now to suffer a slow and lingering "death of a thousand cuts." He might have preferred a swift death to what is to come. 15 There remains one further thought regarding the outcome of this, the defining moment of David's life. He suddenly grows old. Ifthere is any truth to our speculation that David was feeling his age, and that his one night stand with Bathsheba was as much an attempt to prove to himself that his manhood was not failing as it was a surrender to naked lust, then there is a tragic irony to its outcome. Far from renewing the dynamism of his youth, it proved to be more in the nature of a last fling. This was to be David's last decisive act. From this moment onward he lapses into passivity. David the dynamic, David the decisive ceases to initiate and force events. From now on he will only react, and weakly at that. This is a shocking change that will take time for us to get used to. We will have to get acquainted with an old man, the cords of power progressively slipping from his fingers, the state increasingly run by others, and he, himself more and more manipulated by his court, a tool in the hands of his advisors. David is a broken man.

THE PUNISHMENT COMMENCES Then the Lord struck down the child that the wife of Uriah bore to David, and he became very sick. (12: 15) Note that Bathsheba is referred to as Uriah's wife. So she was when the child was conceived. Neither David's disposal of Uriah nor his hasty marriage to Bathsheba prior to her giving birth can make the child legitimate; neither in God's eyes nor in the eyes of the author.

So David entreated God for the boy; David fasted, and went in [to his room] and lay all night, clothed in sackcloth, 16 on the ground. Now his servants 17 stood over him and tried to raise him from the ground but he refused, nor would he eat food with them. Now on the seventh day the child died, and David's servants were afraid to tell him that the child had died for they said: "Behold, while the child was still alive he wouldn't listen to us when we spoke to him; how can we tell him that the child is dead? He might do something rash. " 18 But David saw his servants whispering together, and understood that the child was dead. So David said to his servants: "Is the child dead?" And they said: "He is dead" (12:1619) For seven long days the child lingers; for seven days David lies prostrate in his room, fasting and praying to God for the recovery of the child, spuming all attempts by his major-domos to raise him off the floor and get him to eat a little. So intense is his agony that the servants hesitate to inform him of the child's death lest, in his grief, he do harm to himself. But David is alert to his surroundings. From his servants' behavior he gets the message and directly confronts them, leaving them no alternative but to come out with the truth. His reaction to the news astounds them. 15. The Rabbis of the Talmud saw in the disasters that were to overpower David's later years the implementation of the sentence that he had unwittingly pronounced on himself. See the introductory paragraphs to Chapter 30, and especially note 6. 16. Reading with LXX and Q; MT omits the words clothed in sackcloth. 17. Literally the elders of his house. 18. Literally something evil.

378

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

Then David rose up from the ground, washed, and anointed himself and changed his clothes; and he went into the House of God and worshiped 19 Then he went to his own house and asked for food, which they set before him, and he ate. And his servants said to him: "What is this thing that you have done? While the child was still alive you fasted and wept, 20 but when the child died you rise and eat bread?" And he [David] said: "As long as the child was still alive I fasted and wept, for I thought: 21 'Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me and the child might live. ' But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not come back to me. "22 (12:20-23) David has not reached a point in his development where he can accept suffering in reverence and in love. That stage is still to come. Here his mortification has been less an expression of suffering and pain than an attempt to supplicate God, throwing himself on God's mercy, intensifying his dependence on God. When this fails, his response is a shrug of resignation. He submits. This is a new David.

POSTSCRIPT Nothing now is left but to pick up the pieces and go on. So David consoled Bathsheba his wife, and went into her and lay with her; and she bore a son and shi3 called his name So/omon, 24 and the Lord loved him. He sent [a message] by the hand of the prophet Nathan; and he called his name Jedidiah 25 by the grace of the Lord 26 (12:24-25) Nothing can bring back nor compensate for the dead child, the child that the wife of Uriah bore to David, but their second son is some consolation. (Note that, consequent to David's repentance and the pardon of his sin, Bathsheba is now referred to as his wife.) Nathan's message is, in effect, that God bears no grudges with regard to the child. He will be judged on his own merits. 27 Though no one knows it, he has a great future awaiting him. Before we leave this tragic episode there are two items worth pondering. The first is the nature of Bathsheba. We know surprisingly little about her when we consider what a critical role she played, and especially when we remember the future importance of her son, Solomon. We are told almost nothing about her; and we have no alternative but to learn about her indirectly. First, let us summarize what we already know: she is extremely beautiful, she belongs to one of the best families in the capital and she was married to a war hero. As we have observed her during this drama, we have noted her total passivity. With one exception, she never acts. She is acted upon. She is observed, sent for, bedded, sent home, taken to wife, and so on. The only action she takes is to send David word that she is pregnant. This impression is reinforced when we observe her through the eyes of another writer 19. Literally prostrated himself. 20. Reading with LXX and Targ.; MT reads For the living child you fasted and wept. 21. Literally said. 22. That is, life is a one-way street. Only with my death will we be reunited in Sheol. 23. So Targ., Syr., Q and MT vowelization (Keri); the consonantal MT (Ketib) reads and he [David] called his name. It seems to have been the prerogative of the mother to name her child. See Prologue, note 25. 24. From the root Shalom, peace, and probably meaning "His (God's) peace." 25. Meaning "beloved of the Lord," or possibly "the friend of the Lord." The name is a pledge that this second child will not go the way of the first. 26. The last phrase is rendered in accordance with the suggestion of P. Kyle McCarter Jr., based on parallel Phoenician inscriptions (McCarter, Anchor Bible: II Samuel, p. 304). 27. This will be made explicit to Solomon in a dream he will have at Gibeon, and later while building the Temple. (1 Kings 3:14, 6:11-13)

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

379

(the author of the Book of Kings). 28 Here she is an older woman, yet still she never initiates anything. She is manipulated by courtiers; told what to do, she always complies. She is ever the passive object of the wills, passions and acts of others. And yet-this picture will not do. For some strange reason, while doing nothing and remaining totally passive, she always seems to come out on top; she always ends up with what she wants. 29 Always. And as she moves through her era death stalks behind her. Everyone who stands in her way dies violently! She never raises a finger, but somehow the way is always cleared for her. 30 With this in mind let us review the part played by Bathsheba in the "affair." She first appears naked, taking a bath in the privacy of her rooftop. (It is true that the palace overlooks the roof, but could she reasonably expect peeping toms?) She is summoned by the king. (Could she reasonably tum down a royal invitation?) She is bedded by him. (How could she help herself, alone as she was?)31 After being sent home she makes no move to follow up in any way. (She had to let David know that he had put her in a family way; it would eventually show and it was only fair to let him know so it wouldn't be a surprise, wasn't it?) She never tells her husband any lies (she will never see him again), 32 and she has no part in his death. (How could she know what David was doing?) And after her husband's death it is David who sweeps her up and marries her. (She could hardly refuse his proposal; he was the father, after all, and she could hardly be expected to head a single-parent family.) All in all she is more sinned against than sinning. The other episodes of her life that are recorded are similar (they will be examined in the Postscript to this book). All these episodes give one food for thought. Furthermore, if we bear in mind the way the author differentiates by gender her treatment of the principal actors in her drama, then the treatment she accords to Bathesheba is unique. In the Introduction we pointed out that it is the male figures who carry the historical-political story line; every male actor is critical to the plot line and the omission of the least of them would make the tale, as it is being told, unworkable. The female figures, on the other hand, are superfluous to the political plot and their omission would not be felt. 33 The one exception to this general rule is Bathsheba. She is the only woman who is indespensible on the political level of the Book; she is moreover the most manlike figure among all the women who people Samuel, functioning exclusively on the political level. There is no escaping the fact that in achieving her aims she is the most successful political manipulator in the entire drama. She not only rivals her principal male contemporaries but, when measured in the coin of success and the price paid for it, one can contend that she surpasses even that supreme politician, David. As she is presented to us she is the ultimate teflon personality: not a speck of blame adheres to her as she sails through life achieving everything she desires. I suggest that Bathsheba was far from being the ninny that she is so often taken to be. The second item to consider takes us back more than half a dozen chapters in the Book of Samuel:

28. See Postscript: The Death of the King. 29. She gets David and becomes the king's favorite wife; she gets her son Solomon crowned king to succeed David; she gets Adonijah, the only serious rival to Solomon for the throne, purged along with all of his main supporters. 30. It is true that we are generalizing from sparse evidence; she only appears in three separate episodes which have been recorded in Scripture, but then it only takes three points to plot a curve. I think that the evidence, from diverse points of view and in radically different circumstances, is sufficiently consistent to allow reasonably reliable deductions. 31. We have no intimation in the text that she resisted David's advances. 32. This is the only point where the text itself raises serious questions. David's entire attempt to palm off their child on Uriah presupposes Bathsheba's cooperation in the coverup. But in the event, Uriah's refusal to spend the night at home took her off the hook. 33. The task of the female figures is to carry the moral theme of the Book, and to provide the basis for an alternative to the male-created power structure that dominates the world.

380

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

Now after he came from Hebron, David took additional concubines and wives from Jerusalem, 34 and yet more sons and daughters were born to him. And these are the names of[the sons] that were born to him in Jerusalem: Shammua, and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon, and Ibhar, and Elishua, and Nepheg, and Japhia, and Elishama, and Eliada, and Eliphelet. (5:13-16) The sons are, of course, listed in their birth order. What is striking is the name of the son born immediately before Solomon. His name means "given," presumably by God. The full form of this name, for example Nethaneel, Elnathan (both meaning given by God) and Nethaniah (given by the Lord) etc. are quite common Biblical names. The shortened form, Nathan, is rare. 35 Considering the rarity ofthe name, we might entertain the possibility that this child (of another of David's wives-not Bathsheba) was born between the time that the prophet Nathan called David down over his affair with Bathsheba and the birth of her second child, Solomon. Furthermore, that David named him after the prophet who had called him to order. Now it was not the normal practice in the Biblical era to name children after other people. To do so could only be the result of a deep sense of obligation. Of course all this is no more than speculation, and the conjunction of name and time may be no more than coincidence, yet if there is any substance to this conjecture it implies an overpowering sense of contrition. The thought of David having one of his sons named in such a way as to provide a daily living reminder of his sin and its subsequent denunciation quite boggles the imagination. Was this David's way of thanking Nathan for calling him up short? One thing is certain; Nathan never suffered for his brashness. He remained a trusted confidant of David to the very end of his reign. 36

PLAYBACK In Chapter 26 we discussed the conclusion of the Ammonite campaign as part of our analysis of the larger picture of the Aramean wars and David's greatest victories. We did so to round out this overview, but our author had a different idea. She opted to break up the connected narrative of the imperial campaigns in order to focus on the great personal turning point that occurred in David's life while the war was progressing. Only after having related his confession and the start of his punishment does the author condescend to return to the war and wind it down. She had good reason so to arrange her narrative. Knowing what we now know, the closing days of the war will be seen by us in a different light than previously. Then we saw it as the crowning triumph of the Great Empire Builder. Let us rewind the tape and play back the last days of the Ammonite campaign and see how it looks to us now.

Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and captured the capital. 37 And Joab sent messengers to David, saying: "I have fought against Rabbah; I have also captured the City of Waters. Now muster the rest of the troops, encamp against the city and take it, lest I capture the city and it be called by my name." (12:26-28) Joab, we now know, was David's accomplice in the murder of Uriah. Since that nasty piece of work David has married Bathsheba, she has had a child, Nathan has publicly accused the king of his crimes and David has broken down and confessed. Since then he has withdrawn into himself, leaving the conduct of the war to his general. In effect, the great warlord has abdicated his role as Com-

34. I Chronicles I4:3 reads in Jerusalem. 35. In fact, with the exception of Nathan the prophet and David's son only three persons in the Bible bear the name: the father (or brother) of one of David's officers, an early member of the tribe of Judah, and a prominent citizen among the returnees from Babylon in the time of Ezra the Scribe. 36. I am indebted to Harvey Meirovich for drawing my attention to these possibilities. 37. Literally, the royal city. I Chronicles 20: l reads And Joab smote Rabbah and destroyed it.

BEFORE THE BAR OF JUSTICE

381

mander in Chief. Seen against this background, Joab's message to David takes on a different meaning. Joab is telling David to get a grip on himself. Reading between the lines, he is saying something like this to David: "You were tough enough to order me to murder one of my best and bravest field commanders, and I was thick-skinned enough to do your dirty work for you. Now don't go all to pieces over this. Be a man! Take the field and finish the job out here. If you don't take hold of yourself! will end up being the Commander in Chief in name, as well as in fact." The message gets through and prods David out of Jerusalem. 38 Journeying to Succoth he assumes command of the reserve army stationed there and with them is on hand for the fall of Rabbah. This move is little more than a ceremonial parade. The city is already nine-tenths vanquished and, as Joab has made clear in his message, he is perfectly capable of finishing the job by himself.

So David assembled all the reserves, advanced to Rabbah, and fighting against it, took it. And he took the crown from off the head of their king/ 9 its weight was one talent ofgold, 40 and in it was a precious stone. 41 It was placed on David's head He also took out of the city an immense amount of booty. Now as to the people who were in it [the city], he brought them out and put them [to labor] with saws, and iron picks, and iron axes; and set them to work making bricks. 42 And thus he did to all the cities of the Ammonites. Then David and all the troops returned to Jerusalem. (12: 29-31) In the event it is Joab that has defeated the Ammonites, taken the city and, as the Chronicler informs us, has put the city to the sword. And it is Joab who has arranged for David to be present, stage-managing the ceremonies. From being the one who carried out the king's orders Joab is now the one who is in control. David has sunk into passivity. The great change in David is beginning to manifest itself. David will never take the field again. In the last great war of the period, the Edomite War, he sits it out. It is Joab who directs the war; it is his younger brother, Abishai, who commands the forces in the field and defeats the Edomites. 43 David the warrior is now a thing of the past.

38. The message, for all its undertones, is polite and solicitous. As the years pass and David's situation deteriorates, such hints will no longer work. Only brutal language and overt threats will be able to goad David into necessary action. The task of manipulating the dysfunctional monarch, saving him from his own folly and keeping his head above water will become progressively more difficult for those about him. It is much to the credit of that brutal man, Joab, that despite the ever-increasing burden he will have to bear, and the many attractive options that he will have, he will remain unswervingly loyal to his uncle David to the very end. 39. LXX reads the crown of Milcom. Milcom was the name of the chief deity of the Ammonites. This may have been the name by which the royal crown was known. 40. The crown was made of solid gold weighing approximately 66 pounds. 41. Reading with Syr., Targ., Vulg., and 1 Chronicles 20:2; MT lacks the words and in it was. 42. Literally, made them work with brick-molds. 43. See Chapter 25, notes 50 and 51.

CHAPTER30

RAPE AND REVENGE: A TALE OF TWO BROTHERS AND THEIR SISTER Things fall apart; the center cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full ofpassionate intensity. W. B. Yeats, The Second Coming H. S. Pyper, in his extremely perceptive work David as Reader, points out that in Biblical narrative an oath taken in the name of the Lord is absolutely binding and always, in one way or another, comes to pass. 1 This was something that the original audience for the Book of Samuel understood perfectly, but of which most modern readers are unaware. Thus we miss the powerful sense of suspense that gripped the original audiences of this section of our book. As we remember, David, upon hearing Nathan's "case," exploded with an oath in the name of the Lord: "As the Lord lives, the man who did this deserves to die! 2 He shall pay for the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing and showed no pity." (12:5-6) In Biblical times readers of the Book, or those hearing it narrated, would have recognized this instantly as an irrevocable oath that will inevitably come to pass, and since there is no "rich man," the story applying to David himself, the oath applies to him. And so does the appended sentence of fourfold penalty because he did this thing!3 But how this sentence will be carried out is not specified. The punishments for desecrating God's name are spelled out by Nathan; the way the oath will be fulfilled is left open. And in this lay the suspense for the Biblical readers; for while the oath will be ful-

1. He also makes a collateral point: that oaths sworn in the name of God (as opposed to those sworn in the name of the Lord) are not absolute. Sometimes they come to pass and sometimes they don't. Furthermore, they always can be trumped by an oath in the name of the Lord. Two examples out of many are Saul's oath condemning Jonathan (I Samue/14:44) and David's oath swearing to kill Nahal and all the males in his household (I Samuel 25:21-22), neither of which are fulfilled-see Chapters 8 and 15. (Pyper, David as Reader, p. 140-146) 2. Literally "the man who did this is a dead man!" i.e., he is as good as dead. The comparable modem colloquialism would be: "he is dead meat!" 3. What this thing is, Nathan then proceeds to spell out: taking Uriah's wife and murdering Uriah.

384

RAPE AND REVENGE

filled, the way in which it will be so is far from obvious, and almost never in the way it was intended or originally perceived. 4 As the author presents the tragedy of David's fall, and as her Biblical audience understood it, the theme of the narrative is "crime and punishment," with David having passed sentence on himself and having decreed his own punishment. The physical death sentence he pronounced on himself is commuted by Nathan in the name of God, but the David that we have known does die. Internally David breaks. We have noted (note 2 above) that the force of David's oath is that "the man who did this is dead meat," and "dead meat" is what David is from this moment onward; the shell of a man with his spirit broken. As to the fourfold penalty that David decreed, four lambs for the one stolen, this becomes one of the central themes of the remainder of the narrative. 5 The first "lamb," David's child born of his adulterous union with Bathsheba, has already been "paid." There are three to go. 6

THE ROT SETS IN We return to the tale of events unfolding around David the king. We remember that while remorse and repentance hold primacy of place in the inner life of man, they cannot undo the consequences of our deeds. In our world acts irrevocably have a ripple effect, the wavelets spreading remorselessly despite all efforts to prevent them. David is doomed to live with the consequences of his crimes, and we now begin to examine these consequences and how they play themselves out. We have already touched upon the effect on David of having his crimes brought home to himhow Nathan's denunciation broke his spirit-the terrible sense of guilt and remorse that quenched the fire that had provided the driving force in his life. But there is a second immediate consequence, no less serious than the first-David has lost his moral authority. David had always been more than a politician and warrior; he had been a religious figure and a moral force. He was the anointed of the Lord; his clean hands always serving as his strongest suit. It was this, more than his political acumen or military proficiency, which had brought all Israel into his camp. It was his moral authority that had insured the support that had made all his victories and political accomplishments possible. He had always appeared to everyone bigger than life. And now the shining facade has been publicly stripped away, revealing not simply a flawed mortal but a common criminal, an adulterer and a murderer. This lost moral authority will never be regained during his lifetime. No longer a figure to emulate or a leader to blindly follow, he will have to hold on to his throne and rule as the common run of rulers do, by political maneuvering and by force. This failure is the fountainhead of a dry rot that begins 4. Much a similar technique is used by Shakespeare in his play Macbeth. It was accepted convention in the Elizabethan world that predictions made by witches and wizards were true but not reliable. They would inevitably come to pass, but never in the form that they seemed to imply. The unsuspected form the fulfillment of the witches' prophecies took surprised not only Macbeth but the play's audiences as well. The suspense of waiting to see how they would "tum out" added appreciably to the tension of the audience, and to its enjoyment. 5. The law upon which David based his judgment (Exodus 21:37) applies to animals that cannot be restored to their original owner, having been either sold or slaughtered. The "lamb" in this case, Bathsheba, cannot be restored; she is already David's wife, and besides Uriah is dead. So David, by his own verdict, will have to pay with four "lambs" of his own: four of his own children. That this was hardly David's intention when he delivered his verdict is obvious. 6. This interpretation was expressed by the Rabbis of the Talmud who saw in the disasters that were to overpower David's later years the implementation of the sentence that he had unwittingly pronounced on himself: "He shall pay for the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing and showed no pity." To paraphrase the Talmud: the repayment for the lamb (Bathsheba) that he took from Uriah was to be repaid by four lambs of his own, in the form of four of his own children: the child of Bathsheba, his first born Amnon and his third son Absalom who all die, and his daughter Tamar, who is raped and thrown to the dogs (Tractate Yoma 22b). Actually a fourth son of David's, Adonijah, is later to meet a bloody end, but this was outside our author's ken. Hugh Pyper makes a strong case for this Talmudic interpretation indeed being the intention of the author.

RAPE AND REVENGE

385

to blight the land. As is the nature of these corruptions, its first manifestations appear in David's own family. We return to the terrible judgment pronounced over David by Nathan:

"Now therefore the sword will never depart from your House, because you despised Me, and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. " Thus says the Lord: "Behold, I will raise up against you evil out ofyour own House ... " (12:10-11)

It is instructive to consider how little thought we give to the effects of our behavior upon our children. For better or for worse parents are always their children's prime instructors. It is from their parent's behavior that they learn, not from their moralizing. And it is amazing how perceptive children are; how much they note and what conclusions they draw. David has just given his sons two very important lessons in royal behavior: if you want a woman, take her; if someone gets in your way, kill him. David's sons are to prove apt pupils. That there is a further lesson, a lesson about what happens to one's inner being when one does these things, is completely lost upon his children. Never particularly close to their extremely busy father, they are not privy to his inner life. 7 It is his public actions that they take to heart, and it is the lessons they learn from them that foment the evil that is to wrack the House of David.

RAPE! Arnnon, it is, David's oldest son, who absorbs the first lesson.

Now [some time] afterward, this is what happened: Absalom, David's son, had a beautiful sister whose name was Tamar, and Amnon, [who was also] David's son, fell in love with her. Now Amnon desired his sister Tamar8 so much that he became sick; because she was so youn/ and it seemed toAmnon impossible to do anything to her. (13:1-2) As far as age goes Tamar is a "Lolita," barely entering adolescence, but Arnnon is no Humbert Humbert, no middle-aged lecher. Amnon must be in his early twenties at the oldest, yet it is Tamar's very youth that so inflames him. But there is no way that he can have her, licitly or illicitly. As his half-sister a sexual relationship with her would be incestuous and besides, there is no way that he can

7. When young, the children lived with their mothers in the women's quarters. Upon reaching maturity, each son was given his own private quarters. They saw their father almost exclusively in formal settings: at dinner (a daily formal banquet, see Chapter 26), at court receptions and other court events, and as for the oldest sons, at cabinet meetings (see Chapter 25). There would have been little opportunity to develop a close relationship unless David would have found the time and made the effort. It seems that he had more pressing matters on his mind. 8. Tamar was Absalom's sister, as they shared the same father and mother: David and Maacah, princess of Geshur. She was Amnon's half-sister: they had the same father but different mothers. (see Chapter 20). 9. The Hebrew word used, bitulah, is usually translated as "virgin," but Gordon Wenham has demonstrated persuasively that the term means "an adolescent, nubile girl" in the cognate languages of Akkadian and Ugaritic, and that this is the meaning of the word in the Bible. (Wenham, "Betulah 'A Girl of Marriageable Age"') "There is no word in the Near Eastern languages that by itself means virgo intacta"(C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook, p. 378a, as quoted in Wenham, Op. Cit., p. 327). In Semitic languages the way the term "virgin" is expressed is by the circumlocution "she had not had carnal relations with a man" (Genesis 24:16, Judges 11:39, 21;12 etc.) What we are being told is that Tamar is an adolescent who has just entered puberty, about 12-14 years of age (girls in those days entered puberty later than they do today, probably due to a diet less rich in proteins), and it is her extreme youth that has so inflamed her half-brother Amnon. That she undoubtedly was a virgin is besides the point.

386

RAPE AND REVENGE

get to her. Men are forbidden entry into the women's quarter of the palace where she lives with her mother. The hopelessness of his thwarted passion is making him ill. Now Amnon had a friend whose name was Jonadab, the son of Shimeah, David's brother; Jonadab was a very clever man. And he said to him: "Why, 0 son of the king, are you [becoming] ever more haggard day by day? 10 Won't you tell me?" And Amnon said to him: "I am in love with Tamar, Absalom's sister. "And Jonadab said to him: "Go lie down on your bed and pretend to be ill. When your father comes to see you, say to him: 'Please let my sister Tamar come and make me something to eat; let her prepare the sick-food in my sight that I may see it [being prepared], and be served by her and eat.'" (13:3-5)

Here we are being introduced to another member of the family, Amnon's cousin Jonadab, one of those "fixer" types that are so adept at attaching themselves to persons in power. This manipulator now sets about making himself useful to the heir apparent to the throne, by arranging the debauchment of his cousin, Tamar. 11 To understand this "clever" man's advice we have to know something about the sickbed practices of those days. In contradistinction to meals prepared for healthy persons, the food served to someone sick had to be prepared by a specially trained woman in the invalid's presence. This invalid diet was called biryah which we have rendered in the translation as "sick-food" or "invalid food." This diet consisted of cakes, called lebibot, which were felt to be easy on the constitution and to have therapeutic value. It was deemed a vital part of the therapy that the invalid's meal be prepared right before him. Thus such a request from one who seemed ill was a natural one that would awake no suspicion, and was likely to gain the approval of their father. 12 The whole point of the exercise is to get Tamar out of the women's quarters and into Amnon's house where he could have access to her. The ruse is successful. So Amnon lay down and pretended to be sick, and when the king came to see him, Amnon said to the king: "Please let my sister Tamar come and prepare a couple of cakes in my sight, and serve them to me. " 13 Then David sent [word] home to Tamar, saying: "Please go to the house ofyour brother Amnon and prepare invalid food for him." So Tamar went to her brother Amnon 's house, and he was lying down. She took dough, and kneaded it, and made invalid food in his sight and cooked the cakes. 14 Then she took the pan and poured them out before him, but he refused to eat; and Amnon said: "Clear the room " 15 So everyone left. Then Amnon said to Tamar: "Bring the sick-food into the [bed]room and serve me yourself " 16 So Tamar took the cakes she had made and brought them to her brother Amnon in the [bed]room. (13:6-10)

Note the constant stress on their relationship. Again and again it is stressed that Amnon is Tamar's brother, and that she is Amnon's sister. Being close family, brother and sister, Tamar was felt to be in good hands. That is why David permitted her to leave the women's quarters unchaperoned. That is why all the visitors, friends, and staff cleared out and left them alone; in those days it would have been unthinkable to leave a young adolescent girl alone with a man who wasn't a close relative. But what was more natural than to leave her to nurse her own brother?

10. Literally in the morning and in the [following] morning. II. Jonadab is the first cousin of all the players in this sordid saga: Amnon, Absalom, and Tamar. 12. It would seem that the king's daughters were given special training in housekeeping and nursing skills. 13. Literally that I may eat sick-food from her hand. 14. The lebibot were pan-cooked and were probably something like sweet dumplings. 15. Literally "Send out everyone from me." 16. Literally that I may eat sick-food from your hand.

RAPE AND REVENGE

387

Now when she offered them to him he grabbed her and said to her: "Come sister, lie with me!" She said to him: "Don't brother! Don't force me! Such things are not done in Israel! Don't do this vile thing! As for me, where will I carry my shame? And you, you will become like one of the vile men in Israe/! 17 Now speak to the king; he will not refuse me to you. " (13:11-13)

Tamar is desperately trying to talk her way out of a terrifying situation, appealing in short, gasping phrases as she struggles-to his better nature, to his pity, to fear of social ostracism, and even dangling before him the hope oflegitimate marriage; if he only tells her father how much he loves her the king will bend the rules and let them wed! 18 She is grasping at straws. Amnon has her where he wants her and is in no mood to temporize.

But he would not listen to her; and being stronger than she, he overpowered her and raped her. (13: 14)

REVULSION If it is true that the source of Amnon' s behavior is the example of his father, that royal personages can with total impunity do whatever they want with women, yet there remains a quantum gap between the behavior of David and that of his son. While our text does not go into details about the bedding of Bathsheba, there is every reason to believe that, while Bathsheba may not have overtly seduced David, she did not resist his advances either. All the evidence at our disposal indicates that David always behaved like a gentleman with women. I think it is reasonable to believe, on the basis of the evidence, that had Bathsheba resisted he would not have forced her, but rather have resigned himself to having been rejected with as good grace as he could muster. Especially after Michal had thrown in his face the insult that he was behaving like a guttersnipe, his pride would never have allowed him to act like "a vile man." 19 To force a woman against her will was simply beneath him. It is when we come to the next scene of the "Amnon-Tamar affair" that the gap between father and son opens into an abyss.

Then Amnon hated her with a very great hatred; indeed, the hatred with which he hated her was greater than the love with which he had loved her. So Amnon said to her: "Get out! "20 She said to him: "Don't [do this], my brother, for this wrong, in sending me away, is

17. The doers of "vile things," perpetrators of indecent acts and sexual violence, moral pariahs; thus Tamar is saying that if Amnon carries out his intent he will be committing both rape and incest, vile deeds that would permanently stain him. 18. The plea, of course, is silly. Marriage between even half-brothers and sisters is defined as incest and forbidden by Biblical law under the harshest of strictures (Leviticus 18:9, ll; 20: 17; Deuteronomy 27:22). There was no way such a marriage could legally be contracted. Tamar is willing to say anything and promise anything to play for time. Surprisingly, some ancient Talmudic rabbis and a surprising number of modern scholars actually have taken Tamar seriously, concluding that brother-sister marriages were possible in those days. Older people, ancient and modern alike, seem to have forgotten how many silly things "teeny-boppers" can come up with. But it does say much about the moral tone in the post Bathsheba-affair court that such a suggestion could even be made! At any rate, Amnon, in his early twenties, is not so naive; he gives short shrift to Tamar's hysterical babbling and gets on with the business at hand. 19. Even in the violent confrontation with Michal, when she hurt him as deeply as she could, he never laid hands on her; neither did he divorce her or throw her out. He simply turned his back on her and refused to have any further relations with her. See Chapter 23. 20. Literally "Get up. Go!"

388

RAPE AND REVENGE

greater than the other that you did with me! "21 But he would not listen to her, and calling his servant who attended him, said: "Do me the favor of throwing this out of here, 22 and bolt the door behind her." Now she was wearing a robe of many colors-for that is the way the young daughters of the king were dressed, in robes-so his servant put her out and bolted the door behind her. Then Tamar took ashes and put them on her head, and tore the robe she was wearing, and putting her hand upon her head went her way, screaming as she went. (13:15-19)

His passion spent, lust is replaced by loathing. We often make the mistake of thinking that hatred is the opposite of love. It is not. The opposite of love is indifference. Love and hate are both intense passions, and observers of human behavior have often commented on how quickly they can interchange. All the more so can lust, when sated, be transmuted into loathing (for though Amnon thought what he felt was love, his desire was a far cry from that passion celebrated in the Song of Songs-lust is a much more apt term). Having had his way with his sister, Amnon possibly feels let down. Forcing a wildly resisting virgin may have been not at all what he had anticipated. And now the possible repercussions of his rash act, up to now studiously ignored, rise up in all their fearful permutations. And it is Tamar who is to blame. She seduced him into this. He can no longer bear the sight of her. Our reconstruction of Amnon's possible frame of mind need not be fully on the mark, but his actions, as reported, are stark indeed. Having had his way with Tamar, she has served her purpose and can now be discarded. With a callous brutality he orders her out. When she has the temerity to protest this new degradation/3 he has her thrown out of the house. His language is instructive-he refers to her not as a person but as a thing: "throw this out of here, " indicating Tamar with a gesture. The soiled rag is to be disposed of so as not to dirty up the house. Finding herself in the street, reality revealing itself more horrid than her worst nightmares, Tamar bewails her lot in the forms of mourning current in those days. She rips the beautiful robe she is wearing, which not an hour ago served as a symbol of status, commanding respect. Scooping ashes from the fireplace where she had herself cooked the special cakes for the supposedly invalid brother/4 she pours them on her head. And hand on her head she drags her steps away from her brother's barred door, screaming as she goes, bewailing her miserable fate. 25 Where could she go? Where could she "carry her shame?" She was irredeemably soiled, disgraced. She does not return to the palace-is it because she cannot bear to face the people there, or 21. Reading with LXX and Vulg; MT reads Because this great wrong, sending me away, than the other you did with me. 22. Literally Please put this [female] out from me. 23. The penalty for the rape of an unmarried woman in ancient Israel was a massive fine, and being forced to marry the woman. Furthermore he may not send her away all the days of his life (Deuteronomy 22:28-29), that is, the rapist has forfeited his right of divorce. Rape a girl and you're stuck with her for life. Thus Amnon's sending Tamar away is not only brutal callousness but a violation of the legal norms of society. Of course, being brother and sister, they could not be married. Did Tamar, in the aftermath of the rape, begin to take her own desperate suggestion seriously-that the king, their father, could somehow bend the rules and cover her "disgrace" through marriage? Or was this simply her despairing protest over Amnon's adding insult to the injury he had done her. Tamar now was bitterly aware that her admonition "Such things are not done in Israel" had been pitifully naive. She was now beginning to realize that not only were they done, but that her abuser was more than likely to get away with it. Note that at no time does it occur to Tamar to threaten her brother with their father's fury; events were to prove her completely justified. 24. Food preparation was done within the house but actual cooking was usually performed over an outside fireplace so as not to befoul the interior with smoke. Effective chimneys that would draw smoke had not yet been invented. 25. These all were the standard outward expressions of mourning the death of a close family member (see Chapter 21, note 12). The same forms were used in cases of national calamity and personal disaster that did not involve death. For examples see Chapters 3 and 19 for responses to national calamity.

RAPE AND REVENGE

389

because she is certain that they would not have her? We have no way of knowing. All that we do know is that she ends up on her brother Absalom's doorstep.

And her brother Absalom said to her: "Was it Amnon your brother who was with you? But for now, my sister, hold your peace; he is your brother. Don't take this thing to heart. " So Tamar remained, a desolate woman, 26 in her brother Absalom's house. Now when King David heard all these things he was furious, but he did not rebuke his son Amnon27 for he loved him, because he was his firstborn. 28 And Absalom said nothing to Amnon, neither bad nor good, for Absalom hated Amnon because he had violated his sister Tamar. ( 13 :20-22) When he learns about what has been going on David is furious, 29 but he does absolutely nothing -neither for Tamar nor against Amnon. He doesn't even lecture him on right and wrong like old Eli lectured his sons. In the first place Amnon is his favorite and he can't say no to him; he doesn't want to dampen his darling's spirits ("Ah, these high-spirited boys, what will they be up to next?"). But in the second place, who is he to take a "holier than thou" stance? Amnon is just the kind of son to throw his father's affairs back into his face. So this paragon of a parent keeps quiet and sits on his hands. Parent? Nowhere in the chapter do any of his children refer to him as their father. Nor, tellingly, does the author. To each other Amnon, Absalom and Tamar are brother and sister while the author, in her comments, insists on these relationships. Yet David is always referred to as the King, King David or just David. Never do they refer to him as father. 30 The implication is clear: his children's perception that he is no father to them is true. While David turns his back on the entire affair Absalom nurses his hatred. In the East, to this day, the rape of a close relative is an offence that calls for blood. It is the father who should have been his daughter's protector and, failing that, the punisher of her ravisher. As David has become both besotted with his oldest son and impotent as a parent, unable to assert any authority over his criminally spoiled children, it is the brother that will have to avenge his sister's despoilment. Giving his disgraced and desolate 31 sister a home, and counseling her not to make the scandal worse by calling attention to it (don't make a row by harping on incest) Absalom lays his plans. Keeping his fury hidden behind a public facade of indifference, he sits back to play a waiting game. Revenge is a dish best eaten cold.

REVENGE! For two years Absalom bides his time, until any suspicion that he might bear a grudge for what has been done to his sister is long forgotten. Then, his plans laid, he strikes. After two full yearl2 Absalom was having his sheep shorn in Baal-hazor, which is near Ephraim, and Absalom invited all the king's sons. Now Absalom came to the king and said:

26. Reading with LXX and Vulg.; MT reads and desolate. 27. Literally He did not sadden the spirit ofAmnon, his son. 28. Reading with LXX and Vulg., MT lacks the phrase but he did not rebuke his son Amnonfor he loved him, because he was his firstborn.

29. The text gives no indication whether, by all these things, the cause of David's fury was what had happened to Tamar, or that he, David, had been tricked by Amnon into serving as his pimp. 30. The only reference in the entire chapter to David as a father is made by that wily schemer, Jonadab (13:5). And this reference seems highly ironic in that it is used in the context of proposing a plot to dupe and manipulate David into performing a most unfatherly act-delivering his daughter to debauchment! 31. The term " a desolate woman" has the sense of an unmarried and childless woman with no prospects of marriage or family; cf. Isaiah 54: I. 32. Literally two years of days.

390

RAPE AND REVENGE

"Behold, your servant is having his sheep shorn; may it please the king and his courfu to come with your servant. " But the king said to Absalom: "No, my son, we mustn't all come with you, lest we be a burden to you. " So though he pressed him he refUsed to go, but blessed him. Then Absalom said: "If not, then please let Amnon, my brother, come with us [in your stead]." And the king said to him: "Why should he come with you?" But Absalom pressed him; so he sent Amnon and all the king's sons with him. (13:23-27) Absalom, we are learning, is not only an excellent dissimulator; he is also a master of indirection. He pretends that his only aim is to have the king and the top court officials as his guests of honor at his big celebration34 (knowing full well that the king has neither the time nor the inclination for such a break in his schedule). David, for his part, is only trying to let Absalom down easily when he pretends that the reason he won't attend is because he doesn't want him to incur the heavy expense of entertaining the king and his court. Absalom pretends to be devastated at being turned down by his father, and can only be pacified by getting him to send the heir apparent, his older brother Amnon, as a stand-in for the king. 3

Now Absalom prepared a feast like a feast [fit for] a king. 36 And Absalom commanded his personal attendants, 37 saying: "Take note! When Amnon 's heart is merry with wine, and I give you the order to strike Amnon down, then kill him! Don't be afraid; is it not I who has commanded you? Be courageous and brave men!" So the attendants ofAbsalom did to Amnon as Absalom had ordered Then all the sons of the king rose and fled, mounted on their mules. 38 (13:28-29) Absalom waits until Amnon is drunk and off guard, then-at the signal-the men close in on him and the knives strike home. Suddenly sobered by their brother's scream, and the sight of him wallowing in his blood, the royal guests bolt for their steeds, mount, and in panic race for the safety of Jerusalem. Tamar is avenged! Let us pause for a moment in this grisly tale to take note of two not unimportant aspects of the events we have been following. The first relates to the character of Absalom. Like his brother Amnon he is self-centered, devious and vicious. Like him he holds his father in contempt and is adept at manipulating him. And like him he has learned his lessons well-in this case, what is to be done to people who stand in your way. For make no mistake, though the author insists that revenge for the wrong done to Tamar is the main motive for the murder, Absalom is not blind to the fact that, with Amnon dead, he is now next in line to the throne. 39 To what extent Absalom has been serving his outraged 33. Literally Please, let the king and his servants 34. The conclusion of shearing the sheep was a joyous festival (see Chapter 15) which was celebrated with feasting and drinking. Note how close all these top personages are to the soil. We have already met Saul, the king elect, plowing his field, and now we find a royal prince that has a life outside the palace, that of a sheep rancher. These are not the only examples in our book. 35. Once again David has been duped. The last time he sent Tamar to her fate, now he has sent Amnon to his. 36. Reading with LXX and Vulg. (MT lacks this phrase); the Hebrew term mishteh, here rendered Feast, really means a banquet which involves heavy drinking. We recall a similar feast at Carmel, where Abigail found her husband far along in drink (see reference in note 34 above). As we shall see, the heavy drinking is a key element in the plot. 37. The word used is "his naarim," which, we have already learned, is the term used for special troops. Were they his bodyguards? Certainly they were a pack of bravos, willing and ready to murder for their master. 38. In the Ancient Near East, and more recently in parts of Europe as well, the mule (the product of a cross between a male donkey and a female horse) was reserved for the exclusive use of royalty: the king and his immediate family. Everyone else rode donkeys. For a commoner to be granted the right to ride a mule was considered an extraordinary privelege. 39. As we remember, from the list of boys born to David long ago in Hebron, Amnon was the oldest, followed by Abigail's son Chileab (or Daniel, as he is called in Chronicles), followed by Absalom. Amnon is now dead.

RAPE AND REVENGE

391

"sense of justice" and to what extent he has been serving his own interests is impossible to say. I would only suggest that his motives might have been very mixed. In addition to these similarities, there are also contrasts to be noted between Amnon and Absalom: where Absalom does his own plotting Amnon needs others to do it for him, and where Amnon dirties his own hands Absalom gets others to do his dirty work. But one further trait they do hold in common: unlike their father who was always brave to a fault, both seem to have a streak of cowardice in their make-up, and something of the bully. They both pick on the defenseless: Amnon on his little sister, Absalom on his drunken brother (and even then hiding behind the knives of his thugs). In neither case is there anything resembling the giving to the intended victim even a ghost of a chance.

A FATHER BEREFT Now it came to pass, while they [the princes] were still on the road, that the tidings came to David, saying that Absalom had killed all the king 's sons, and not one of them remained! And the king arose, and tore his clothes, and lay down on the ground,· and all his servants stood by with their clothes rent. Then Jonadab, the son ofShimeah, David's brother, spoke up, saying: "My lord must not think that the attendants have killed all the king's sons; 40 only Amnon is dead Because from the day that he forced Tamar, his sister, has Absalom been determined [to kill him]. So now let not my lord, the king take this matter to heart, saying all the sons of the king are dead; Amnon alone is dead " Meanwhile, Absalom had fled (13:30-34)

We note, with detached cynicism, that Amnon's "bosom buddy," Jonadab, has arranged not to accompany him to the feast. Has he also become Absalom's confidant and in on the plot, or does he just sense which way the wind is blowing? At any rate, instead of being one of the guests at Baalhazor here he is in Jerusalem, able to give an accurate summary of what has taken place over 15 miles away. He is, indeed, a "very clever man." Now the soldier on watch lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, a large group of people were coming down the slope by the Horonaim road. 41 So the watchman told the king, saying: "/ saw people descending from the Horonaim road, by the side of the mountain. "42 And Jonadab said to the king: "Behold, the sons of the king have arrived; just as your servant said, so has it come about!" No sooner had he finished speaking than the king's sons arrived, and they lifted up their voices and wept; the king and all his servants also wept bitterly. Now Absalom had fled, and went to Talmai, the son ofAmmihud, king ofGeshur; and

Chileab has vanished from the scene-probably he died young, never reaching maturity. Absalom is now the oldest, and while the principle of primogeniture has yet to be established in Israel, everyone seems to be taking it for granted that the oldest son will succeed David. 40. This verse as it stands (MT, basically supported by the ancient versions) reading My lord must not think that all they have killed all the naarim, the king's sons, really does not hang together. To render naarim in its basic meaning as "young men," and then apply it to the king's sons is not only clumsy and redundant but doesn't take into account the specialized meaning of "elite soldiers" or "special troops" that the term bears uniformly throughout the book. One can use many terms to describe David's sons ("spoiled rotten" is among the first coming to mind) but naarim is among the last one would think of. After all, at this time most of David's sons were pre-adolescents; Solomon would have been no older than four. The slight rearrangement of the words used to reach the present rendition is no more than a guess. 41. The road leading from Beth-horon, and the pass that leads to the plains. The fugitives must have picked up the road south of Beth-el. 42. Reading with LXX; MT reads And behold, a large group ofpeople coming from the road to his rear, from the side of the mountain.

392

RAPE AND REVENGE

the kinl3 mourned for his son every day. So Absalom fled to Geshur; he was there three years. And the spirit of the king44 was pining away with longing for Absalom/5 for he was comforted with regard to Amnon,for he was dead. (13:35-39) Absalom does not stay around to face the consequences of his deed; he flees the country, fmding asylum in the Aramean Kingdom of Geshur, ruled by his grandfather. 46 Geshur is not one of the Aramean kingdoms conquered by David, but rather an independent allied state maintaining close relations with lsrael. 47 There seems little reason to doubt that a request for Absalom's extradition would have been honored despite his close relation to the king; Talmai would have had no stomach to provoke the warlord who dominated the entire region. So it seems that David, despite his deep grief over his first-born son, Amnon, never intended to bring Absalom to justice; no attempt to extradite Absalom is recorded. And as the days pass into months, and the months into years, David is consoled for his loss. Arnnon is dead, and David has learned to put the dead behind him and to go on to the next thing. And the next thing is his beloved son Absalom. So we have the indulgent father who suffers tragedy after tragedy and learns nothing. Arnnon rapes his sister and David is very angry, but you can't undo a rape, so David puts Tamar behind him and goes on to the next thing; he certainly couldn't bring himself to punish his son Amnon. But it is this blatant miscarriage of justice that provokes Amnon's murder. Now Amnon is dead, and you can't undo a death, so the time has come to put a murder behind him; he certainly cannot bring Absalom to justice for his deed. Metaphorically speaking, the blood on Absalom's hands has not yet dried before Arnnon is forgotten and their father is yearning with all his heart for his murderous son. From loving his children too much, David has never learned that justice is a vital element in rearing children. And not having learned his lesson, he will now lay the groundwork for the next tragedy.

43. Reading with LXX and Syr.; MT reads and he mourned. 44. Reading with LXX and Q; MT reads And King David was pining 45. The Hebrew is not clear. Another possible rendering of the text (based partially on Vul.) is: And the king desisted from extraditing Absalom. Both renditions fit the situation, but from different points of view. 46. Absalom's mother, Maacah, was Talmai's daughter. 47. See Chapter 20, note 20. It seems probable that Absalom found refuge in what was then the largest center in Geshur, the city on the shores of the Sea of Galilee whose ruins are today known as Tel Ein-geb. This is where Kibbutz Ein-geb is currently situated. (Several archaeologists identify this site with the Biblical city of Aphek). If indeed this was Absalom's place of exile, he spent those three years in very pleasant surroundings.

CHAPTER31

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN How long will you keep wavering between two opinions? 1 Kings 18:21

We return to the author's evaluation of the situation created by Amnon's murder and Absalom's flight:

And the spirit of the king was pining away with longing for Absalom; for he was comforted with regard to Amnon,for he was dead (13:39) We said that David has put the death of Amnon behind him and now is prepared to go on to the next thing-Absalom. But he doesn't. In his function of Chief Prosecutor he refrains from indicting Absalom and demanding his extradition. But neither, in his roles of King and father, does he pardon him. And as the months drag out into three full years this deadlocked situation becomes increasingly intolerable. Un-indicted, Absalom remains Crown Prince and heir apparent to the throne; unpardoned, he remains in exile. And David, despite his obsessive love of his children, now focused on Absalom 1-his spirit with longing," as the author puts it-makes no move to break out of this deadlock. Why? Is it that David is paralyzed by a sense of guilt, the specter of the beloved Amnon inhibiting him from freely forgiving his murderer? Or could it be that the king is haunted by his role as Chief Justice of the land; how can he publicly pardon so blatant a murderer without totally forfeiting public confidence in the impartiality of justice in lsrael? 2 We are not told-it may simply be that in the general moral collapse that followed Nathan's denunciation David finds it easier to postpone hard decisions and let things drift. Ultimately it is left to Joab to break the deadlock and force a decision. So the question now becomes, what is it that prompts Joab to take the initiative? We are told:

Now Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was aware that the heart of the king dwelt upon Absalom. (14:1)

I. It would seem, from the little that we are told, that this love is mainly reserved for his sons. In the case of the one daughter that is brought to our attention-Tamar-David seems to display a radically different attitude. 2. This last was a sensitive point. David must have been aware that there was a rising tide of discontent in his kingdoms over the judicial reforms that he had initiated and the way justice was being administered. More on this touchy subject in the next chapter.

394

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

What the author is implying is that Joab senses that reconciliation is what David really wants , 3 but that he can't, in his present state of apathy, bring himself to take action. He needs someone to take the initiative for him. So Joab, a member ofthe family, takes it upon himself to restore family harmony by bringing his uncle and his cousin back together again. But this is a little too simplistic. Joab, as we have had occasion to note, is a complex personality who usually is moved by multiple motives. Doing for the king what he wants done is surely one of them, as is a wish to restore harmony in the family, but reasons of state undoubtedly are paramount in his mind. Joab wishes to avert the chaos that an unclear and disputed succession will generate. And then the question arises, is it also part of Joab's intention to ingratiate himself with the future king by being the person to initiate his rehabilitation? Self-interest is always an abiding feature of Joab's makeup. But perhaps all that we are being told by the author is that Joab, who often knows David better than the king knows himself, sees which way the wind is blowing, and feels the time ripe to take the initiative. Thus he will further the interests of the State, the family, and not least, himself.

THE CAT'S PAW Joab, while on the whole a blunt man, can be very wily if the occasion warrants. In the current situation he rejects the direct approach, possibly because it has previously been attempted without success. Instead he opts for the indirect approach that he and David had perfected in the early battles that had paved the way to kingdom and empire. In brief he decides to ambush David in public, in open court, just as Nathan had done so successfully seven or eight years previously. But Joab is no Nathan, no fearless prophet made courageous by the knowledge that it is God's word that he is declaring. David has been becoming increasingly unpredictable. If the message (which would take the form of a public rebuke, and have the impact of a punch to the stomach) should cause David to explode, Joab has no wish to be in the line of fire. Thus he needs someone to front for him while he remains unobtrusively on the sidelines. It is in Tekoa4 that he finds someone suitable to be his cat'spaw. So Joab sent to Tekoa and fetched from there a wise woman and said to her: "Preteml to be in mourning. Dress yourself in mourning garments and don't anoint yourself with oil; be like a woman who has been in mourning a long time over one who is dead Then go in to the king, and speak to him thusly." SoJoab put the words into her mouth. 6 (14:2-3)

In Biblical language, as indeed in the entire Ancient Near East, the term "wise" has much wider connotations than are implied by the English term. Beyond intelligence, to refer to a person as "wise" implies competence and a high level of technical accomplishment. 7 It would seem that one of her

3. In the Ancient Near East the heart was conceived as the seat of thought, not emotion (as is the modern Western convention). Thus the phrase means that David was constantly thinking about Absalom; that his mind was preoccupied with his son. 4. A town on the edge ofthe desert, about six miles southeast of Bethlehem. The town is later to become famous as the home town of Amos, the first of the classical prophets (i.e. the prophets that wrote and published books of their prophecies). 5. In Hebrew the form of address is extremely polite: Please pretend. 6. Since the Hebrew word davar can mean both "word" and "thing" this phrase could equally be rendered: So Joab put the things into her mouth. See below footnote 17. 7. This is the primary meaning of the term "wisdom:" Bezalel, the craftsman who built the Tabernacle, the Ark, the seven-branched Candelabrum etc. in the wilderness, as well as his associate craftsmen in that complex project, are all called "wise of heart" (Exodus 28:3, 35:31, 36:1). Weavers (Exodus 35:25), goldsmiths (Jeremiah 10:9) and sailors (Psalm 107:27) are defined as "wise." Skill in the art of war is also "wisdom" (Isaiah 10:13).

TIIE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

395

areas of accomplishment is the ability to play a role convincingly. Having recruited the "actress" he needs, Joab instructs her in how to "make up" for the part she is to play before the king, and feeds her her lines. Her task is to entrap the king into a public commitment, just as Nathan did. It is a tricky assignment and will take real skill in presentation and timing to pull it off. The woman of Tekoa came8 to the king, fell on her face to the ground and prostrated herself, saying: "Help, 0 King!" And the king said to her: "What is the matter?" She said: "Alas, I am a widow, my husband is dead Your maidservant had two sons, and they came to blows, both of them, in the field, and there was no one to separate them. And one struck the other and killed him. And now the whole family has risen against your maidservant, and they say: 'Hand over the one who smote his brother that we may put him to death for the life of his brother whom he killed ' Thus they would destroy the heir also, 9 and extinguish my [only] ember that remains, leaving my husband with neither name nor remnant upon the face ofthe earth. " Then the king said to the woman: "Go to your house, and I will give orders concerning you." (14:4-8)

The case seems straightforward. One brother has killed another, and the extended family (the clan) is demanding that the killer be brought to justice and executed for murder. The distraught mother is appealing to the king, claiming extenuating circumstances: that she will be left with neither husband nor sons. Her dead husband will be left with no heir (is she implying that the motive behind the family's desire for "Justice" is really so that they may inherit the estate?) and with no one to carry on his name. The cure is worse than the disease. The king seems to accept her plea and tells her to go home. He will take care of the matter. But she refuses to leave. Then the woman from Tekoa said to the king: "Upon me, my lord the king, be the iniquity, and upon my father's house; and the king and his throne be guiltless!" (14:9)

What is the woman saying? As we have already learnt, leaving the blood of a murdered person un-avenged was considered a terrible offense; the blood of the murdered person was believed to be crying out from the ground to heaven for redress. 10 To order the murderer freed was clearly iniquity, an act known from the start to be wrong. The woman claims to fear that his reluctance to perform an act of iniquity, and thus soil his throne, might cause the king not to carry through on his promise. Thus she takes all the guilt on her head, in order to free the king from any scruples in the affair. 11 It is clear that the king's promise that he "will give orders" is insufficient in her eyes. David seems to have developed a reputation for hedging. And the king said: again." (14: 10)

"If anyone says anything to you,

bring him to me and he won't touch you

But this too hardly constitutes a firm commitment.

We have another "wise woman" in our narrative (20:16-22) who shares with the wise woman of Tekoa the high skill of"putting it across" and of persuading people. 8. So numerous manuscripts. The MT version, which is standard, lacks the word "came." 9. Reading with Syr.; MT reads and we will destroy the heir also. 10. Genesis 4:10-11. See Chapter2l, note 8. 11. Rashi (ad foe.) interprets matters differently. He claims that the woman, fearing that she is being fobbed off with a worthless promise, is in effect laying a curse upon the king should he go back on his word: "The iniquity be on you and your father's house," but oriental courtesy demands that she invoke, as it were, the curse upon herself.

396

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

Then she said: "Please let the king invoke the Lord your God, [swearing] that the redeemer of the bloOtP slay no more; that he not destroy my son. " And he said: "As the Lord lives, not one hair ofyour son shall fall to the ground " 13 ( I4: II) Finally she has her commitment. But she still is not finished.

Then the woman said: "Please let your maid-servant speak [one more] word to my lord, the king." And he said: "Speak." (14: 12) One can sense the king's exasperation in his monosyllabic reply. This is really becoming too much.

And the woman said: "Why have you devised such a thing against the people of God? For in giving this decision the king convicts himself, in that the king does not bring his banished one back. We must all die, we are like water spilt on the ground which cannot be gathered up again, nor does God take away the life of him who devises means not to keep his banished one banished And now the reason I have come to say this thing to my lord the king is because the people have made me afraid So your handmaid said [to herself]: 'I will speak to the king. Perhaps the king will perform the request of his servant. For the king will hear, and deliver his servant from the hand of the man [who would] destroy me and my son together from the inheritance of God '14 And your maidservant said [to herself]: 'The word of my lord the king will set me at rest, 'for as an angel of God, so is my lord the king, to discern good and evil. May the Lord your God be with you." (I4: 13-I7) With these words the trap is sprung and the real issue is out in the open. There is no dead husband: the brothers in the case are Amnon and Absalom, and David has been badgered into rendering a judgment, under oath, absolving Absalom from punishment for murder: As the Lord lives, not one hair ofyour son shall fall to the ground (I4:II) So now, the woman charges him, if you don't bring him back from exile you will be, in effect, guilty of breaking your oath. Why bear a grudge? Life is so short. Our lives are like water that, with our deaths, are poured out and sink into the earth, never to be retrieved. Don't waste these precious drops while you still have them. The message penetrates. For the latter part of the speech David is only half listening (the semireversion to her fictitious case and the non-existent "redeemer of the blood" is nothing more than a smoke screen anyway). He is thinking furiously-who put her up to this? She couldn't have dreamed this up all by herself. Who is she fronting for?

Then the king answered, and said to the woman: "Please do not hide from me anything I ask you. " And the woman said: "Pray, let my lord the king speak. "And the king said: "Is

12. If the courts wouldn't act, or were prevented from acting, the right to execute vengeance reverted to the family. What if one of the family, taking upon himself the role of the Goel Ha-dam, the "redeemer of the blood," were to kill her son? Giving an order to the King's Courts wouldn't prevent that. For the "redeemer of the blood," see Chapter 21, note 7. 13. Note that David has sworn an oath in the name of the Lord, not yet realizing that he has been tricked and that the oath applies to his own son Absalom. Note well the words that he has used. They will come to pass. On the significance of oaths made in the name of the Lord see the opening section of Chapter 30, and especially note 1. 14. I.e. the ancestral estate. Theodore Lewis makes a very convincing case that the expression the inheritance of God refers to that portion of land that was awarded the family with the initial partition of the land following the Conquest, and passed down ever since from father to son. The death of the second son would mean that the kinsman pushing to have the killer executed is the very person who stands to inherit the estate if the heir is killed. In "entailed" estates such as these, wives have no right of inheritance so she, as the putative widow, will be left penniless. (Lewis, "The Ancestral Estate in 2 Samuel 14: 16", p. 597-612) The "case," of course, is fictitious but has been designed very realistically so as to take in David. He understands perfectly the implications of the "case" and the "reasons" for her seeming panic and insistence. She is not called a wise woman for nothing.

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

397

the hand of Joab with you in all this?" And the woman answered, saying: "As your soul lives, my lord the king, it'sjust as my lord the king has said; 15 for it was your servant, Joab, who commanded me. It was he who put in your maidservant's mouth all these things, in order to put another face on the matter that your servant Joab did this thing. But my lord is wise, wise as an angel ofGod, knowing all that [goes on] in the land (14:18-20) How does David guess? Has he heard that it was Joab who intervened to move the woman's case to the head of the docket, 16 or does he simply recognize Joab's inimitable style, his "fine Italian hand?" But however he guesses the woman's reply, in which she admits that it was Joab who put in your maidservant's mouth all these things, and then repeats that it was Joab who did this thing (a strange choice of words), it confirms both David's suspicions and his worst fears. And here we begin to realize that something is going on that is not evident on the surface: the continuation of a secret dialogue that has been taking place between David and Joab. For the beginning of the dialogue we have to go back to the days of the Ammonite war when David received word from Joab that Uriah was dead: mission accomplished. David, in his reply, could not refer openly to the murder; the message was an oral one, to be relayed by a messenger. So David substituted a euphemism: don't let this thing bother you (11:25), i.e. don't loose sleep over having murdered one of your top commanders at my request. The author, in her scathing moral summary, picks up this euphemism: But the thing that David had done was evil in the eyes of the Lord (II :27). 17 We remember Joab feeding the wise woman her lines: So Joab put the words into her mouth (I4:3), but the phrase could equally be rendered: put the things into her mouth. Now the woman admits to David that it was Joab who put in your maidservant's mouth all these things (I4:9). David's co-conspirator is exerting psychological pressure on him. He is using their secret codeword to remind David of their shared crime, that he owes his accomplice for his "services" and that he is now calling in the debt. 18 David has no alternative. Both secretly and openly he is committed. And he acknowledges as much in his statement to Joab by himself using their codeword. Then the king said to Joab: "Behold now, I have granted this thing. Go and bring back the young man, Absalom. "And Joab fell on his face on the ground, and prostrated himself, and blessed the king. 19 And Joab said: "This day your servant knows that I have found favor in your sight, my lord the king, in that the king has granted the requesf0 of his servant.

(14:21-22) Joab has gotten his way, but things will never be the same between them again.

15. Literally: one cannot turn to the right hand or to the left from anything that my lord the king has said. 16. See Chapter 29. 17. From this moment onward David's euphemism keeps resurfacing remorselessly. David uses it unwittingly when Nathan traps him into passing judgment on the "rich man" (that is on himself): He shall pay for the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing and showed no pity (12:6). Nathan picks it up when passing sentence on David: However, because you have treated the Lord with absolute contempt in this thing, the son that is born to you shall die (12:14). Absalom uses it as a euphemism for his sister's incestuous rape: Don't take this thing to heart (13:20), while the author reverts to this same euphemism when telling of David's reaction to the news: Now when David heard all these things he was furious (13:21). All in all, the phrase occurs no less than 13 times in 2 Samue/11-14 (as opposed to only 8 times in all the rest of the Book ofSamuel). 18. I am endebted to the article by Patricia K. Willey, "The Importunate Woman of Tekoa," for this understanding of the text. 19. David has done Joab a favor by granting his request, so Joab returns the favor by blessing David. 20. Literally the thing. In his reply Joab is telling David that they now understand each other perfectly.

398

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

THE PARIAH So Joab arose and went to Geshur, and brought Absalom to Jerusalem. And the king said: "Let him dwell apart in his own house; 21 he shall not see my face!" So Absalom dwelt apart in his own house, and was not admitted to the king's presence. 22 (14:23-24) David has been strong-armed by his accomplice in "the thing." He does exactly what he was strong-armed to do; neither more nor less. This must have been a shock to both Joab and Absalom. In place of the reconciliation that Joab thought he had maneuvered, David grimly sticks to the letter of his word. He promised that not a hair of his son ('s head) would fall to the ground. The king keeps his word. Absalom is not prosecuted for his crime. He promised to let him return; Absalom has been allowed to return to Jerusalem-this and no more. David commits him to what amounts to house arrest. Confined to his estate, not admitted to court, Absalom is relegated to the status of a pariah. It goes without saying that no one will have anything to do with someone so disastrously out of favor with the king; disfavor can be catching. So Absalom is relegated to a kind of quarantine, with only his servants for company. This is far from what he expected. The disillusionment of the young man proves deeply embittering. It is a mark of his current state that David is content with such half-measures. He either should tum Absalom over to justice as a fratricide, or he should forgive him wholeheartedly. David has learned nothing from the outcome of his failure to take action after the rape of Tamar. So Absalom is left to brood, and in isolation his sense of injustice festers, ultimately metastasizing into a terrible resolve, while his contempt for his father turns into a ravening hatred. This rejection it is that will give birth to the uprising that is to begin the process of the unraveling of the United Kingdoms. What sort of a person is Absalom? We have already learned much: he is spoiled, reckless, and there is a streak of viciousness in his character. He is a brilliant dissembler, a master of indirection and possesses the great virtue of patience. He has the ability to hold his hand until the moment is ripe to strike. Now, in preparation for what is to come, our author adds flesh to the outline that we have been able to infer so far from his actions.

Now in all Israel there was no one so much to be praised for his beauty as Absalom; from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. And when he cut his hair (for at the end of every year he used to cut it, for it became heavy upon him so he had it cut) he would weigh it: two hundred shekels, by the royal standard, was the weight of the hair ofhis head (14:25-26) That business with the hair is a telling touch. Not only is Absalom good-looking, but also he knows it. The vanity involved in making an annual ceremony of having his hair cut, and then weighing his hair and recording its weight, paints his narcissistic character in an unforgettable vignette. 23 Then comes a family note:

Now three sons were born to Absalom, and one daughter whose name was Tamar; she was a beautiful woman. (14:27)

21. Literally, let him turn aside to his own house ... so Absalom turned aside. 22. Literally, and he saw not the king 's face. 23. If the Rabbinic authorities are correct in placing the weight of the royal shekel at half the weight of the sacred, or sanctuary, shekel, then the weight of a year's growth of hair came to somewhere between two and three pounds. His hair must have been very thick and luxuriant. The author forbears telling us what he did with his hair after he had weighed it.

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

399

Beauty seems to run in the family. It is not usual to give the names of daughters unless there is a special reason; is it because she is named after Absalom's tragic sister, making her some sort of compensation for the family that her aunt will never have? As to the sons-they remain nameless. Putting this together with what we will be told later (18:18) it seems reasonable to assume that they all died in infancy or early childhood, only Tamar surviving to maturity. With these remarks, the author rounds out her portrait of the man who is to shatter the peace of the last decade of David's reign. What remains yet unsaid, the narrative will reveal as the tale unfolds.

A FORCED REHABILITATION For two years Absalom remains under house arrest, waiting for his father to relent, but to no avail. The status quo seems likely to perpetuate itself indefinitely. At the end of two years his patience has come to the breaking point. Joab engineered his return; it is up to Joab to finish the job of his rehabilitation.

Now Absalom dwelt in Jerusalem two full years24 without seeing the king 's face. Then Absalom sent for Joab, to send him to the king, but Joab would not come to him. So he sent a second time, but he would not come. (14:28-29) Joab seems to feel that he has better things to do with his time. He put himself out for Absalom but cannot, in truth, claim to have succeeded in fostering reconciliation. David remains icy, and an element of coldness may have crept into his relationship with Joab, who has publicly so embarrassed the king with his trick. Joab has no wish to further exasperate the situation. Having done what he could, he now wants nothing further to do with the matter. He has not counted on the ruthlessness in Absalom's nature.

Then he [Absalom] said to his servants: "Behold, Joab 's field is next to mine, and he has barley there. Go set it on fire!" So Absalom's servants set the field on fire. (14:30) That should wake Joab up; and it certainly does.

Then Joab got up and came to Absalom, at his house, and said to him: "Why have your servants set on fire the field belonging to me?" And Absalom said to Joab: "Behold, I sent [word] to you, saying: 'Come here, so that I may send you to the king, to say: "Why have I come from Geshur? It were better for me if I were still there. " Now let me see the king 's face; and if there be iniquity in me, let him put me to death. "' 25 (14:31-32) There is no gainsaying that Absalom is perfectly right. His coming to Jerusalem is no improvement. In Geshur he was in exile, but not under house arrest. Five years in limbo is all that he will endure; either rehabilitate me or kill me-decide. Unspoken is the implied threat to Joab: involve your-

24. Literally two years of days. 25. I.e. "I claim that killing Amnon was justifiable homicide; everyone recognizes death as the legitimate penalty for raping my sister, (and which punishment the king, as her father, should in all justice have executed). But if he finds me guilty of premeditated murder (a capital crime), then I am ready to accept my punishment." This is ingenious; to go and kill Amnon in hot blood right after the rape would have been one thing; what actually took place, however, was as coldly premeditated as could be, and a direct challenge to royal justice. For the technical meaning of iniquity see Appendix: Psalm 51, note 13.

400

THE FUGITIVE'S RETURN

self on my behalf or I will make so much trouble for you that you will wish you had. Burning your field is just an example ofwhat I am prepared to do. Joab gets the message. He is dealing with what we would call a sociopath; a person with no moral limits. Under the circumstances it is worth risking a confrontation with the king if it will get Absalom off his back.

So Joab came to the king and told him. Then he [the king] summoned Absalom, and he came to the king and bowed himself with his face to the ground before the king; and the king kissed Absalom. (14:33) Note that the text does not say that David forgives Absalom, only that he gives Absalom a public, formal kiss. The status of pariah is lifted, but this is far from forgiveness and a heartfelt and sincere reconciliation. It is a grudging step, this political rehabilitation of Absalom, forced by a brutal act of arson. What is holding David back from opening his heart, as opposed to his arms, to the son he now loves? We have been told that he was pining for him. How desperately he loves him we will soon learn. But some barrier David has erected within himself will not allow him to express his love when it could do some good. With this formal kiss the course of future events is fixed; Absalom now has both motive and opportunity to try to push his father aside and seize the throne. David's last slim chance to win back his criminally errant son is gone. David may be beyond learning from experience, but the same is not true of Joab. This personal involvement with his cousin has been an eye-opener for him. He now begins to realize that should this egotistical monster ever become king, it will bode no good for himself. By burning Joab's field Absalom has demonstrated that he has written Joab off. One does not cultivate supporters and make friends by burning them out. From one who has made a serious effort to help (and possibly cultivate) Absalom, Joab has already moved to distance himself politically. Now Joab begins to see Absalom as a threat to his own future. This is one of the worst mistakes Absalom could have made. Absalom seems to have either forgotten or to never have grasped the lesson of Abner, the son ofNer. Where it comes to a perceived threat to himself, Joab has no more scruples than Absalom, and is just as ruthless. In retrospect we will see that another future event has now been fixed: Absalom has signed his own death warrant.

CHAPTER32

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING He that goeth about to persuade a multitude that they are not so well off as they ought to be, shall never want attentive and favorable hearers; because they know the manifold defects whereunto every kind ofregiment [government] is subject, but the secret lets and difficulties, which in public affairs are innumerable and inevitable, they have not ordinarily the judgment to consider. Richard Hooker, Works: Laws ofEcclesiastical Polity It is a common fault ofmen not to reckon on storms in fair weather. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince More than ten years have passed since that fateful afternoon when David took his walk on the palace roof and spied Bathsheba bathing. Since that moment we have been chronicling the account of David's moral breakdown, the progressive collapse of his character and the resultant disintegration of his family. But during all this period he has remained the ruler of two dynamic kingdoms and of an extensive empire. In our preoccupation with his private life we have almost lost sight of the fact that he is a public figure. The time has come to ask ourselves what has David, as king, been doing all this time. Unless we achieve balance by getting some idea of what has been happening in the public arena we will be simply unable to understand the explosive events that form the contents of the next six chapters of the Book ofSamuel. In retrospect, as we gaze over David's career to date, the cumulative effect is overwhelming. A public hero before he is twenty, king in Hebron at thirty, by forty he rules the United Kingdoms of Judah and Israel, has conquered Jerusalem and established it as his capital, and has liberated his people from the yoke of the Philistines. The next ten years are equally notable. It is during this period that we date his momentous act in moving the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem, turning his secular capital into a holy city, 1 as well as his plan to build a Temple, a "House for God," and its rebuff. 2 This also is the period of the great imperial wars. By fifty he is master of an empire stretching from the Egyptian border to the banks of the Euphrates River in the far north, and dominates the region. The Bathsheba affair comes near the end of this tumultuous imperial expansion. The next decade is spent in consolidation; reorganization and reform. He never gives up on his plan for a "House for God;" the years following the conclusion of the great wars are spent preparing for this great project that his heir will carry to completion, storing up materials and treasure for its

I. See Chapter 23. 2. See Chapter 24.

402

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

accomplishment. Indeed, the greatest part of the loot from the imperial conquests is dedicated and put aside for this goal. 3 These years are also spent on consolidating David's reform of the worship service, achieving the merger of the classic sacrificial service with Samuel's religious innovations of ecstatic worship. It is now that the guilds of musicians and singers are consolidated, that drafts of Levites are organized to perform the custodial duties of the shrine, and that the anthologies of liturgical poetry are begun that will eventually become the Book of Psalms. 4 These years are not only filled with religious projects. Major administrative reforms, some that had begun previously, now became central concerns of the government. Chief among these are the establishment of a royal system of courts to centralize and professionalize the administration of justice, and the reorganization of the Kingdom of Israel into rational administrative units. The former means the creation of a network of "King's Courts" throughout the kingdoms, transferring to them certain categories of cases, especially the trying of all capital crimes. This implies, of course, the creation of a professional judiciary responsible solely to the king. 5 The latter involves creating administrative districts that will cut across tribal boundaries as well as creating a bureaucratic hierarchy, responsible to the king, to govern these districts in his name. The purpose of both of these reforms is to erode tribal and local autonomy and increasingly to shift power into the hands of a central autocracy: the king. 6 The implementation of all such "reforms" is far from easy. 7 They are vigorously, and at times desperately resisted on all levels. The new courts remove the most important categories of cases from the local courts (the "elders"), irreversibly eroding their authority, and putting matters in the hands of outsiders who regularly override local traditions and precedents in the name of a standardized universal code. 8 The administrative redistricting is an even more blatant attempt to break down tribal autonomy, grouping two or more tribes in one district, while cutting other tribes into two or even three parts. 9 It takes time to train the necessary officials and judges to implement these reforms, as well as to develop the infrastructure needed to administer them. Taking into account the effort needed to overcome the resistance these changes engendered, it is not surprising that only by the end of David's long reign is the judicial system in place, and then only partially. The administrative redistricting of Israel 10 only comes to fruition (to the extent that it ever does) in the days of Solomon. As we have said, these reforms are vigorously resisted and provoke deep resentment in Israel. To this one must add indignation among the clergy over the religiously central role given to Jerusalem by 3. See Chapter 25. 4. See Chapter 24. 5. See Chapter 25, especially note 67. 6. Another matter occupying the king at this time was the long-term project to increasingly professionalize the army. This involved enlarging the size of the regular army and the contingents of foreign mercenaries, and the building of a chariot corps. This may have been, in part, a response to the growing unrest in Israel's population that made the reserve forces increasingly unreliable. On the one hand this professionalization removed the burden of periodic military service from the public (though this was probably replaced by periods of unpaid labor-the levy or corvee--more on this later). On the other hand, it was preparing the tool that would enable David's successor to ruthlessly oppress the population and to crush any public unrest. See Chapter 25, especially note 18. 7. There may have been other projects of which we know nothing. 8. One important purpose of taking capital cases out of local hands was to stamp out the deeply embedded tradition of blood feuds. In this the reform ultimately proved successful, but only after the passage of many generations. The institution of "The Redeemer of the Blood" was only relegated to the realm of a historic memory towards the end of the first Commonwealth. 9. This is based on Solomon's administrative districts. My assumption is that the first stages of this reorganization originated in David's time, and that Solomon simply brought the process to its conclusion. 10. This administrative reorganization was never applied to the Kingdom of Judah, only to the Kingdom of Israel. Was this discrimination in favor of Judah, not disturbing the status quo, due to favoritism shown to David's home tribe, or to the danger of explosive resistance, or simply to the fact that Judah, a mini-kingdom comprising a single tribe, was too poor and sparsely populated to be worth the effort? We do not know.

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

403

the new dispensation, which, of necessity, demotes the ancient shrines of the North to second-class status, and drains away part of their local clientele who now make their pilgrimages to Jerusalem. If one considers these elements against the background of the steadily increasing taxation-and its increasingly efficient collection-one can begin to realize that the third decade of David's rule is beset by a rising tide of anger and disaffection with the regime. 11 If, as we have postulated, the ending of the imperial wars indeed brought in its wake an economic downturn, 12 the mix of all these forces would explain the explosive proportions of the discontent we will shortly encounter. With these factors in mind we should be able to appreciate the public mood Absalom encounters when he emerges from his five years of exile and house arrest. What I am suggesting is that although Absalom is a charmer, and a gifted demagogue to boot, without this public mood of disenchantment and disaffection he would never have been able to raise a rebellion. As it turned out, four years of persistence is what it takes to harness the discontent.

PREPARING THE GROUND Absalom's bitterness and anger we know; we have been watching them fester and swell for seven years, ever since his sister's rape. At his vaunting ambition we can guess. But why does he choose to pursue the inherently risky course of treason? He is now David's oldest surviving son, the heir apparent to the throne. He is not an inherently impatient man. All he has to do is to wait and the plum will drop into his mouth of its own accord; his father is getting no younger and is showing his age. Perhaps it is the burning resentment he feels for the way he has been treated, perhaps the boundless contempt for his now indecisive father whom he perceives as being in his dotage. Perhaps he is afraid his father still bears him a grudge and, at the last moment, may push him aside and choose another of his sons in his place. There is, after all, no closeness between them. Whatever the reasons, shortly following his rehabilitation Absalom takes the first of the steps to lay the ground for a coup d'etat. Now some time after this Absalom began to use a chariof 3 and horses with fifty men to run before him. (15:1)

A two-horse chariot, with out-runners, for daily transportation was the prerogative of members of a royal family in the Ancient Near East. The more runners the higher the rank of the personage; fifty runners would seem to be the largest single body of runners in David's time. 14 Having been out of the public eye for five years, Absalom's first move is to put himself back on center stage, in a setting emphasizing his closeness to the crown. In effect, he is putting himself forward almost as an alternative to the king. That David does nothing to curb this presumptuous action-Absalom arrogating to himself the ceremony due only to a king-is yet another instance of David's permissive attitude to his sons, an attitude that only earns their contempt. 15 11. The dire warnings of the prophet Samuel, as to the price the population would pay for their demand for a king, were now being fulfilled (see Chapter 5). It may be that the author secretly sympathized with Samuel's anti-monarchic views: perhaps that is why she gave them such prominent treatment. In a sense, all of2 Samuel is a description of the working out of Samuel's grim foresight into how things would develop. 12. See Chapter 25: "The Economic Consequences of Empire." 13. Reading with Q; MT reads Absalom provided him self with. 14. The runners served several purposes: they cleared a way for the chariot through the narrow and crowded streets of ancient cities, they acted as bodyguards and they displayed the exalted rank of the man who rode in the chariot. Egyptian pictures show some of the runners as being armed with clubs, possibly to beat pedestrians out of the way when necessary. 15. The writer of the Book of Kings, in a very similar situation, underlines David's permissive attitude with a heavy hand, inserting the remark: Now his father had never restrained him in his entire life by saying: "Why

404

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING Absalom follows this up with a brilliant piece of demagoguery.

And Absalom used to rise up early, and would take his stand on the arm of the [city] gate, facing the road, 16 and whenever any man had a suit to come before the king for judgment, Absalom would call to him and say: "What city are you from?" And he would say: "Your servant is from such and such 17 a tribe in Israel. " And Absalom would say to him: "See, your claims are good and right, but there is no one assigned by the king to hear it. " And Absalom would add: 18 "If only I were judge 19 in the land, then everyone that had a suit or case could come to me and I would give him justice. " And if a man would approach him, to bow down to him, he [Absalom] would put out his hand, and take hold of him and kiss him. Thus Absalom did to all Israel who came to the king for judgment; so Absalom stole the hearts ofthe men ofIsrael. (15:2-6) It would seem that reform of the judicial system is creating serious problems with the administration of justice. That remark about "there is no one assigned by the king to hear [your case]" (15:3) speaks volumes. Taking whole categories of cases out of the jurisdiction of the lower courts, and transferring them to royal jurisdiction, has thrown intolerable burdens upon a fledgling system that is as yet incapable of handling them. The result is a backlog, especially galling to a public that is used to speedy adjudication of suits by local courts. Taken in conjunction with a king whose prestige as Chief Justice of the land has been seriously undercut by Nathan's tricking him into pronouncing sentence on himself in open court/0 it would seem that this is even more burning an issue than that oftaxation. At least this is the issue that Absalom homes in on, and he probably knows very well what he is doing.2t Our author focuses on one other aspect of Absalom's campaign. Despite his routinely parading himself in public with all the pomp and ceremony of a king, when he is "electioneering" early in the morning he dispenses with the ceremony appropriate to his rank. In his personal contacts with the public he is ''just plain folks," solicitous of the person's concerns, inquiring as to his background and forestalling any attempt to show deference to him by embracing and kissing him. Aspiring politicians should carefully note Absalom's technique; it is masterful and stunningly successful. With no track record of his own, he succeeds in transferring to himself the affections of large numbers of Israelites from one of the most brilliantly accomplished rulers in history. One last item deserves to be mentioned: Absalom seems to be focusing his campaign on Israel, the Northern Kingdom. 22 The author, by repetition, appears to be stressing this point: have you done this?" (I Kings I :6). Our author, by contrast, is much more subtle, allowing us to draw our own

conclusions from the behavior she depicts, as well as from her silences-what she refrains from saying. See Postscript: The Death ofthe King.

16. The low outer wall enclosing the approach-way to the city gate proper. See Chapter 3, note 17. The court would be holding its sessions in the gate plaza within. I7. Literally is from one ofthe tribes. I8. Literally said: I9. Absalom is here playing on the double meaning of the word Shofot: ruler and judge (see Chapter 5, note 2I). The ruler was ipso facto the Chief Justice. The classic meaning of the term, "ruler," was not lost on his hearers, yet were Absalom to be challenged he could always claim that all he was talking about was a judicial appointment. Absalom covered himself well. 20. See Chapter 29. The fact that Joab could pull a similar trick on David would indicate that his reputation for judicial insight was not very high (see Chapter 31 ), unlike his son, Solomon, who built an international reputation as a judge. 21. It may very well have been that it was Absalom's own burning grievance and sense of injustice (at the way the king, his father, had failed to punish Amnon, abandoning Tamar to her fate) that made his presentation so convincing. 22. See Chapter 20 for a discussion of the shift in meaning of the word "Israel" from an all-inclusive term to one specifically denoting the Northern Kingdom and its inhabitants.

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

405

Thus Absalom did to all Israel who came to the king for judgment; so Absalom stole the hearts ofthe men ofIsrael. (15:6) Israel is the dominant member of the United Kingdoms, in population, sophistication and wealth; and it is here that resentment burns hottest. The coup d'etat, when it comes, is a Northern revolt.

PUTSCH! The fact that Absalom has negligible support in Judah is the glaring weakness in his plot; indeed, he has no real possibility of raising a popular rebellion against David, the "native son," among his own fellow tribesmen. This poses significant danger: should David fall back upon Hebron, the tribe of Judah will probably rally to him, and that would tum Absalom's coup d'etat from a surgical strike into a protracted civil war between the two kingdoms. Absalom compensates for this critical gap in his plans by a stunning piece of misdirection.

Now this is what happened: at the end offour yeari3 Absalom said to the king: "Please let me go, that I may pay my vow in Hebron which I have vowed to the Lord For your servant vowed a vow, while I dwelt in Geshur in Aram, saying: 'If the Lord indeed returns me to Jerusalem, 24 then I will worship the Lord in Hebron.'" 25 (15:7-8) This request and the cover story that goes with it are plausible. Making a vow in exile to make a thanksgiving offering for his reprieve, should it ever occur, in the holy city of Hebron, his birthplace, is just the kind of thing a person in those days would do. Now Absalom can claim that six years have passed since his return and his conscience is bothering him; he can't put it off any longer. He has no difficulty in getting royal permission to absent himself from court to fulfill his vow. 26

And the king said to him: "Go in peace. " So he arose and went to Hebron. Now Absalom sent secret agenti 7 throughout all the tribes ofIsrael to say: "When you hear the sound of the Shofar, 28 proclaim: 'Absalom is king in Hebron!'" (15:9-10) Absalom has prepared the ground well in Israel; he has groups of conspirators established in all the key cities and strategic points of the kingdom waiting for the signal to rise. Now they are informed that upon the signal they are to raise the cry that Absalom has crowned himself king in Hebron; the clear implication being that Judah also has risen and is behind Absalom. This ploy will deceive David and his court completely.

And with Absalom went two hundred men from Jerusalem; they were invited guests who went in good faith, 29 not knowing anything. And Absalom sent and summonecf0 Ahithophel,

23. Reading with LXX and Syr; MT reads forty years. 24. Reading with LXX, Targ. and Syr; MT reads will indeed bring me back to Jerusalem. 25. Reading with LXX; MT omits the words in Hebron. 26. Actually, it is doubtful if he really needed royal permission. It seems more likely that he made an issue of it simply to draw attention to where he was going. 27. Literally spies. 28. The ram's hom, one of whose uses was proclaiming the crowning of a king. See also Chapter 8, note 7. 29. Literally, in their simplicity. 30. Reading with LXX and Q; MT omits and summoned.

406

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

the Gilonite, David's counselor, from his city ofGiloh, 31 while he was offering the sacrifices. Now the conspiracy was strong, for the people with Absalom kept increasing in numbers. (15:11-12) Unlike his invited guests, 32 who had no idea of what was going on and only now are realizing that they have been publicly compromised, Ahithophel seems to have been part of the conspiracy from its early stages. Absalom is a brilliant demagogue but it is Ahithophel, one of David's most trusted counselors, who is the brains behind the conspiracy. 33 With Absalom's proclamation, and the furor created by his carefully placed groups of conspirators, a bandwagon effect is generated. All sorts of people are declaring in favor of Absalom and the movement is snowballing. In very short order David learns of what is happening. Once again David is caught flatfooted. The last time he was caught unawares was by the sudden switch of Ammon from an ally of David's to the side of his greatest enemies, the Arameans. At that time we spoke of his disastrous intelligence failure, and suggested that at the root of this failure was a willful disinclination to abandon preconceived notions. 34 Once again we come upon instances of David's inability to learn from past mistakes. The signs of rebellion were everywhere. For four long years Absalom has been openly undermining the government. Any halfway competent intelligence service could easily have uncovered the conspiracy. It seems that David didn't know what was happening because he didn't want to know: he couldn't conceive that a son of his would rise against him, no matter how criminally inclined he had proved himself to be, nor how shabbily he had been treated. "There's none so blind as they who won't see." 35 The uprising taking him completely by surprise David falls, once again, into the old pattern: he panics. Instead oftaking a moment to evaluate the situation and coolly determine a course of action, instead of making a stand in his virtually impregnable citadel or going over to the offensive and trying to rally those loyal to him, he loses his head, abandons Jerusalem and flees. And just as his panic reaction in the Ammonite-Aramean crisis almost cost him his crown, so here too, in his impulsive and ill-conceived reaction, he comes close to losing everything.

Now someone came and told David, saying: "The hearts of the men ofIsrael have turned to Absalom! "36 And David said to all his servants who were with him in Jerusalem: "Arise, and let us flee; or else there will be no escape for us from Absalom. Go in haste, lest he speedily overtake us and bring down evil upon us, and smite the city with the sword!" And the king's servants said to the king: "Whatever my lord, the king, decides, behold, we are your servants. " So the king went forth, and all his household with him (the king leaving ten ofhis women-concubines-to keep the house). (15:13-16) From self-absorbed overconfidence David's mood swings wildly to paranoia; he begins to see conspirators everywhere. This fear of a non-existent fifth column in the heart of Jerusalem, that would tum his fortress into a death trap, induces a panicky flight. The calm and unswerving loyalty

31. A town south of Hebron, mentioned in Joshua 15:51. Ahithophel, a member of the inner circles of government, naturally had a residence in Jerusalem, but had arranged to be out of Jerusalem visiting his estates near Hebron, ready for Absalom's summons. 32. We must never lose sight of the fact that sacrifice was followed by a communion feast. The invited guests must have been from the best families in Jerusalem. As heir apparent, Absalom must have donated animals for sacrifice with a lavish hand to feed so many guests. 33. We have already been indirectly introduced to Ahithophel: he is Bathsheba's grandfather. 34. See Chapter 27. 35. Jonathan Swift, Polite Conversation, Dialogue 3. 36. Literally are after Absalom!

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

407

of his staff does little to quiet his fears: with his staff, his wives and children, 37 the troops of the garrison and the fast-reaction force stationed in Jerusalem he abandons the city. The knowledge that Absalom went to Hebron and the proclamation that he crowned himself there convincing him that Judah is also in rebellion against him, David does not tum toward his southern kingdom, but flees eastward. Absalom's ploy has succeeded brilliantly. David has cut himself off from his natural base of support.

THE FLIGHT OF THE KING So the king went forth, and all his servants 38 after him, stopping at the last house. And all his servants passed by him, and all the Cherethites, and all the Pelethites, and all the six hundred Gittites that hadfollowed him from Gath, passed on before the king. The king said to Ittai the Gittite: "Why do you also go with us? Go back and stay with the [new] king, for you are a foreigner, and also an exile from your country. 39 Only yesterday you came, and today should I make you wander about with us, seeing I go I know not where; 40 go back, you and your brethren with you, and may the Lord deal with you41 in loving-kindness and truth. " But Ittai answered the king, saying: "As the Lord lives, and as my lord the king lives, wherever my lord the king shall be, whether for death or for life, there will your servant bel" Then David said to Ittai: "Go; pass on. " So Ittai the Gittite passed on, and all his men, and all the children that were with them. And all the land was weeping aloud as all the people passed on; so the king crossed the brook Kidron and all the people passed on before him on the road to the wilderness. 42 (15:17-23) Leaving Jerusalem by the East Gate, which leads to the Mount of Olives, David pauses at the edge of the suburbs outside the walls, 43 by the last house, to review his followers. His servants 44 he expects to be following him, as his foreign mercenaries as well, the Cherethites and the Pelethites. 45 He takes their salute as they pass. Then follows a six hundred-man contingent of Gittites (Philistines from Gath) with their commander, Ittai, at their head. These are not foreign mercenaries in the same sense as the Cherethites and Pelethites; these are soldiers recruited from among Israel's erstwhile enemies, the Philistines, whom David had conquered and reduced to vassaldom. What are they doing here? They, of all people, owe him no loyalty. David, it seems has learned something after all from the sudden shock of events. Instead of trying to hold on to what troops he still has, he magnanimously releases Ittai and his men from their oaths of loyalty to him. You are strangers here, he tells them. This is not your quarrel. Serve the new

37. The leaving often of his concubines behind to take care of the palace in his absence (to prevent looting? to make the beds?) is inexplicable. They will prevent neither Absalom nor a mob from doing as they wish. The Hebrew term used here, vayaazov, which we, in common with most translators, have rendered as "leaving," has also the meaning of"abandoning" or "forsaking." Perhaps this would be closer to the intent of the remark. At any rate, by this bad decision, just one of many, David provides the opportunity for the Machiavellian master stroke that Ahithophel will devise to solidifY Absalom's burgeoning support. 38. Reading with LXX; MT reads and all the people 39. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg. (Literally from your place); MT reads to your country. 40. Literally I go where I go. 41. Reading with LXX; MT lacks the words may the Lord deal with you. 42. Reading with LXX; MT reads passed over on the face ofthe road to the wilderness. 43. See the opening section of Chapter 23 for a discussion of the evidence for the existence of suburbs outside the city walls. 44. The term "his servants" includes not only his household staff and bureau chiefs, but also that part of the professional Israelite army stationed in Jerusalem. The core of this force has been with David since the Wilderness days. 45. See Chapter 25, note 69.

408

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

king or go home. You have no future with me, a fugitive. This is not the David we have reluctantly come to know for the last ten to fifteen years. In this gesture we perceive glimmers of the old David, the David of the early years whose personal magnetism elicited such selfless devotion from the men he led. And the old magic still works; the Gittites refuse discharge. Ittai and his men will stick with their king to the bitter end, for good or for bad, their loyalty to him unshaken. David takes their salute, and they pass on with the rest of the army. Then David rouses himself, rises, and turning his back on Jerusalem sets forth. With crowds of weeping onlookers watching, the king crosses the Brook of Kidron and sets his face toward the Wilderness of Judah. 46

And Abiathar came up, and behold, Zadok also, and all the Levites, bearing the Ark of the Covenant of God; and they set down the Ark of God until the people had all passed out of the city. 47 Then the king said to Zadok: "Take the Ark of God back to the city. If I find favor in the eyes of the Lord, He will bring me back and let me see both it and His habitation. But should He say: 'I have no pleasure in you, ' behold, let Him do to me what seems good to Him. "48 (15:24-26) The entire religious establishment of Jerusalem, bearing the Ark, is decamping on the heels of the political echelon. David puts a stop to this. The Ark of the Covenant must be above politics. Its place is Jerusalem, unconnected to the fortunes of any particular regime. God will do with me as He wills; the presence of the Holy Ark will not influence God's purpose for me. But then, with a flash of his old self, David continues:

Then the king [continued], saying to Zadok the priest: "Are you a seer? Return to the city in peace, and your two sons with you, Ahimaaz your son and Jonathan, the son of Abiathar. Behold, I will tarry in the plains of the wilderness until word comes from you to tell me [what is happening]. " So Zadok and Abiathar returned the Ark of God to Jerusalem, and they remained there, while David made his way up the Mount of Olives, weeping as he climbed; his head was covered and he went barefoot, 49 and all the people that were with him covered every man his head and went up, weeping as they went. (15:27-30) "Don't be so sure how things will turn out. You want to help me? Get back to the city, you and your sons, and be my eyes and ears. Size up the situation and send me word. I won't cross the Jordan until I hear from you." David is tardily building the nucleus of the intelligence service whose lack, he now realizes, is what has largely contributed to his current disastrous state. One woe doth tread upon another's heel, so fast they follow (Hamlet, IV). David has barely come to grips with the realization that he is in the dark, with no real idea of what is going on, when he receives another blow:

And it was told to David.· 50 "Ahithophel is among the conspirators with Absalom!" And David said: "0 Lord, please, turn the counsel ofAhithophel into foolishness." (15:31)

46. As we remember (see Chapters 22 and 23) Jerusalem is sited on a mountain spur surrounded on three sides by deep ravines. At the bottom of the ravine to the east of Jerusalem flows the "Brook of Kidron," really a wadi, then begins the ascent to the Mount of Olives. From its crest it is downhill all the way, through the northern part of the wilderness of Judah until one reaches the Jordan Valley just north of the Dead Sea, a distance of a bit over 20 miles. From here to the fords, and across the river to the Trans-Jordan is but a short march. 47. This verse has been slightly rearranged to make it clearer in the translation. In the original Hebrew Abiathar is mentioned in the middle of the verse rather than at the start. 48. Literally what seems good in His eyes. 49. Signs of mourning. See Chapter 30, and especially note 25 for further references. 50. Reading with LXX and Targ; MT reads and David told.

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

409

The news that the most brilliant political manipulator of the age is with his enemies drives David to tum to God in prayer,51 and having turned to God, the prayer's answer almost miraculously appears.

And it was, when David reached the summit [of the mountain], the place where God was worshiped, and behold, Hushai the Archite52 was there to meet him, his robe torn and earth on his head 53 (15:32) For David, under the pressure of crisis functioning as if he were thirty years younger, Hushai is the answer to a prayer. Here is the means of neutralizing Ahithophel.

So David said to him: "Ifyou go on with me, you will just be a burden to me. But ifyou return to the city and say to Absalom: 'I am your servant, 0 King; as I was your father's servant in time past, so now will I be your servant, ' thus will you defeat for me the counsel of Ahithophel. Are not Zadok and Abiathar, the priests, with you there? So everything you hear in the palace tell Zadok and Abiathar, the priests. Behold, their two sons, Ahimaaz, Zadok's son, and Jonathan, Abiathar's son, are with them; through them you send to me everything you hear." (15:33-36) This was not what Hushai was intending; the old counselor was loyally following the fortunes of his king. But he immediately accepts that it is in Jerusalem that he can be of best service to his king. In the course ofhis ascent, between the foot of the Mount of Olives and the altar at its summit, David has organized an espionage service from scratch, and has implanted it in the very heart ofhis enemy's operations. Up to now David's activities have been transparent to Absalom, while he remained in the dark as to his son's plans and decisions. From now on the shoe is to be on the other foot. It is Absalom who will be left guessing as to David's whereabouts and intentions, while it will be David who has a pipeline into Absalom's inner councils.

So Hushai, the friend of David, 54 entered the city just as Absalom was arriving in Jerusalem. (15:37) The interruptions and involvements engendered by David's flight are not yet over. Two further encounters await him, posing issues that must be resolved before he can get away from the area of settlement into the uninhabited wilderness. The first occurs almost immediately.

David had passed a little beyond the summit, and there was Ziba, the servanr5 of Mephibosheth, coming toward him [with] a yoke of saddled asses, 56 bearing two hundred loaves

51. See Chapter 24 for a discussion of how prayer permeated the lives of people in the Biblical Age. 52. Hushai belonged to the clan of the Archites, part of the tribe of Benjamin (Saul's tribe, no less). They were situated north of Jerusalem. It is interesting to note that, in the cases of both Hushai (the Benjamite) and Ahithophel (from Judah), their tribal affiliations do not determine their loyalties. 53. Signs of mourning. See note 49 above. 54. The term Friend of the King seems to have been the official title of a court position, something on the order of a privy counselor. One of Nathan's sons, Zabud, will be appointed to this position in the court of King Solomon (1 Kings 4:5). See Postscript: The Death of the King, note 80. 55. Literally the lad; for background on Ziba and Mephibosheth, see Chapter 26. 56. The ass (or donkey) was the most common beast of burden in the Ancient Near East, as well as the steed ridden by all that could afford to do so (with the exception of royalty, who rode mules). When used for carrying loads it was usual to yoke a pair of asses together (as Ziba has here done): the combined carrying capacity of two yoked animals is significantly greater than that of the two asses separately.

410

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

of bread, a hundred raisin [cakes], a hundred of summer fruit, 57 and a skin of wine. Then the king said to Ziba: "What are you doing with these?" And Ziba said: "The asses are for the king 's household to ride upon, 58 and the bread and the summer fruit are for the warriorl9 to eat, and the wine is for the weary to drink in the wilderness. " ( 16: 1-2) This is an extremely generous and welcome gift, especially for a servant of the House of Saul to offer to the king who had supplanted them. This leads to the question, was this the private initiative of Ziba, or was he acting on behalf of Jonathan's son, Mephibosheth?

So the king said: "Where is your master's son?" And Ziba said to the king: "Behold, he remains in Jerusalem, for he said: 'This day the House of Israel will restore to me the kingdom ofmyfather!"' (16:3) Ziba insists that the gesture is his own. If we believe him (for, after all, we have only his unsubstantiated assertion) Saul's crippled grandchild thinks that the palace putsch is really a popular revolution of the Northern Kingdom against the House of David and in favor of the House of Saul. It is a grim reminder of the tenacity with which the supporters of the House of Saul have held on to the dream of the restoration of the "legitimate royal house." One can easily imagine David's reaction: "I restored to Mephibosheth his grandfather's estates, and appointed this man to work and oversee them so that Mephibosheth could live the life of a gentleman in Jerusalem on the proceeds, and this is the way he repays me!"

Then the king said to Ziba: "Behold, all that belongs to Mephibosheth is yours. "And Ziba said: "/bow [to you]; may /find favor in your sight, my lord the king." (16:4) We have spoken of the tenacity with which the supporters of Saul (largely from his tribe of Benjamin) maintain their loyalty, and nurture their dreams of a restoration. David is now to be treated to the opposite side of the same coin: the depth of the hatred for the, in their eyes, "illegitimate successor and supplanter of the true ruling house of Israel." Thirty years have passed since the fall of the House of Saul, and yet there are those who have never been able to make peace with the fact that an outsider sits on the throne oflsrael. 60

Now when king David arrived at Bahurim, 61 a man of the family of the House ofSauf2-his name was Shimei the son ofGera-came out .from there; he came out, cursing as he came. He threw stones at David, and at King David's servants, and at all the people, and at the warriors that were on his right hand and on his left. 63 And these are the curses that Shimei uttered: "Get out! Get out! Man of blood! Scumf4 The Lord is paying you back fol 5 all

57. Probably cakes of pressed figs. 58. Probably the meaning is that they are for the (pregnant) wives of the king or his very young children. 59. Hebrew naarim. 60. One has only to remember the unwillingness of vast numbers of the supporters of John F. Kennedy to accept Lyndon Johnson as a legitimate successor to their hero to get some idea of the feelings of many people toward David. 61. A Benjamite town, on the edge of the wilderness, bordering on Judah. See Chapter 21, "The Down Payment." 62. That is, belonging to the same clan as Saul. 63. That is, the king's bodyguards. 64. The Hebrew is Ish Belial, literally base, worthless fellow. We have also rendered the term vulgar and nasty follows, as the context indicated. If, on the other hand, the Hebrew term Belial means the nether world, the realm of the dead, as it clearly does in 2 Samuel22:5, then the phrase Ish Belial would mean something like "you piece ofcarrion!" i.e. one deserving of death and as good as dead.

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

4ll

the blood of the House of Saul, in whose stead you have ruled. May the Lord give your kingdom into the hand ofAbsalom, your son; you are in calamity because you are a man of blood! "66 (16:5-8) It seems that the road upon which David and his entourage are treading runs along the edge of a ravine, and that Shimei is standing on the slope on the far side of the cut. Even so, for a lone person to thus curse and provoke a column including military contingents is risky in the extreme. Only a blind and consuming hatred, driving him to openly gloat over the distress of the supplanter of his beloved king and kinsman, can explain such foolhardy behavior. How dangerous it is becomes immediately evident. Then Abishai, the son of Zeruiah, said to the king: "Why should this dead dol 7 curse my lord, the king? Let me go over, I pray you, and take off his head!" But the king said: "What have I to do with you, you sons ofZeruiah? Thus he curses because the Lord said to him: 'Curse David!' Who then shall say: 'Why have you done so?"' And David said to Abishai and to all his servants: "Behold, my son, the product of my loins, seeks my life; how much more now this Benjamite! Leave him alone and let him curse, for the Lord has told him [to do so]. Perhaps the Lord will see my a.ffliction68 and the Lord will repay me with good for this cursing ofme today." (16:9-12) Abishai must be at least fifty by now, yet he is as hotheaded and violent as he was as a teenager during the Wilderness years. 69 Unlike Abishai, David seems to have learned something from his shocking fall from the pinnacle of power: humility. David reins him in, reminding him and all his men that ifhis own pampered son, Absalom, seeks his life, does not one of Saul's kinsmen have even greater cause to hate him? This is not a time to throw his weight around. This pouring of abuse on the head of a beaten man, fleeing for his life, can be part of God's punishment for his pride and the arrogance of power. This is the time to bend under the lash of adversity. By taking it stoically and not striking back, he might merit God's forgiveness. So David and his men proceeded on the road, 70 while Shimei went along on the hillside opposite him, cursing as he went, and throwing stones, and flingin~ dirt. 71 And the king, and all the feople who were with him, arrived weary at the Jordan/ and he refreshed himself there. 7 (16:13-14)

65. Literally The Lord is returning upon you. 66. Shimei can not be holding David responsible for the death of Saul and his three sons; they died in battle with the Philistines. Perhaps he holds David responsible for the assassination of Saul's fourth son, Ishbosheth, or of the Gibeonite massacre of Saul's family (see Chapter 36). Or perhaps he simply can't stand the idea of this low class adventurer, his hands stained with the blood of uncounted thousands in his wars, seated on Saul's throne. After all, it was for this very sin of having shed much blood that David felt he had been barred from building a House for God (see Chapter 24). Thus the accusation may be that he is the murderer of Saul's kin, or a bloody villain, or both together. The hate runs very deep. 67. For the significance of this phrase, see Chapter 20, note 31. 68. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg; MT reads my iniquity. 69. See Chapter 16, especially note 10. 70. In the Hebrew text there is a break at this point. It is possible that in ancient times it was customary to insert here a penitential psalm, perhaps Psalm 89. See Chapter 29, note 9. 71. Literally dust. 72. Reading with LXX; MT lacks the words at the Jordan. 73. Literally revived himself there.

412

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING

David's flight from Jerusalem is more than a strategic retreat; the author treats it as almost a religious pilgrimage on the part of a proud man, humbled by the turn of events, penitentially seeking his God. David does not ride in a chariot or on mule-back. He walks barefoot, his head covered as a sign of mourning, and weeping. His attitude is humble, resigned to his fate, willing to accept anything that God has in store for him. This, indeed, is David's last great act as a religious figure. Here he lives in public what is so movingly expressed in many psalms. The road from the Mount of Olives to the fords of the Jordan is a distance of something over 20 miles. It is probably well after dark that the exhausted column of refugees reaches the crossing point. There they halt, as David has promised Zadok, and await the word from Jerusalem that will determine their future moves.

CHAPTER33

THE DAY OF THE MERCENARIES These, in the day when heaven was falling, The hour when earth's foundations fled, Followed their mercenary calling And took their wages and are dead. Their shoulders held the sky suspended; They stood, and earth's foundations stay; What God abandoned, these defended, And saved the sum of things for pay.

A. E. Housman, Epitaph on an Army ofMercenaries

Absalom's coup d'etat, in its opening phase, has been brilliantly successful. Capitalizing on pervasive discontent in Israel, he has emerged a populist leader with a wide following. He has managed to attract respected government figures to his side. He has engineered an uprising that has caught the government completely by surprise, and has panicked it into precipitous flight. And he has succeeded in cutting off David from his natural base of support. The problems now facing Absalom emerge from his two major shortcomings: he has failed to win over the regular army and its officer corps - they remain unswervingly loyal to David - and the public is deeply divided. Despite Absalom's inroads, there remains an enormous respect, even reverence, for David's charismatic personality and for his tremendous accomplishments. As long as David remains alive public sentiment may swing back to him. The good beginning must rapidly be consolidated, and David and his loyal entourage must be quickly crushed lest he make a comeback. At this stage of the events all the cards are in Absalom's hands. How he deals with these issues will determine the outcome of the putsch.

THE MACHIAVELLIAN Leaving David and his exhausted fellow fugitives hovering on the banks of the Jordan River, waiting anxiously to learn which way the cat will jump, the author turns back the clock to earlier in the day. We remember that, as David was toiling down the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, Hushai was returning to Jerusalem.

414

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

So Hushai, the friend of David, entered the city just as Absalom was arriving in Jerusalem. (15:37) It is to this moment that we now return.

Now Absalom and all the people, [that is] the men of Israel, arrived in Jerusalem. And when Hushai, the Archite, David's friend, came to Absalom, Hushai criei to Absalom: "Long live the king! Long live the king!" And Absalom said to Hushai: "Is this your loyalty to your friend? Why didn't you go with your friend?" 2 (16:15-17) The picture is not pretty; Hushai appears a groveling sycophant and Absalom, even though actively seeking supporters is so repelled by this fawning as to deliver a stinging rebuke. Hushai counters this accusation that he has betrayed a close friend by insisting that his primary loyalty is, and always has been, to the State, not to persons. He serves the crown, not the person who may, at any given time, wear it. As he has loyally served David when he was king, so with equal loyalty will he serve his successor. Then Hushai said to Absalom: "Not so; for whom the Lord has chosen, and this people, and all the men of Israel3-his will I be and with him will I remain. Secondly, whom should I serve if not his [David's] son; as I have served your father, so will I serve you." (16:18-19) The argument works; Hushai's presentation must have been very convincing. Absalom and his fellow conspirators are hardly people who value loyalty. Their only surprise is to discover in Hushai an opportunist of their own caliber. Jumping onto the bandwagon is something that they all understand and approve. Hushai is in; almost without effort David's man has installed himself in the inner councils of the conspirators. Then Absalom addressed' Ahithophel: "Give your counsel; what should we [now] do?" And Ahithophel said to Absalom: "Bed your father's concubines, whom he lejf to mind the palace; and all Israel will hear that you have made yourself odioul to your father, and the hands of all who are with you will be strengthened" (16:20-21) Ahithophel here addresses the pressing need of Absalom to shore up and consolidate his support among the waverers who are inclined to him but yet hesitate to take the final plunge. Is he determined enough, ruthless enough to pull off his coup? What if he and his father come to some understand-

1. Literally said. 2. Note the constant repetition of the term "friend." While the term "Friend of the King" was the formal title of a high court official (in Egyptian and Mesopotamian courts as well as in Israel, see Chapter 32, note 54), it here refers to more than just Hushai's title of office. Hushai's closeness to David was proverbial, and this was Hushai's problem: how to convincingly pretend to be a turncoat. Inasmuch as we, the readers, know that Hushai is acting for David and remains loyal to him, we can appreciate the irony of his cry, "Long live the kingf' In his own mind Hushai is thinking of David; Absalom, of course, takes the sentiments as referring to himself. 3. Though we are not told explicitly, from 2 Samuell9:JJ it appears that the Israelite militia ("all the men of Israef') have anointed Absalom king of Israel. This has no overtones of divine sanction; it is simply a public act of allegiance to the new king. 4. Literally said to. 5. The Hebrew heniach can also mean "to abandon" or "to forsake", as in Jeremiah 14:9. See Chapter 32, note 37. 6. That is, to stink. See Chapter 8, note 8.

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

415

ing-a regency, say-where will that leave his supporters? There must have been many who were sitting on the fence, afraid to commit themselves. With remorseless logic Ahithophel insists that the only way to persuade the fence sitters to commit themselves is to publicly create an irrevocable breach with his father, an act so outrageous as to completely foreclose any possible chance of reconciliation. The act he proposes is that Absalom publicly commit adultery with his father's wives, 7 an act guaranteed to shame and infuriate his father absolutely. It would also demonstrate to the public the strength of Absalom's resolution: he would stop at nothing in order to achieve his goals. 8 This is amoral realpolitik with a vengeance. In Ahithophel's book, anything is justified so long as the desired ends are achieved. So they pitched a tenr for Absalom upon the roof[ of the palace], and Absalom lay with his father's concubines in the sight of all Israeli-Now in those days, the counsel that Ahithophel gave was as if one had consulted the word of God; thus was all the counsel of Ahithophel [esteemed], both by David and by Absalom. (16:22-23)

The advice is followed. In order to make the act as public as possible it takes place, not in the palace proper, but on the roof, where the gawking multitudes lining the rooftops can see the concubines being led to the tent (one at a time?) and Absalom entering to take his pleasure. 10 And it works; after this there is little sitting on the fence. We are not told this directly, but it is implied in the author's summarizing comment. Whatever Ahithophel advises works; with him you cannot go wrong. Consulting him is like consulting an oracle of God. Of course there is a difference: Ahithophel never lets moral considerations get in the way of his keen political insight or his ruthless machinations. But then, only fools let themselves be hobbled by religious or ethical scruples. Amoral ruthlessness is the price of success. And Ahithophel, the complete Machiavellian, with his brilliant maneuvering, will place this young prince on the throne, and through him be a power, if not the power in the empire.

THE TURNING OF THE TIDE Then Ahithophel said to Absalom: "Let me choose twelve thousand men, and I will set out this night in pursuit of David And I will come upon him while he is weary and downhearted, and panic him; then all the people that are with him will flee, and I will strike down the king only. Then I will return all the people to you, as a bride comes home to her husband You seek the life of one man only; then all the people will be at peace. " 11 Now this statement pleased Absalom and all the elders ofIsrael. (I 7: 1-4)

7. Concubines were legal wives, but of low status. See "The Shadow ofRizpah" in Chapter 20. 8. As we have already mentioned, it was customary for a new king to inherit the harem of his dead predecessor. In this sense, taking David's wives was not only a public assertion of his succession to the throne, but also a public declaration that his father was already as good as dead. See Chapter 20, note 30. 9. Literally, the tent, i.e. "the bridal tent." 10. Nathan's curse would probably have been in the minds of many of the onlookers: "'Now therefore the sword will never depart from your House, because you despised Me, and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife. ' Thus says the Lord: 'Behold, I will raise up against you evil out of your own house, and I will take your wives before your very eyes and give them to your neighbor; he will lie with your wives in the sight of this very sun! For you did this thing in secret, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun!"' (12: 10-12) It was clearly in the mind of the author as she penned this. This was payback time, in more ways than one, for David's great sin. II. Reading with LXX; MT reads when all have come back [except] the man whom you seek, then all the people will be at peace.

416

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

Ahithophel counsels maintaining momentum: David is on the run and off balance. One quick, surgical strike and the whole matter will be over. You don't even have to kill the people who are with him. Kill him, and with David dead all opposition collapses. With no one to rally around, David's followers will have no alternative but to come back to you, David's son and successor. Give me 12,000 men and I will settle the matter for you this very night. 12 The advice sounds good, not only to Absalom but also to the leading figures of Israel who, it seems, have been formed into some sort of council, or cabinet, to govern the land. But before acting on it they decide to ask for a second opinion.

Then Absalom said: "Summon also, I pray, Hushai the Archite, and let us also hear what he has to say. " So Hushai came [before] Absalom. Then Absalom said to him: "This is what Ahithophel said Shall we take his advice? If not, you speak." And Hushai said to Absalom: "This time, the counsel that Ahithophel has given is not good" And continued: 13 "You know that your father, and them that are with him, are warriors, u and as embittered as a bear, robbed of her whelps in the field. Now your father is an experienced soldier; 15 he won't spend the night with the people. Behold, even now he has hidden himself in one of the pits, or in some [other] place. Now it will happen, if any of the people 16 fall at the first [attack], whosoever hears of it shall say: 'There was a slaughter among the people that follow Absalom. ' And even if he is a brave man, with the heart of a lion, he will utterly melt [with fear], for all Israel knows that your father is a warrior, and those with him are valiant men." (17:5-10) Hushai, upon hearing Ahithophel's proposal, undermines it brilliantly. While admitting Ahithophel's accustomed good judgment, he must this time take exception. Yes, David and his men are on the run, but a sudden night attack is not only a risky proposition, but will probably not achieve its purposes. One must remember that David, and the men with him, are experienced and battlehardened soldiers. They are not likely to be panicked by a sudden assault. If attacked, they are likely to give a good account of themselves and cause considerable casualties among our people, especially in a night melee. And this could have serious repercussions. We all know how rumors fly. A standoff skirmish with casualties could be magnified into a major reverse, which could panic many of our followers, and destroy all our momentum. We must never allow ourselves to overlook your father's reputation as a phenomenal soldier among the general population. Moreover, it behooves us to remember your father's skill as a guerilla fighter. He's too smart to be sleeping with his troops, where he would be vulnerable to a sudden attack. The plan would not achieve its purposes, and might even boomerang. Having, with devastating perspicacity, pinpointed all the weaknesses in Ahithophel's plan Hushai presents his alternative.

"But my counsel is, that all Israel be gathered to you, from Dan to Beersheba, 17 as the sand by the seashore for multitude, and that you yourself march among them. 18 And thus we will 12. Is Ahithophel trying to curry favor by his offer to command the strike force that will finalize the putsch and give Absalom the throne, or doesn't he trust that the military men in the conspiracy will have the necessary drive and competence to carry it out? We will learn that Amasa, whom Absalom appoints as his Commander in Chief, is anything but fast and decisive. 13. Literally said. 14. Literally mighty men. 15. Litemlly a man of war. 16. Reading with LXX; MT reads any ofthem. 17. A cliched phrase meaning "everyone." This does not imply that Judah has joined the revolt; it hasn't. For all Absalom's efforts the revolt is to end as it began, an affair of the Northern Kingdom oflsrael. 18. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg.; MT reads and that you go to battle in person.

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

417

come upon him in whatever place where he may be found; there we shall descend upon him as the dew falls upon the ground, and of all the men who are with him not one will be left. And if he withdraws into a city, then all Israel will bring ropes to that city, and we shall drag it into the valley, 19 until not one pebble will be found there. " (17: 11-13) Stripped of its picturesque verbiage, Hushai's counter-proposal is simple; don't take risks, but use the one great advantage you have: numbers. Smother him with numbers; that way is certain and risk-free.

Then Absalom and all the men of Israel said: "The counsel of Hushai the Archite is better than the counsel ofAhithophel. "-For the Lord had determined to overturn the good counsel ofAhithophel, in order that the Lord might bring evil upon Absalom. (17:14) And Hushai prevails; by painting Ahithophel's plan as risky (Ahithophel would never have denied it) and his as a sure thing, he persuades the risk-averse conspirators to reverse themselves. Note that the author insists that Ahithophel's advice was good-it probably would have worked. So much so that, considering Ahithophel's reputation, the author feels that it was Providential-an act of God-that Hushai was able to get his advice overturned. It was God's way of setting up Absalom for a fall. Now, having accomplished his major purpose of buying David time, Hushai turns to his second, no less important task. No time must be lost to inform David where things stand, for the conspirators having once reversed themselves might do so again.

Then Hushai said to Zadok and to Abiathar the priests: "Thus and thus did Ahithophel counsel Absalom and the elders of Israel, and thus and thus did I counsel. Now therefore send quickly and tell David: 'Do not lodge tonight at the fords of the Jordan, but cross over at once, lest the king and all who are with him be swallowed up!'" Now Jonathan and Ahimaaz were waiting by En-rogel, 20 and a maidservant was to go and tell them; and they were to go and tell King David; for they could not be seen to come into the city. But a boy saw them and told Absalom, so both of them left at once, and came to the house of a man in Bahurim21 who had a well in his courtyard; and they went down into it. Then the woman took a cover and spread it over the mouth of the well, and scattered grain22 over it, so that nothing would be noticed 23 And when Absalom's servants came to the woman at the house, they asked: "Where are Ahimaaz and Jonathan?" The woman said to them: "They have gone over the brook ofwater. " 24 They searched and did not find [them], so they returned to Jerusalem. Now after they [Absalom's servants] had gone, they came up from the well, and went and told King David; and they said to David: "Rise up and cross over the water quickly, for thus has Ahithophel counseled against you. " So David, and all the people that were with 19. Israelite cities were almost universally built on hilltops. 20. A spring a short distance southeast of Jerusalem, in the Kidron valley, near one of the roads leading to the Jordan valley. 21. The home town of Shimei the son of Gera, who only a few hours earlier that day had been abusing the fleeing David! (2 Samue/16: 5-8) Despite being a Benjamite town and a Saulite stronghold, even here one can find supporters of David willing to risk their lives for him. 22. Sometimes rendered as groats, the exact meaning of the word is not certain; it obviously was a type of grain that customarily was left in the open to sun-dry. 23. Literally, be known. Wells in those days were simply holes in the ground with no parapets and thus easily covered and concealed. 24. Or possibly, they have gone over towards the water [the Jordan].

418

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

him, arose and crossed the Jordan; by daybreak not one was left who had not crossed the Jordan. (17: IS-22) The tide has turned. David has succeeded in escaping his moment of greatest vulnerability and has gained the breathing space necessary to regroup. Though to all outward appearances Absalom's star is still rising, as he mobilizes and assembles a huge army and organizes his government, the truth is that it is David who is using this period to greatest advantage. Having joined the troops that fled with him to the regular army stationed in the Trans-Jordan, he mobilizes troops and gathers supplies from the large pockets of support he has in this region. David and his supporters emerge from this brief span of several weeks transformed from a pack of fugitives into a disciplined army ready and able to defend his throne. 25 All this Ahithophel has foreseen. A David aroused from his lethargy, and in command of a disciplined field army, will take a miracle to overcome. Either Absalom will win fast or almost inevitably lose. And due to his brilliant planning, victory had been within his grasp until that decisive moment when, trying to play it safe, Absalom and his foolish Israelite political friends threw away their main chance. What is the use of intelligence if the stupidity of others thwarts you? The Machiavellian's maneuverings have reached their outer limits, and have collapsed. For time and chance happen to them all. (Ecclesiastes 9: II) So realizing that the tide has turned, and knowing what the end will be, Ahithophel accepts the inevitable and acts accordingly.

When Ahithophel saw that his counsel was not followed, he saddled his ass, arose and went home to his city; he set his house in order and then hanged himself Thus he died, and he was buried in the sepulcher ofhis father. (17:23) When all his plans collapse about him, the man of faith can always fall back upon his God. The amoral Machiavellian has only himself; when his best proves insufficient he has nothing to fall back on. Ahithophel takes the only way out left to him.

COMEBACK David establishes his government in exile in the capital of the Gilead, the same city that Abner chose following the disaster of Gilboa. It is from here that David will organize his comeback.

So David came to Mahanaim (17:24) Meanwhile, his mobilization fmally completed, Absalom moves to the offensive.

And Absalom crossed the Jordan, he and all the men of Israel with him. Now Absalom had appointed Amasa as commander of the army in place ofJoab. (Amasa was the son of a man 25. We have already discussed at some length David's major base at Sukkoth (see Chapter 27, especially note 23); This was the foundation of his military resurgence. Mahanaim was his administrative center; from here he drew upon the population of the region. The support that he could count on among the great cattlemen and ranchers of the region (we shall shortly see instances of it) should not surprise us, despite the fact that the TransJordan, technically, was part of Israel. Even in his Ziklag days we know that units from this region augmented his followers (see I Chronicles 12:8-15 and Chapter 19, note 2). In reality, the Trans-Jordan was as backward a region as Judah in comparison with the Kingdom of Israel proper. It was a sort of "Wild East," and had little in common with Israel either socially or economically.

MAP 33.1 THE REBELLION OF ABSALOM N

cb • Succoth

SHECHEM

•

JABBOK RIVER

• Rabbah

*

JERUSALEM

• Hebron

0

5

10

15

IL...---'-'------~1~.---_..._!_

20

____.!

miles

420

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

named /thra the /shmae/ite 26 who had gone in to Abigail, daughter of Jesse, 27 sister of Zeruiah, Joab 'smother.) And Israel and Absalom encamped in the land of Gilead (17:2426) Joab and Abishai having remained loyal to David, Absalom needs a replacement to command the levy of troops he is raising. The choice falls to his cousin Amasa, who is also a cousin of Joab (see note 27). He probably held a fairly high rank in the army and was close to Absalom. Like David, Absalom likes to keep the command of the army within the family.

Now when David had come to Mahanaim, Shobi, the son of Nahas h. from Rabbah of the Ammonites, and Machir, the son of Ammiel of Lo-debar, and Barzillai the Gileadite from Rogelim [brought] beds, and basins, pottery vessels [with] wheat, and barley, and flour, and parched grain, and beans, and lentils, 28 [as well as] honey, and curds, and sheep, and cheese from cow [milk] for David, and for the people that were with him, to eat. For they said: "The people are hungry and weary and thirsty in the wilderness." (17:27-29) There are two points that the author is making here. First, that David is in friendly territory; the great landholders rally around, pouring supplies upon David and his followers. 29 Secondly, that David's erstwhile enemies don't use the moment of his discomfiture to rise up and either join Absalom or make a bid for liberty. Shobi would seem to be a younger brother of the late and unlamented Hanun, whose break with David triggered the cascade of the Aramean-Ammonite war (see Chapter 27). It appears that David has appointed Shobi as his governor over the Ammonites following their defeat and the death of Hanun, and that the new lord has learned the lesson of that terrible war. His appearance among the welcomers and suppliers is crucial: it means that David does not need to watch his back, and can devote his complete attention to his errant son Absalom.

Then David mustered the army that was with him, and appointed commanders for the regiments and for the companies. 30 And David divided the army into three parts: 31 one-third under the command of Joab, one-third under the command of Abishai, the son of Zeruiah, Joab 's brother, and one-third under the command of Jttai the Gittite. And the king said to the army: "I too will go out with you." But the army said: "You will not go out with us; for if we are routet/2 they will not care about us; even if half of us die they will pay no atten26. Reading with 1 Chronicles 2:17 and LXX: MT reads the Israelite. 27. Reading with LXX and 1 Chronicles 2:13-17. MT reads Nahash, which, if accepted, would imply that Abi-

gail and Zeruiah are the products of a previous marriage of their mother, prior to her marriage to Jesse. This would make the women David's half sisters. We prefer the simpler solution: that this is a scribal error, Nahash having been copied by mistake from the next verse. As it is there are complications enough in the household without having to add the problems of a blended family. It seems as though Ithra the lshmaelite was not married to Abigail, and that Amasa was the result of an extra-marital affair between Abigail and a non-Israelite. The text is very explicit: it does not say that Ithra married Abigail but that he "went into her." The bottom line of this excursus into family history is that Amasa is a first cousin of Joab and of Absalom, and a nephew of David. 28. Reading with LXX and Syr.; MT repeats parched grain at the end of the verse. 29. Only two examples are given, both somewhat surprising, as they are persons whom we would hardly expect to be sympathetic to David. The first, Machir, was the patron ofMephibosheth, Saul's grandson, at whose estate in Lo-debar he resided until David got around to bringing him to Jerusalem and rehabilitating him (see Chapter 26). The second, Barzillai, was the father-in-law ofMerab, Saul's eldest daughter (see 1 Samue/18:19 and 2 Samue/21:8). Thus the implication of the author's listing these figures is that if these great barons, despite their close tie to Saul and his family, supported David, how much more so those who had no specific reasons to oppose him. 30. Literally he set over them commanders of thousands and commanders ofhundreds. 31. Reading with LXX; MT reads And David sent out the army. 32. Literally flee away.

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

421

lion to us; but you are worth ten thousand of us!33 Therefore it is better that you help [by being] in the city. " 34 The king said to them: "Whatever you think is best. I will do. " So the king stood on the arm ofthe gate, 35 while all the army marched out, by their companies and their regiments. ( 18: 1-4)

This is the last decisive action recorded of David in this book. The David of old, briefly resurgent, fades and is replaced by the aged and broken man we have been getting used to, declining once more into the passivity and indecisiveness that have marked his last decade. Denied the field command by the army (and very rightly so; what is to happen to Absalom could easily have happened to David had he taken to the field in person), David is reduced to a figurehead, shunted aside to watch events but not to make them. The future now lies in hands other than his. It is well to pause and examine this army that is marching out of Mahanaim. The command structure is familiar; we saw something similar in the field in front of Rabbath-ammon. Here the army is divided into three parts: once again we can assume Joab takes direct command of the standing army while Abishai commands the reserves. 36 What is new, and significant, is that Ittai the Gittite has an independent command. These are the mercenaries, the Gittite battalion and the Cherethites and the Pelethites, and everything depends upon them! From auxiliary contingents in the days of the great wars, they have now expanded to become the central pivot of the army loyal to David. If they hold, victory is possible; if they break, everything is lost. David's final instructions to the army are also worthy of note. The author goes out of her way, at this point, to draw attention to them. They tell us everything about what David has become. And the king gave orders to Joab, Abishai and Jttai, saying: "Deal gently, for my sake, with the young man, with Absalom. " And all the army heard the king giving the order concerning Absalom to all the commanders. (18:5)

After all that has happened, what is one to say to this? Perhaps the following comment says it all: It is pathetic to observe how, throughout this day in which the gravest interests were at stake, David had no thought for himself-this we could excuse-none for his loyal troops or for the future of his country, but only for the son, the young man Absalom, who had cast every vestige of filial affection to the winds. 37 So the army took the field against Israel, and the battle took place in the Forest of Ephraim. 38 Now the Israelite army was routed by the David's troops, and there was a great 33. Reading with LXX and Vulg.; MT reads Now there are ten thousand like us. 34. Reading with LXX; MT reads from the city. The idea is that David can contribute most to the cause by keeping himself safe and letting others take the risks. 35. The wall of the approach-way to the gate (see Chapter 3, note 17). David is reviewing the troops as they march out to battle. 36. Numerically, the reserve troops mobilized by David from the Giliad form the bulk of the army. It is to these that David appoints officers from the regular army to command them (see Gen. Yadin's analysis of how the reserve system functioned in Chapter 25, Excursus VIII: David's War Machine). But they cannot begin to match in numbers the reserve forces mobilized by Absalom. The real strength of David's army lies in the regulars (always a rather small force), and especially in the mercenaries. 37. A. R. S. Kennedy, Samuel, ad loc. 38. A dense area of primeval forest, possibly south of the Jabbok River, between Mahanaim and the Jordan to the west. It is hard to realize today, as we gaze over these barren hills and plains that the entire region was once covered with primeval forest. In Biblical times those areas cleared of forest were terraced and intensively cultivated (see Chapter 4, Excursus II: How they Lived in Those Days). The current eroded desert is the heritage of the Arab conquest of 1300 years ago and its aftermath. Within a thousand years the "land of milk and honey," capable of supporting millions, had become a desert with a population of barely 300,000 souls (c. 1850). It is

422

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

slaughter there that day-twenty thousand men/39 The battle spread over the face of the whole country; and the forest devoured more soldiers that day than the sword consumed! (18:6-8) Absalom's army, composed of aging reserve troops who probably have not done service since the great wars fifteen years before, fleshed out with raw conscripts, is no match for David's battleseasoned veterans and picked mercenaries. This is especially the case when fighting in chaotic close combat in the rugged forest where Absalom's superior numbers cannot be brought to bear. 40 The author, in swift, sharp comments paints the picture: the battle spreading out over the whole forested region as all cohesion is lost; the comment that the incredibly difficult terrain accounts for more casualties than the fighting itself; 41 the murderous toll of dead; and the bottom line-Absalom's army totally shattered!

REBELLION'S BITTER END Having disposed of this terrible battle in two short verses-as we remember, our author has never been particularly interested in the details of wars-she returns to pick up the thread of her narrative; how the people involved in this tragic affair work out their interlocking destinies. Absalom, separated from his men in the chaos of the rout, falls victim to the perils of the forest.

Absalom was mounted on a mule when he encountered some of David's soldiers; as the mule passed under the tangled branches of a great oak his head was caught in the oak, and he was left hanginl1 between heaven and earth; the mule that was under him kept on going. 43 One of the men saw this, and told Joab, saying: "I just saw Absalom hanging in an oak tree!" Then Joab said to the man who told him: "What! You saw it! Then why didn't you smite him then and there? 44 I would have owed you ten pieces of silver and a belt!" And the man said to Joab: "Even if I had a thousand pieces of silver in my hands, I would not lay a hand on the king 's son; for in our hearing the king ordered you, and Abishai, and lttai: 'For my sake, 45 watch over the young man, Absalom. ' Otherwise I would have dealt

only with the return of the Jews to their ancient homeland since the 1880s that the process has been reversed, with reforestation and conservation of the soil beginning to return the "Promised Land" to a semblance of its condition during the Biblical era. 39. Reading with LXX; MT omits the word men. 40. An army trying to force its way through a tangle of trees and undergrowth quickly loses all cohesion, and battle becomes a series of single combats, ambushes and small unit skirmishes. In the future days of the great empires, the Assyrians will develop specially equipped and trained units for just this extremely difficult type of terrain. It seems likely that David's generals force the issue in the forest, rather than in the open country, precisely in order to give their seasoned troops the advantage over their numerically superior opponents. 41. One is reminded of the horrors of the "Wilderness Campaign" in the drive on Richmond in 1864. 42. Reading with LXX, Syr., Targ. and Q; MT reads he was held. 43. There is a common misapprehension, dating from Josephus and the Talmud, if not earlier, that Absalom, who made a fetish of wearing his hair long, was left dangling by his hair entangled in the branches of the oak. It makes a good moral: his pride being the cause of his downfall. But there is no mention of hair in the text, only of his head. The picture seems to be that of Absalom, riding at full gallop to escape David's men, whom he has just encountered (and either not watching where he was going due to glancing over his shoulder to keep track of his pursuers, or simply being jolted upward by an unexpected bound by his steed), is caught with his neck jammed into the fork of a low-hanging branch of a tree. The mule passing on, he is left hanging in the air, and slowly strangling. 44. Literally why didn't you strike him to the ground there? But see note 47 below for the unconscious irony of Joab's demand. 45. Reading with LXX, Syr., Targ. and Vulg.; MT reads who [ever you are].

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

423

falsely with my life (for nothing is hidden from the king), and you would have stood aloof" (18:9-13) Joab, upon receiving report of Absalom, is furious that the man didn't finish him off. The man's retort is instructive: "You say you would owe me ten pieces of silver and a belt; even ifyou paid me a thousand up front I wouldn't disobey the king's command. When the king would hear ofit-and he would-my life would be forfeit, and you wouldn't lift a finger to save me!" It would seem that Joab's character is well known to his men. But where this soldier fears to risk his life, Joab must act. To leave Absalom alive would be suicidal. The old king may have gone soft but Joab hasn't. Leave Absalom alive and David, in his dotage, will probably pardon him; if Absalom survives David, in due time he will inherit the throne. And then where will Joab be? Both the health of the State, and Joab's skin, depend on Absalom's not surviving his rebellion. In Joab's book, the only good enemy is a dead enemy. Joab has never forgotten the burning of his field, and what he thus learned about how Absalom felt towards him. Joab is not only furious with the soldier, he is also angry with himself. Why is he wasting time in conversation? Every moment is vital. Joab, the man of action, takes things into his own hands.

And Joab said: "I will not waste time with you like this. "And he took three javelins in his hand and thrust them through Absalom; 46 but he still remained alive in the midst of the tree. Then ten warriors, Joab 's arms-bearers, surrounded Absalom and struck him until he was dead 47 (18:14-15) As the entire rebellion is a struggle within the family as to who should sit upon the throne, with Absalom dead the revolt is over. The same would have been true the other way around had David been killed. Absalom dead, there is no reason to continue the slaughter. Joab, ever the pragmatist, immediately calls off the pursuit of Absalom's supporters.

So Joab sounded the Shofar, 48 and the army turned back from pursuing after Israel; for Joab held back the army. And they took Absalom, and threw him into a great pit in the forest, and they raised over him a very great heap of stones; and all Israel fled, every man to his own tent. (18:16-17) Joab insures that Absalom, as a rebel, shall not even be accorded the dignity of a proper funeral. As his end was ignominious, so is his burial: in a pit in a forest, covered with a cairn of stones. 49 To this end the author appends a bitter footnote:

Now Absalom, during his lifetime, had taken a pillar and raised it up for himself in the King's Valley; for he said: "/have no son to keep my name alive. "50 He named the pillar after himself; and it is called "Absalom's Monument" to this day. 51 (18: 18)

46. Taking the phrase (lit.) thrust them into the heart of Absalom to mean "into his body." Despite being transfixed three times, Absalom is still not dead. It takes Joab's arms-bearers to finish him off with multiple sword thrusts and slashes. 47. And now the bitter irony of David's oath becomes apparent (see Chapter 31, note 13). David had sworn: "As the Lord lives, not one hair of[Absalom] shall fall to the ground" (14:11), and here his corpse is hanging between heaven and earth, not one strand of his gorgeous locks touching the ground! Biblical audiences would have been waiting for this moment of denouement. 48. The ram's hom. See Chapter 8, note 7. 49. This form of burial was apparently reserved for persons disgraced or accursed. Note Joshua 7:26, 8:29, 10:27. 50. Literally in remembrance.

424

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

The juxtaposition of the forest grave with the forlorn pillar outside Jerusalem is the author's sad summation of this conscienceless fratricide and would-be patricide; this man who would be king.

THE BEARER OF THE TIDINGS All that now remains, at the close of this bloody day, is to inform David that he is still king oflsrael, and of the price he has had to pay for his crown. Considering his current condition, breaking the news will not be a welcome task. Yet the chance for a moment in the limelight will ever coax forth eager volunteers. We remember Ahimaaz, who along with Jonathan were the couriers who bore Hushai's secret report and warning to David. He has remained with the army, tagging along after Joab. It is he who now pushes himself forward.

Then Ahimaaz, the son of Zadok, spoke up: "Please, let me run and bring the king the news that the Lord has delivered him from the hand of his enemies. "52 But Joab said to him: "You shall not be the one to bring the news today; bear news another day, but today you shall not, for the king 's son is dead " Joab then said to the Cushite: 53 "Go, tell the king what you have seen, " and the Cushite bowed to Joab and ran off. But Ahimaaz, the son of Zadok, continued to [pester] Joab: "Come what may, please let me, also run after the Cushite. " And Joab said: "Why should you run, my son, seeing that you will get no reward for going?" But he said.· 54 "Be it as it may, I want to run. " So he said to him: "Run." Then Ahimaaz ran byway of the Plain/5 and he outran the Cushite. (18:19-23) Joab knows the news that Absalom is dead may bring the sky crashing down on the head of the bearer of these tidings, or at the least leave the messenger permanently tainted in the eyes of the king. For one who has a career ahead of him at court, this could be fatal; a Cushite mercenary is expendable. Joab does his best to spare the young man the danger, but Ahimaaz will not be denied his moment of "glory." With a shrug Joab lets him go, probably thinking that, with his messenger already dispatched, Ahimaaz will be too late. He is wrong. He has not sufficiently taken into account the lad's desperate enthusiasm.

Now David was sitting between the two gates; 56 the watchman on the roof of the city gati 7 went over to the wall, and lifting his eyes saw a solitary man running. And the watchman

51. The death of his three unnamed sons (see "The Pariah" in Chapter 31) must have hit Absalom very hard to induce him to take so unusual a step. Was it because he had suffered some injury that made him incapable of fathering more children? The edifice, partly hewn out of the rock in the Kidron Valley to the east of present walled city of Jerusalem, and known popularly as "Absalom's Tomb," dates back only to the first century BCE, and is neither his tomb nor the monument he raised to commemorate his name. The location of the original monument is currently unknown. 52. Literally judged him out of, that is, that in the contest between him and Absalom God has judged David the more worthy and has awarded him the verdict. 53. A Nubian or Ethiopian mercenary, possibly one of Joab's headquarters staff (less probably, a slave attached to headquarters as a communications runner). 54. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg.; MT omits these words. 55. That is, by way of the Jordan Valley. This is a longer route than the direct, overland route to Mahanaim taken by the runner, but being highway all the way, Ahimaaz can make much better time than the Cushite pushing through the forest over broken ground. As it turns out, Ahimaaz gets there first. 56. In the enclosed approach-way to the main city gate. See Chapter 3, note 17. 57. The city gate itself was a multi-storied, roofed structure flanked by at least two towers. The second story, directly over the entryway and containing one or more rooms, was reached by a stairway that was usually inside the towers. The flat roof of the top story was used as a watchman's platform.

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

425

cried out and told the king; the king said: "If he is alone, he has news to relate. "58 And as he came on apace and drew near, the watchman saw another man running; and the watchman called to the gatekeeper, saying: "Behold, there is another59 man running alone!" The king said: "He also brings news. " And the watchman said: "I can see that the running of the first [man] is like the running ofAhimaaz, the son of Zadok" And the king said: "He is a good man, and brings good news. " Then Ahimaaz called out, and said to the king: "All is well! "60 And he bowed down before the king with his face to the ground, and said: "Blessed be the Lord your God, who has delivered up the men who raised their hands against my lord the king!" And the king said: "Is all well with the young man Absalom? "61 Then Ahimaaz said: "I saw a great tumult when the king's servant, Joab, sent offyour servant, but I didn't know what it was about. " So the king said: "Move aside and stand here. " So he turned aside and stood (18:24-30) Sometime during his long run he must have finally grasped Joab's meaning. Ahimaaz's report is circumspect in the extreme. For one who was on the spot, his knowledge of events has become curiously selective. Not having stuck his neck out, he now fades into the entourage of courtiers attending on the king. Let someone else break the bad news (this boy has a future as a courtier).

And behold, the Cushite arrived; and the Cushite said: "Let my lord the king be informed: the Lord has this day delivered you62 out of the hand of all those who rose up against you!" The king said to the Cushite: "Is all well with the young man Absalom?" And the Cushite said: "May the enemies ofmy lord the king, and all those that rise up against you for ill, be like that young man!" Then the king began to shake, 63 and he went up to the chamber over the gate, and he wept; 64 thus he said: "0 Absalom, my son; my son, my son Absalom! Would that I had died instead ofyou, 0 Absalom, my son, my son!" (18:31-19:1)

NOW CRACKS A NOBLE HEART David, the king, was a man who exerted a rigid control over himself; this was one of the secrets of his meteoric success. The natural man was subject to the iron necessities of his ambition, and of his role as the king. Only rarely have we had glimpses of the natural David, the passionate man, breaking out from the restraints his sterner self imposed on him. 65 It is understandable if we have come to see him as cold, calculating and indifferent to others. Thus it is a shock to be confronted with the depth of his grief over his murderous and rebellious son. Now we begin to appreciate what the author has all along been telling us: that despite appearances, behind the mask of cold indifference, which so fatally alienated Absalom, lay a passionate love. Of all David's failings this is probably the greatest: his

58. Literally he has tidings in his mouth. 59. Reading with LXX, Syr. and Vulg.; MT lacks this word. 60. Literally Shalom! Peace! 61. Literally Is the young man Absalom [in] Shalom? Robert Alter comments: "[It is] almost as though he were trying to conjure shalom, well-being, from the last two syllables of his son's name." ("Scripture, Commentary, and the Challenge oflnterpretation," p. 5) 62. Literally has judged you; see note 52 above. Essentially the Cushite delivers exactly the message Ahimaaz said he would bring, but in fact toned down diplomatically. This phrasing implies that Absalom is dead. 63. Or tremble from emotion. 64. Reading with LXX; MT reads as he went. 65. Prime examples are: when he let himself go, and danced in a wild abandon of religious ecstasy before the Ark as it was brought up into Jerusalem (see Chapter 23) and, at the opposite extreme, when he dropped his guard over Bathsheba (see Chapter 28).

426

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

inability to express to his children the love he feels for them. Holding them ever at arm's length, it is only when it is too late that his love bursts its bonds in the form of wild grief. Love is never enough in bringing up children; David's permissiveness and overindulgence- his inability to set limits for his children and to discipline them-are notorious. Had he openly communicated his love for them it might have gone a long way to mitigate his other failings. What probably alienated Absalom more than anything else was his sense of being no more than an object to his unfeeling, distant father. In this David probably couldn't help himself. He never really cared for anyone except himself until he had children and began to care for them (apparently focusing his love on one at a time); it would seem that he simply didn't know how to open himself up. Part of this was undoubtedly native to his personality, and part the result of long training in self-control, in order to further his career. Careers have a price. Now, when it is far too late and Absalom is dead, an eruption of grief rises to the surface and paralyzes David. The way the author relates this tragic climax recalls to mind old Eli sitting at the gate of Shiloh, anxiously awaiting the news of the battle ofEben-ezer. 66 The author is inviting our comparison of the two figures. The comparison does not work to David's advantage. Eli, though he is never referred to in this final account of his life by title-as High Priest-but only by his personal name, is nonetheless totally focused on national and religious matters. He is able to handle the news of the death of his sons; it is the news of the loss of the Ark of God that prostrates and kills him. For all his faults and failures Eli constantly transcends the personal; he puts the larger issues first. David, by contrast, remains fixated on his personal feelings for his son. Despite the author's insistence that he is the king (in this episode he is referred to by name only once, at the very start; after this he is exclusively referred to by his title of "king") he refuses to act the part. He is incapable of transcending the narrow compass of his grief. It takes the brutal browbeating of Joab to rouse him to a grudging and minimal assumption ofhis responsibilities as the Head of State.

It was told Joab: "The king is weeping, and mourning over Absalom. " -Now the victory that day was turned into mourning for the entire army, for the troops heard tell that day: "The king is grieving over his son. " Then the troops stole into the city, as soldiers steal who are ashamed when they have fled in battle. So the king covered his face, and cried out in a loud voice: "My son Absalom! Absalom, Absalom my son!" (19:2-sr David's reaction, communicated to the troops, insults and humiliates them. Joab hears what is going on and acts to save the situation.

Then Joab came into the house [where] the king was, and said: "You have this day humiliated all your servants, 68 who this day have saved your life, and the lives of your sons and daughters, the lives of your wives and the lives ofyour concubines. 69 You love those who hate you, and hate those who love you! For you have made clea/0 today, that your officers and your soldiers are as nothing to you-for this day I know that were Absalom alive, and all of us dead today, that then you would be well pleased 71 Now get up! Go out and speak

66. Chapter 3. 67. Verse 19:1 in the Hebrew is numbered as 18:33 in Christian Bibles. Thus the numbering of the verses in this chapter, which follows the Hebrew versification, is one ahead ofthe numbering in Christian Bibles. 68. Literally you have shamed the faces of 69. Absalom, had he succeeded in coming to the throne through rebellion and regicide, would have had little alternative but to kill all his brothers and sisters lest one or more of them challenge his tenuous legitimacy. In the case of the wives, Joab is exaggerating for effect; Absalom would probably have taken them over as he had already done with the concubines David left behind in Jerusalem. 70. Literally declared. 71. Literally it would be proper in your eyes.

THEDAY OF THE MERCENARIES

427

i/

to the hearts ofyour troops; for I swear by the Lord, 2 you do not go out, not a single man will remain with you this night! This will be worse for you than all the evil that has come upon you, from your youth until now!" (19:6-8) Brutal shock therapy, but the absolute truth! If David will not placate his army after so humiliating them, they will desert in mass. The shock treatment jolts David out of his paroxysms of grief and he gets a grip on himself. So the king rose up, and took his seat in the gate. 73 And it was proclaimed to all the people, saying: "Behold, the king is sitting in the gate. " Then all the people came before the king. " (19:9) Joab has once again saved the day, but at a steep price to himself David will neither forgive nor forget the brutal way Joab ran roughshod over his grief. And when he learns (as he will) that it was he who killed Absalom/4 Joab will be a marked man!

72. Reading with Q; MT omits the word if 73. Ancient Near Eastern cities had no inner public place (an Agora). The only sites for meeting were the squares located in the city gates. They were used for public assemblies, religious events, education, trade and court procedures. In this case a chair is placed at the head of the Gate Square and here David sits and holds public audience. 74. Technically, Joab was not the one who killed Absalom. He was very careful about that, making certain to only wound him, and leaving the actual killing to his squad of arms-bearers (that Joab, a professional killing machine, could have, by accident, somehow missed killing Absalom-and with three thrusts, no less-is not a very credible proposition). The symbolic nature of Joab's actions has not escaped the notice of numerous scholars: he transfixes Absalom's body with three javelins, one for each of the three divisions of the army, and then turns his men loose to slash away at him so that no one can tell which stroke was the one that finished him off. Thus "the whole army killed him," and no one in particular. Needless to say, this technical evasion of responsibility will not work with David. He will hold Joab personally responsible for Absalom's death (as indeed he was), even though he can never charge him with it.

CHAPTER34

THE RETURN OF THE KING: PLANTING THE SEEDS The prince must . . . avoid those things that will make him hated or despised; and whenever he succeeds in this, he will have done his part, and will find no danger in other vices. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince

The uprising is over, the rebel army crushed and Absalom dead. Having gotten a grip on himself, the way is clear for David to return to Jerusalem and resume his rule. The question before David is: how shall he orchestrate his return? How he fled Jerusalem we remember; the author went into great detail. We recall him rejecting steed or chariot, toiling barefoot up the steep slope of the Mount of Olives, weeping and with his head covered in mourning. We recollect his humility and magnanimity, his refusal to take offence, his placing himself and his cause in the hands of God. We remember the flashes of his old panache as, from chance encounters while on the run, he built an entire espionage system and inserted it into the very heart of the conspiracy. This humiliating rout brought out the best that there was in David; it was one of his finest hours. 1 How he returns we will now learn. If we keep the incidents of his flight before our eyes as we read, the results will be instructive; David's homecoming is, in many ways, a mirror image of his flight. Everything seems reversed: the direction, the events and what awaits at journey's end. As usual, the author does not preach at us. She organizes and lays out the incidents, and leaves us to draw our own conclusions.

SETTLING SCORES The revolt oflsrael had its roots in deep public resentments and grievances as much as in the collapse of David's family life. It was not a revolt against the United Kingdoms per se, or the House of David which joined them: it was a rejection of a distant and aging king in favor of his young and caring son who would right all wrongs. The unexpected outcome of the rebellion-David reasserting himself, Absalom proving a broken reed and the Israelite army smashed-gives birth to a radical reappraisal in the Northern Kingdom. Now are David's great accomplishments remembered; perhaps we misjudged David, the thinking begins to run; maybe we were in error in thinking him in his dotage. Maybe we should try to patch things up and start once again on a new basis: we will reassert our loyalty to him and he will then give serious consideration to our grievances. It is this reversal and

I. It is interesting to note the effect that adversity has on David; his finest hours are almost invariably the product of being pushed to the wall. It is success and power that prove his undoing.

430

THE RETURN OF THE KING: PLANTING THE SEEDS

reappraisal that is to lead the northern tribes of Israel to make the first move, holding out the hand of accommodation.

Now Israel had fled, every man to his tent. And all the people throughout all the tribes were arguing [with each other] saying: "It was the king who delivered us out of the hand of our enemies, and saved us out of the hand of the Philistines. Now he has fled out of the land, from Absalom. But Absalom, whom we anointed over us, is dead in battle. So now, why do you say nothing about bringing the king back? (19:9-11) The public mood is swinging back to David. Now is the time for reconciliation; David has but to grasp the hand that will be offered to him and with some magnanimous gesture, of the type so typical of him in years gone by, win back the hearts of his Israelite subjects. Is David aware of this? We will be informed that he assuredly is, but that he has other priorities in mind. Instead of seizing this opportune moment, David will so orchestrate his return as to rub the noses of the Israelites in their defeat and disgrace; this by showing favoritism to the Kingdom of Judah, which had not joined in the rebellion.

Then King David sent [a message] to Zadok and to Abiathar, the priests, saying: "Speak to the elders of Judah, saying: 'Why should you be the last to bring the king back to his house? "'-For the talk of all Israel had reached the kini-"'You are my brothers; you are my bone and my flesh; why should you be the last to bring back the king?'" (19:12-13) This is not only demagoguery, but also willful incitement of regional jealousies; the very opposite of the policy David has pursued throughout his career? It is an approach so inherently counterproductive that, forgetting its petty spitefulness, it blatantly advertises that David the statesman is a thing of the past. But this is not all that there is to the message; David has more than one score to settle. His instructions to Zadok and Abiathar continue:

"And to Amasa, say this: 'Are you not my bone and my flesh? 4 God do so to me, and more also, ifyou do not become permanent commander of the army in place ofJoab!'" (19:14) If there is one man to whom David owes his crown-indeed, his very life-it is to Joab. Without him he would never have survived. As in so many past instances, Joab's total loyalty to David, and his unerring instinct for the right deed at the right moment, has pulled David's chestnuts out of the fire. So David, owing Joab everything, proceeds, as one of the first acts in his new lease on rule, to cashier his benefactor! David reprieved is no longer the humble and penitent fugitive of a few weeks ago. The pendulum has swung to the other extreme. The war over, the rebellion crushed, who needs Joab? David not only thinks he is now safe in removing Joab from his command, he probably considers himself very clever in co-opting Amasa in his place. As Absalom's general this will win the loyalty of the Israelite levies; as a prominent Judean citizen the appointment will curry favor in that quarter as well. 5 2. Literally reached the king in his house. 3. For more than thirty years David has consistently positioned himself above sectional differences. Now, for the first time, he publicly is taking sides. 4. In using this phrase to the elders of Judah David is stressing their tribal kinship; to Amasa, that they are close relatives, part of the same family. As we have previously noted, Amasa is the son of Abigail, David's older sister. 5. How politically obtuse David has become will be born out by the events as they unfold. At this point, suffice it to say that the Israelite levies feel neither loyalty to, nor affection for this Judean cousin of Absalom who had

THE RETURN OF THE KING: PLANTING THE SEEDS

431

How do the Judeans take to this appeal? They have been sitting out Israel's rebellion-their king has never called them to arms. This is his ftrst call to them; never having revolted, they have seen no need to bring him back. For them he has never left. But if this is what their king wishes-a public demonstration of support-so be it. They will gladly comply, and if this demonstration will shame and humiliate those snobby and fractious Israelites, so much the better! Thus hi swayed the hearts of all the men of Judah, and as one man they sent to the king [this message]: "Return, you and all your servants. "(19: 15)

So David, undoubtedly feeling very pleased with himself, begins his return; a journey that is to culminate in a crescendo of fiascoes that he himself has engineered.

ON JORDAN'S BANKS: VENGEANCE DEFERRED So the king returned and came to the Jordan, and Judah came to Gilga( to meet the king, to conduct the king over the Jordan. Then Shimei, the son of Gera, the Benjamite from Bahurim, hurried down with the men ofJudah to meet King David; and one thousand Benjaminites with him. And Ziba, the servanl of the House of Saul [was also there], and his fifteen sons and twenty servants with him. They rushed into the Jordan before the king: they crossed over the ford, to bring over the king 's household and to do whatever he wanted 9 Then Shimei, the son of Gera, threw himself down 10 before the king as he [was about to] cross the Jordan. (19:16-19)

If we begin to get a sense of viewing a rerun, that the film we have seen before is being rewound, there is much truth in this perception. There is a symmetry between flight and return that goes beyond a mere recounting of historical events (though they did take place): it is also an artifact of the author's presentation. She is picking and choosing among a plethora of incidents in order to make a point. Let us first examine the case of Shimei, the son of Gera. We remember him cursing and throwing stones at David as he fled Jerusalem; kicking an opponent, figuratively speaking, when he is down. Now the shoe is on the other foot and Shimei, feeling the headman's blade raised over his neck, rushes to the Jordan in hope of an amnesty. 11 He knows full well that without pardon his life is forfeit. He is gambling on the calculation that, politically, it is in David's interest to begin his reentry with a magnanimous gesture. His calculation proves correct. And he said to the king: "Let not my lord hold me guilty, 12 nor remember the wrong that your servant committed on the day that my lord, the king, left Jerusalem, that the king been foisted on them, and had Jed them to crushing defeat. As far as influence in Judah, we will shortly Jearn how little ice he cuts there. 6. That is, David. 7. An ancient shrine on the West Bank of the Jordan. We remember it as the site of Saul's coronation. See Chapter 7. 8. Litemlly the lad 9. Literally, whatever was good in his eyes. While the Hebrew of these verses is not totally clear, the overall meaning seems fully understandable. 10. Litemlly fell down. 11. It was not uncommon for kings, in the Ancient Near East, to proclaim an amnesty upon ascending the throne, and upon other propitious events during their reigns. 12. Literally impute iniquity to me; the Hebrew avon refers to consciously committing wrong, with malice aforethought. See Appendix: Psalm 51, note 13.

432

THE RETURN OF THE KING: PLANTING THE SEEDS

should take it to heart. For your servant knows that I have sinned/ 3 therefore, behold, so here I have come this day, the first of all the House of Joseph, 14 to go down to greer 5 my lord, the king. Then Abishai, the son of Zeruiah, spoke up: 16 "Should not Shimei be put to death for this-for he cursed the Lord's anointed?" But David said: "What have I to do with you, you sons ofZeruiah, that you should put a spoke in my wheel today? 17 Shall anyone be put to death in Israel this day? Don't you18 know that I am this day [once again] king over Israel?" And the king said to Shimei: "You shall not die." And the king gave him his oath. (19:20-24) In both cases Abishai wants to kill Shimei for lese majeste, and both times David spares him, but for very different reasons. Then a humbled fugitive, he bore Shimei's curses as part of God's punishment, a deserved debasement that he accepted with resignation. Now, as David the triumphant, reinstated as king over Israel, he foregoes revenge because, as he explicitly states, it is politically inexpedient. He foregoes, but he does not forgive. 19

ON JORDAN'S BANKS: JUSTICE DENIED We remember that among the ftrst to reach the fords of the Jordan was Ziba, this time accompanied by all his 15 sons and his 20 servants. While David has been occupied with Shimei, they have been busy helping David's family across the river and carrying over his personal effects. Now, suddenly, who should appear on the scene but their master, Mephibosheth. And Mephibosheth, son of Saul20 came down to meet the king; now he had cut neither his toenails nor his fingernaili 1 nor trimmed his mustache, nor had he washed his clothei2 from the day the king had left until the day he returned in peace. Now when he came from Jerusalem 23 to meet the king, the king said to him: "Why didn't you go with me, Mephibosheth?" And he said: "My Lord, the king, my servant tricked me, for I said to him: 'Saddle an ass for me, 24 so that I may ride on it and go with the king -for your servant is lame. He [Ziba] slandered your servant to my lord, the king; but my lord, the King, is like an an13. Hebrew het: committing a wrong in error or due to carelessness. Note how, after admitting malicious wrongdoing he downplays his act. In effect he is begging David to treat what he did as a minor error, with no evil intent, committed carelessly! 14. A euphemism for Israel. Joseph was the progenitor of the two largest tribes of the Northern Kingdom, Ephraim and Manasseh. 15. Literally to meet. 16. Literally answered. 17. Literally that you should be "a satan" to me today, that is, an adversary, one that causes me to stumble. (It is only in later times that the term, having become the satan, is applied to the angel who serves as the "Prosecuting Attorney" in the Divine Court. It is as such that the term is used in the Book ofJob. At a still later date the term became, in the Christian tradition, a proper noun, "Satan," the name of the Adversary of man and God.) 18. Reading with LXX; MT reads I. 19. In I Kings 2:8-9 we are informed that, on his deathbed, David still bore the grudge and instructed his son to take care ofShimei after his funeral. See Postscript: The Death ofthe King. 20. He was, of course, the son of Jonathan, and grandson to Saul. In the Bible the phrase "son of someone" can mean "descendant of." By referring to him as "the son of Saul" is the author implying that any lingering sense of obligation to the son of his dear friend, Jonathan, has vanished, and that David now sees him solely in a political light: as the last surviving member of the House of Saul? 21. Reading with LXX; MT omits nor his fingernails. 22. All these were signs of mourning. 23. Reading with LXX; MT reads to Jerusalem. 24. Reading with LXX, Syr., and Vulg.; MT reads for I thought, I will saddle me an ass.

THE RETURN OF THE KING: PLANTING THE SEEDS

433

gel of God; do therefore whatever is good in your eyes. For all my father's house were but men doomed to death before my lord, the king, yet you set your servant among those who eat at your table. What further right have/, then, to cry to the king?" (19:25-29) David confronts Mephibosheth with the pointed question: "Why weren't you among those who stuck with me in my extremity?" This amounts to a charge of treason; we remember Ziba's story of how Mephibosheth stayed in Jerusalem expecting the revolutionaries to make him king as the legitimate heir to Saul. Mephibosheth' s answer is that his servant betrayed him: sent to saddle an ass so that he could go with David, the servant used the opportunity to abscond with all the available asses, leaving the cripple Mephibosheth stranded. 25 How David responds to this is a portent of things to come.

And the king said to him: "Why do you talk so much? I say: you and Ziba divide the property! And Mephibosheth said to the king: "0, let him take it all, for my lord the king has returned to his house in peace." (19:30-31) This is blatant injustice! David, on the basis of an unsupported story, had stripped Mephibosheth of all that he possessed. Now Mephibosheth puts in a counterclaim that is certainly plausible. Does David examine the matter, cross-examine, or postpone judgment until witnesses can be called? He is bored by the whole issue (a matter which is, for both sides in the dispute the difference between affluence and abject poverty). In total disregard for all judicial procedure, the Chief Justice tells Mephibosheth and Ziba to split the difference, thus perpetrating injury and injustice on both parties alike. 26 If this is any example of how David has been in the habit of adjudicating the cases brought before him, we can begin to understand what lay behind the deep resentments that Absalom so successfully harnessed. 27

AT JORDAN'S BANKS: PREFERMENT OBTAINED One last matter needs to be disposed of before David will be free to cross the Jordan and reclaim his Kingdom. 28

Now Barzillai, the Gileadite, had come down from Rogelim 29 accompanying the king to the Jordan, to escort him over the30 Jordan. Barzillai was very old; eighty years of age. Now he had provisioned the king during his stay at Mahanaim, for he was a very wealthy man. And

25. We remember the donkeys; they turned up with Ziba loaded with supplies for David. He must have cleaned out the townhouse's storeroom to load them. 26. If Ziba was telling the truth, he has been slandered and unjustly stripped of half the lands awarded to him for his Joyal aid in David's extremity. If Mephibosheth is telling the truth, he has been slandered and unjustly stripped of half his lands by a scheming servant. Either way justice has been perverted. Mephibosheth's failure to protest the decision also speaks volumes: he is happy to get off with his skin. As he sees it (and he is probably right} his life was hanging by a thread. So much for David's promise to Jonathan. 27. As to the truth of the matter the author does not say-that isn't the point she is making. But she does obliquely hint: while Ziba's story is totally unsubstantiated by any evidence, the author does present corroborative evidence to buttress Mephibosheth's story. Mephibosheth's long fingernails and toenails, his overgrown mustache and dirty, smelly clothes do substantiate his claim to have been in mourning over David's having been deposed. 28. While technically part of the Kingdom of Israel, the Trans-Jordan seems to have given no support to the revolt, and to have remained Joyal to David. 29. Rogelim was far to the north on the Transjordanian plateau, at least 2500 feet above the fords of the Jordan where David was crossing. 30. Reading with Q; MT reads in the Jordan.

434

THE RETURN OF THE KING: PLANTING THE SEEDS

the king now said to Barzillai: "Cross over [the Jordan] with me, and I will provide for you in Jerusalem with me. " But Barzillai said to the king: "How many years have I left to live, that I should go up with the king to Jerusalem? I am this day eighty years old, can I tell the difference between good and bad?31 Can your servant taste what I eat and drink? Can I still hear the voices of male and female singers? Why then should your servant be an added burden to my lord the king? Your servant will go a little way over the Jordan with the king. Why should the king reward me with this [great] reward? Let your servant, I beg ofyou, return and die in my city, by the grave of my father and mother. But here is your servant, Chimham; 32 let him cross over with my lord, the king, and do for him whatever seems good in your eyes." (19:32-38) Barzillai, the great baron, has accompanied David to the Jordan. Unlike in the case of Joab, David feels a deep sense of gratitude to this man for the succor he provided. You took care of me, he proposes, now I will take care of you. Barzillai respectfully declines on grounds of extreme age; he is no longer able to enjoy the opportunities of the high-living court, and will only be a burden to David. He uses the offer, however, to suggest preferment for his son, Chimham. 33 David readily accepts the request, taking Chimham under his wing. And the king said: "Chimham shall cross over with me, and I will do for him whatever seems good in your eyes; anything that you want of me I will do for you. " So all the people went over the Jordan but the king remainec/ 4 and the king kissed Barzillai and blessed him. Then he [Barzillai] went back to his home and the king crossed over to Gilgal, and Chimham crossed over with him. (19:39-41) Chimham' s future has been secured. We can be thankful to the author for concluding this section the way she did, with David gratefully rewarding the service rendered to him at his moment of greatest need by Barzillai. It helps to wash away the bad taste left by virtually everything else he has done since Absalom's death, and stands in striking contrast to his treatment of Joab, to his vindictiveness toward the defeated rebels, and the cavalier way he has related to the people he has met. Almost without exception, however, his actions will all determine his future in ways he does not suspect. Having planted the seeds of his future with these decisions, evasions, and deferments, David, for the last time, turns his back on the Trans-Jordan and re-enters the Land oflsrael.

31. A euphemism for sexual activity. 32. LXX and Syr. add my son before or after the name. 33. We assume with LXX and Syr. that Chimham is his son, though this is nowhere mentioned in MT. 34. Reading with LXX; MT reads crossed over.

CHAPTER35

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

George Santayana, The Life ofReason The repercussions of David's decision to intrude his kingdom of Judah into what is essentially an Israelite upheaval begin almost from the moment he crosses the Jordan. And all the people ofJudah [were present to] escort the king, and also a part1 of the people of Israel. Then all the men of Israel came to the king, and said to the king: "Why have our brethren, the men ofJudah stolen you away [from us], escorting the king and his household over the Jordan, together with all David's men?" (19:41-42)

The Israelite delegation (the one thousand Benjamite troops that came with Shimei, and whoever else has arrived in the interim) is outraged to find itself upstaged by the mass Judean outpouring. This is their affair-they have driven David out, they are inviting him back-what is Judah doing mixing in? The question is directed to David since the Israelite delegation senses, correctly, that it is he who is behind this demonstration. Either David does not deign to answer, or he is given no chance; things quickly get out of hand as the Judeans, affronted in their turn by the use of the term "stolen you away," react with heat. Then all the men of Judah answered the men of Israel: "Because the king is our kinsman! And why are you so angry over this matter? Have we eaten at all at the king's expense? Has he given us any gift?" (19:43)

This assertion that they are getting nothing out of their presence, that they have come simply out offamily feeling to welcome their kinsman back from "abroad," and the implication that the Israelites are there for purely mercenary reasons (which in fact is the case) infuriates the Israelite delegation. And the men of Israel answered the men of Judah, saying: "Wi have ten shares in the king, 3 and moreover we are the firstborn rather than you/4 Why have you slighted us? Were we not the first to propose bringing back our king?" ( 19:44) 1. Literally a half 2. Literally, /. 3. That is, we are ten tribes to your one. 4. Reading with LXX; MT reads and in David also we have more than you.

436

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

This retort, which amounts to the simple assertion that Israel is the bigger and more important kingdom and therefore should by natural right, have priority in all matters, serves to totally enrage the Judeans. The situation is beyond control, if indeed David even wants to control it. Two armed masses of men face off against each other, on the verge of violence. It is the Israelites, vastly outnumbered, that back down.

And the words of the men ofJudah were fiercer than the words ofthe men ofIsrael. ( 19:44) Is this what David intended, or even expected? It is doubtful. He probably only intended to forcefully remind the Israelites that they were doing him no great favor by inviting him back after their rebellion. He had beaten them with his own troops, and had not even called upon his loyal Kingdom of Judah, which would back him to the hilt. David is in no mood to compromise with the fractious Israelites or to even give ear to their grievances. He holds the cards and he will dictate his terms. With this harsh stance, and the confrontation David has provoked by his appeal to the Judeans, the chance for reconciliation has passed. It only remains to be seen if the Israelites are sufficiently cowed to take David on these terms. They are not. David has miscalculated: he has pushed too hard and too far.

Now a certain worthless fellow, a Benjamite named Sheba, the son of Bichri, happened to be there; and he sounded the Shofa-i and proclaimed: "We have no portion in David, Neither have we any sharl in the son ofJesse; Every man to his tents, 0 Israel. " 7 So all the men of Israel went up from followinf David, and followed Sheba, the son of Bichri. But the men of Judah stuck to their king, from the Jordan [all the way] to Jerusalem. (20: 1-2) The reaction is immediate, and far more serious than the rebellion of Absalom. That was at heart no more than a family squabble, where one party mobilized popular resentments in Israel for his own benefit. But no one questioned the basic political structure, nor was it threatened. Now the stinging defeat in the Trans-Jordan, combined with the brutal rebuff at Gilgal has left Israel with no way to relieve its burning sense of grievance and humiliation within the existing political system. The resulting explosion is therefore directed against the political structure itself: The Kingdom of Israel rejects and deposes the entire House of David, and secedes from the United Kingdoms. In one blow the work of an entire generation, the voluntary union of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, is undone. How badly things have been mismanaged can be seen from a comparison of the revolts of Absalom and Sheba. Absalom's revolt was a coup d'etat, a palace revolution, led by a member of the reigning House in conjunction with the leading echelons of Israel-the elders. Sheba's rebellion, on the other hand, is a populist uprising, led by a low-class rabble-rouser who is no part of the establishment.9 This threatens a social revolution as well as a political one. Having once let the genie out 5. The ram's hom, used as a call to action-in this case rebellion. 6. Literally inheritance. 7. As is so often the case in the Biblical world, in times of high emotion the speaker breaks into poetry! See the section entitled "Impeachment" in Chapter 9. 8. This is the literal meaning of the Hebrew, as in the English expression "stuck like glue." The Judean troops do not go home, but stick closely to David, forming a tight security cordon around him, until he is safely within the walls of his mountain fortress. 9. This is the meaning of the term belial, here rendered as a worthless fellow. See Chapter 38, note 16 for other uses of the term.

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

437

of the bottle by proclaiming secession and overthrow of the ruling dynasty, come what may, things will never be the same again. 10

INTERLUDE: TYING UP LOOSE ENDS Escorted home to Jerusalem by Judean troops, David finds unfmished business awaiting him at the palace: his ten concubines whom he had so unwisely left behind "to keep the house." They present David with a problem; as Absalom, at Ahitophel's advice, had publicly committed adultery with them, David cannot take them back into his bed. How he deals with them makes one's gorge rise.

Now David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the king took the ten women, the concubines whom he had left to keep the house, and he put them in prison. He provided for them but did not go in unto them; so they were imprisoned to the day of their death, widows with their husband alive!ll (20:3) Granted that, for no fault of their own, David cannot take them back as his wives. The decent thing to do would be to divorce them. Even more generous would be to settle on them good-sized dowries. With their beauty (they would not have been David's concubines had they not been beautiful) and respectable dowries (to compensate for the stigma of what they had undergonei 2 they could have found husbands, had children, and lived normal lives. Instead, on the principle that "if I can't have them, no one will," David sentences them to life imprisonment. There is something increasingly appalling about the way this old man throws his weight around, discarding human beings like outworn garments. 13

THE RESURRECTION OF JOAB David now faces one of the most severe crises of his career: if he cannot stamp out the rebellion before it can organize and consolidate itself he faces a prolonged and disastrous civil war. Swift action is imperative, but he has just cashiered the one person upon whom he can rely to do the job. For forty years he has leaned upon Joab; now, by his own doing, Joab is no longer available. He will have 10. The cry "What portion have we in ... ? To your tents, 0 Israel!" is destined to become a distressingly familiar call in the years to come. II. Reading with Targ.; MT reads in living widowhood(?) 12. Absalom most probably had raped them; it is extremely doubtful that they had submitted willingly. 13. Various scholars attempt to extenuate David on the grounds that, since Absalom had used these women to make a political statement, David was thus "forced" to use them thus to make a political counter-statement-to reassert his right to the throne. Others proffer the claim that David had no choice: had he divorced these women, anyone marrying an ex-concubine of the king would have a claim to the throne. I think that both of these arguments are spurious: the first because the man who used them to strengthen his claim to the throne is dead; what stronger political counter-statement than that could be made? As for the second, I do not find serious the idea that any Tom, Dick, or Harry, by marrying an ex-concubine of a king could thus acquire a serious claim to the throne when there were a good dozen sons, legitimate heirs, waiting in line. In all events, a king is subject to God's law as much as any other human being, and just as there is no law forbidding a former wife of a king to marry so is there a law forbidding the depriving a person of freedom for no cause. In the Jewish religious view, and under Biblical jurisprudence, violating divine law for purposes of political expediency is a crime against God and man. But however one looks at this sordid affair-and it is sordid-David is treating these ten women as objects, not as human beings. Whatever rationalization he (and his latter day apologists) may have, I cannot get around the feeling that, at its root, the motivation was one of petty vindictiveness: taking out his sense of humiliation on a group of defenseless victims.

438

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

to make do with Amasa, a less than adequate replacement. So quickly do David's ill-considered acts recoil upon him. Then the king said to Amasa: "Mobilize the men ofJudah, and in three days report here to me. "14 So Amasa went to mobilize Judah; but he was late for the time set him. Then David said to Abishai: "Now will Sheba, the son of Bichri, do us more harm than Absalom! You take your lord's servant/5 and pursue after him, lest he find himself fortified cities and cause us [real] trouble. " 16 So all Joab 's men went out behind him [Abishai], and the Cherethites and the Pelethites, and all the mighty men; they left Jerusalem to pursue Sheba, the son ofBichri. (20:4-7) The skies are dark with bad decisions coming home to roost. David sends Amasa to mobilize the Judean reserves, and appoints the date for the mustering of the entire army; the date arrives and Amasa and the reserves are nowhere to be seen. Time is running out for a fast resolution to the crisis: if Sheba gets the time to swing several walled cities to his side, and to garrison them, we will be talking of prolonged siege warfare. Without Amasa, David is reduced to falling back on his only experienced field commander, Abishai (he will never reinstate Joab-it is now a matter of pride and principle with David-Joab is out). He will have to rely on the regulars, the standing army that Joab has commanded all these years, the elite rapid-reaction force and the mercenaries. Abishai assumes command and at once sets out. Why does Amasa fail to meet the deadline? It could be because he lacks the ruthless drive and the high level of personal competence that gets things done. He is not a member of the elite officer corps of the army and we have never heard of him holding any command-his appointment seems to have been purely political. On the other hand, there may very well be resentment in Judah that Joab, who has led the levies to so many victories and who is as much a "native son" as Amasa, has been dumped. Perhaps it is a combination of lack of drive and ability, and lack of the stature to command instant respect; the fact remains that the troops do not flock to the colors to follow him. And so Amasa misses the rendezvous. And what is Joab doing all this time? He is keeping a very low profile since having been fired but, unbeknownst to David (though obviously with his brother Abishai's knowledge and consent), he is tagging along with the army. Now when they reached the great stone that is in Gibeon, 17 [here was] Amasa coming to meet them. Amasa, realizing that events are rapidly moving beyond him, gathers up what troops he has managed to mobilize, and rushes to intercept the army. After all, he is Commander in Chief. He catches up with them at Gibeon. Now Joab was clad in a soldier's tunic, and over it was ~irded a sheathed sword, strapped to his hip. And [as he advanced] it slipped out and fell. 8 And Joab said to Amasa: "Is it well with you, my brother? " 19 And Joab took Amasa by the beard with his right hand, as if 14. Literally Call up for me the men ofJudah [within] three days, and you be present here. 15. I.e. the king's personal troops, the standing anny and the mercenaries. David is referring to himself in the third person. 16. Reading with Targ.; MT reads snatch away our eyes. 17. Possibly the great high place at Gibeon where later Solomon was to offer sacrifice (I Kings 3:4). Gibeon, as we remember, is about seven miles northwest of Jerusalem 18. Reading with LXX; MT seems to read: Now Joab was girded with his military tunic, and over it a girdle with a sword,fastened to his hip, in its sheath ... 19. Literally, "Are you at peace, my brother?"

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

439

to kiss him. Now Amasa took no notice of the sword that was in Joab 's [left] hand, and he [Joab] struck him in the stomach with it, and spilled out his bowels onto the ground without striking a second time; and he died! As Josephus recounts it, Joab was not clad in his usual armor (he had been relieved of his command-he is only along as "an observer"). He is clad in a military tunic with a sheathed sword strapped sideways on his hip. As he moves forward to greet his cousin, Amasa, seemingly by accident Joab's sword slips out of its sheath and falls to the ground. Joab breaks stride, stoops, picks up the sword with his left band-a most natural move-and then continues his advance to greet Amasa. Amasa, taking no notice of the sword held clumsily in Joab's left hand, has not the slightest suspicion as Joab takes hold of his beard with his right (his sword) hand preparatory to kissing him. Instead of the kiss, a thrust from the sword in Joab's left rips open his abdomen, spilling all his entrails out on the ground. For Joab, one blow is sufficient. There is no need to strike again. So history repeats itself. Once before David tried to dump his ferocious nephew, and once again Joab's replacement quickly departs this world. 20 But this is a more serious matter by far. Then Abner, the intended replacement, was the commander of an enemy army with whom David was doing a deal behind Joab's back; and besides, Joab had the public excuse that the killing was justified because of a blood feud. Here Joab has been relieved of his command by the king and replaced by Amasa, whom he now murders in cold blood. This is mutiny, and in the face of the entire army. And does the army arrest Joab for the murder of its Commander in Chief? At first they are too stunned to act, and the initiative is quickly taken out of their hands. Then Joab, and Abishai, his brother [continued] the pursuit after Sheba, the son of Bichri. And one of Joab 's warriors took his stand by him [the corpse of Amasa) and cried: 21 "Whoever is in favor of Joab, and whoever is for David, follow Joab!" Now Amasa was wallowin~ in hii2 blood in the middle of the road and anyone who came by, seeing him, stopped 2 Now when the man saw that all the people stood still, he dragged Amasa off the road into the field, and covered him up. 24 Once he had been removed from the road, all the people passed on after Joab, to pursue Sheba, the son of Bichri. (20: I 0-13) The army has mutinied along with Joab and Joab now controls the army!

THE WISE WOMAN OF ABEL How can Joab justify his act of treason? Only by suppressing the rebellion, and restoring David with dispatch to his Northern Crown. Only success can excuse his sedition. And with the army once more in his capable hands, he proceeds to do just this. Now he [Sheba] passed through all the tribes of Israel until Abel of Beth-maacah, 25 and all the Bichritei6 gathered together and followed him in. Now they [David's army] came, and

20. See Chapter 21. 21. Literally said. 22. Reading with LXX; MT lacks this word. 23. This clause is transposed from the end of the verse. 24. Literally threw a garment over him. 25. Reading as in 20:15; MT reads Abel and Beth-maacah. Abel ofBeth-maacah was a town in the northernmost extremity of Israel, about five miles west of Dan. It was a main road junction: the east-west road from the coastal city of Tyre to Damascus crossed the road from Razor leading north to the Valley of the Lebanon. The name Abel of Beth-maacah suggests that the city once belonged to the Aramean Kingdom of Beth-maacah (see

440

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITIER FRUIT

laid siege to him in Abel; they cast up a siege ramp against the city, and all the people that were with Joab were battering the wall to overthrow it 7 when a wise woman standing on the ramparts of the city18 called out: "Listen! Listen! Please tell Joab to come over here that I may speak with him!" And he approached Then the woman said: "Are you Joab?" And he said: "It is/." And she said to him: "Listen to the words ofyour maidservant." And he said: "I'm listening. " Then she said: "They were wont to say in olden times: 'Let them but seek counsel at Abel, ' and so they settled the matter. I am one of those who are peaceful and faithful in Israel; you seek to destroy a city and a mother in Israel! Why will you swallow up the inheritance of the Lord?" (20: 16-19) The speed of Joab's reaction (note that Abishai has-quite illegally-relinquished the command to his brother) has given Sheba no time to recruit a leadership corps and to organize an army. He keeps falling back, hoping to gain time, until finally, with his back to the border, he has no alternative but to hole up in Abel with his immediate supporters-the members of his own clan. And Joab, ever the professional, quickly invests the city, constructs a ramp for siege towers and battering rams, and makes the necessary preparations for the assault. So far everything is routine. Suddenly a woman's voice is heard, shrieking from the battlements, demanding to speak with Joab. Consenting, Joab approaches the city wall, stopping just out of effective arrow range (we must understand that what follows is carried out by the two parties at the top of their lungs, with both the army and the inhabitants of Abel listening avidly). Who is this woman who takes it upon herself to initiate a parley with this formidable general who is besieging her city? 29 We are given no personal data about her, not even her name. All that we are told about her is that she is "a wise woman." 30 The rest we will have to infer from what takes place. She opens by recalling the ancient roots of Abel, a city known from olden times for its wisdom; so much so that it was renowned as an arbiter of disputes. 31 Then she insists on her loyalty and peacefulness; by implication she is indicating to Joab that she represents the attitudes of the majority of the inhabitants of the city: we are not seditious; we are not in revolt; these rebels just walked in and took us over. Then comes the challenge: why do you want to destroy this ancient and venerable city, this "mother in Israel," this part of the inheritance that the Lord has allotted to the people oflsrael. 32 Joab's response is emphatic: he professes shock that anyone could even imagine that he harbors such awful intentions! 33 He has nothing against the city. He is simply a loyal servant of David in pursuit of a dangerous rebel. Tum him over to us and we will leave you in peace.

Chapter 25). By the time of David it must have been Israelite for generations for the wise woman to have been able to refer to it as "a mother in Israel" (20: 19). 26. Reading with LXX; MT reads Berites, a designation otherwise unknown. The Bichrites were members of the clan from which Sheba. the son ofBichri, hailed. 27. The siege ramp (Hebrew solelah) was constructed of beaten earth and mortar, reinforced with stones. Wooden beams were incorporated into the upper layer forming a staging platform to support siege engines. 28. The phrase standing on the ramparts has been transposed from verse 15. 29. We have no indication that she has been authorized by anyone to speak for him, though some commentators simply assume, as self-evident, that the city elders appointed her as their spokesman. At the most, she represents the "peace party" in the city. 30. For a discussion of the meaning of this term see Chapter 31, and especially note 7. 31. "Like 'father,' 'mother' sometimes was a title for someone bearing a particular kind of religious authority.... Note also that the northern Israelite city of Abel may be considered an oracular center; it is called 'a mother in Israel."' (Meyers, Discovering Eve, p. 160) 32. For the significance of the term "the inheritance of the Lord" see Chapter 31, note 14. 33. Though we are not told, I assume none of the listeners broke out in hysterical laughter at this statement; everyone observed the proprieties and kept straight faces, even though Amasa's blood is barely dry on Joab's hands.

MAP 35.1 THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST SHEBA, SON OF BICHRI

•

I Shechem I I I I I

''

eRabbah

Gibeon-:

•

JERUSALEM

• Hebron

NEGEB Beer-sheba •

1- - - ~ Flight of Sheba, son of Bichri & Joab's pursuit

0

10

20

30

I

I

I

I miles

442

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT And Joab answered, saying: "God forbid! God forbitf 4 that I should swallow up or destroy! That is not the easel But a man from the hill country of Ephraim, Sheba, the son of Bichri by name, has raised his hand against the King, against David! Give us him alone, and I will depart from the city. (20:20-21)

This is both generous and clever on Joab's part. He accepts the woman's protestation of loyalty on behalf of the city's inhabitants and disavows any intention of making an example of the city for opening her gates to rebels. He furthermore grants amnesty to all of Sheba's followers within the city. "All we ask is: give us the leader and we will leave you in peace." By not demanding unconditional surrender Joab is leaving an out for everyone but Sheba.

And the woman said to Joab: "Behold, his head will be thrown down to you from the wall. " (20:21) The woman does not offer to open the gates to Joab; she trusts neither him nor his army once in the city. He wants Sheba; he will get Sheba. Then if Joab breaks his promise they still have the option of defending themselves. She is not called a wise woman for nothing. We have said that the woman was speaking on her own authority and had not been authorized to negotiate with Joab. The next verse tends to bear this out: having cut a deal with Joab, she now has to convince her fellow Abelites (not to mention Sheba's clansmen, the Bichrites) to go along with her. And this will not be easy. Sheba, of course, will fight to the last, as long as there is any opportunity to resist, along with all those he can convince to support him. Moreover, no one relishes the thought of throwing someone to the wolves, especially if he has claimed refuge as a political refugee. The woman seems to be possessed of no official position; she has only her personality and powers of persuasion to rely upon.

Then the woman, in her wisdom, approached all the people of the city, and they cut off the head ofSheba, the son of Bichri, and threw it down to Joab. (20:22) Maurice Samuel envisions the scene thus: I sometimes think of her as the woman with the voice: yelling above the thunder ofthe battering rams, piercing into the ears of Joab, whispering, pleading, exhorting, arguing in the streets and homes of Abel, unto all the people: "Cut his head off, cut his head off, there will be no peace otherwise, I've promised it to Joab, cut his head off." Her wisdom prevailed. 35

Joab proves as good as his word. Wiser by far than his uncle David, he understands that there is a time for generosity and forbearance, even in the midst of rebellion and war. Joab's aim is to restore quiet and tranquility; he knows that to kill all Sheba's supporters, the Bichrites, means to wipe out an entire clan; this will madden the tribe of Benjamin. To "make an example" of Abel will infuriate Israel even further. There is no organized revolutionary party; Sheba never got a chance to organize one. As usual, Joab cuts right to the heart of the matter. In the case of the previous rebellion, Absalom

34. For this expression, see Chapter 12, note 7. 35. Samuel, Certain People of the Book, p. 89. Maurice Samuel finds the wise woman of Abel a horrifying person; he is appalled by her relentlessness in organizing the lynch of Sheba. I disagree. I see her as another Abigail, a woman who, by taking upon herself an extremely dangerous initiative, succeeds in averting a bloodbath. (Sheba and his followers occupied the city, had obviously cowed the inhabitants if not into active support then into passivity, and certainly had no scruples about killing her if they felt that it served them.) If it had not been her it would have been some other, one might say. But we have no evidence for such a belief. The fact remains that she was the savior of Abel.

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

443

was the key: kill him and the revolt was over. Here Sheba is the key: kill him and the rebellion dies stillborn. So he blew the Shofar, and the arm/6 dispersed from the city, every man to his tent. And Joab returned to Jerusalem, to the king. (20:22)

The United Kingdoms have been preserved intact, and will remain so through the reign of Solomon, David's successor, but with this difference: formerly, the United Kingdoms were a union voluntarily entered into, and cemented by loyalty. From now on Israel will acknowledge David as their king, not out of choice but due to force majeure. Never again will the House of David mobilize the Israelite levies, only the Judean reserves. The fortresses of the Northern Kingdom will multiply, and they will be garrisoned by royal troops, mercenaries and increasingly by chariot regiments; Israel is an occupied kingdom. Judah will remain David's voluntarily; Israel will, in effect, become part of the empire, taken and held by force. And now we come to the bottom line with regard to David: the cashiered general returns to the king who fired him, at the head of his army. By a relentless series of blunders, errors of judgment, moral lapses, failures of nerve and just plain obtuseness, David has progressively lost control of his family, his kingdoms and now, at the last, his army. The army has mutinied and now stands foursquare behind their general. David tried to fire Joab, and failed. Now it is Joab who has the power to fire David. The only thing that stands between David and dethronement in favor of a military dictatorship is Joab's personal loyalty to his uncle. As long as Joab retains control of the army David is safe on his throne, but control of events has passed from his hands. For some time now Joab has been a prime mover, filling the growing vacuum left by David's ever increasing dysfunction and loss of moral stature. It was he who got David moving at the end of the Amorite war almost 15 years ago and it was he who engineered the reconciliation, for what it was worth, between David and Absalom. It was he who ended the rebellion by killing Absalom, and kept the army from mutinying immediately afterwards by forcing David to conciliate them. It is he who, by seizing control of the army, and his skillful combination of decisive action and magnanimity, breaks the back of Sheba's rebellion before it can even get moving. In his earlier days David would never have allowed himself to get into such crises. For some time now he has needed someone to pick up his pieces after him. He is no longer capable of running things. Now it is others who will handle state affairs as David, increasingly withdrawn, declines into his final years.

THE POWER ELITE Who is now running the Kingdoms and the Empire? The author concludes her saga of the tragic decline of David from triumphal conqueror to bumbling impotence with a resume of the cabinet that is actually governing the kingdom during the last half-decade or so of the reign. 37 Now Joab commanded the entire army ofIsrael; And Benaiah, the son ofJehoiada, commanded the Cherethites and the Pelethites; And Adoram was in charge ofthe corvee; 38

36. Reading with LXX; MT reads and it dispersed. 37. The medieval commentator, Radak, sees this list not as a summary and conclusion but as a new beginning. Quite properly grasping that this list must be seen in the light of the previous one, he sees the connection between the two cabinets not in terms of contrast but rather in similarity. Just as the earlier cabinet was displayed at the end of the wars that established David's kingdom, so now that the revolts of Absalom and Sheba have been suppressed there is a renewal of David's kingship, therefore it is appropriate to once again make known who comprises his cabinet.

444

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT And Jehoshaphat, the son ofAhilud, was Mazkir; 39 And Sheva40 was Scribe; And Zadok and Abiathar were priests. Also Ira, the Jairite, was David's minister. 41 (20:23-26)

When we compare this cabinet with that of twenty to twenty-five years earlier, the first thing that strikes our eye is the similarities: six persons that held portfolios over two decades ago are still in their jobs.42 This continuity argues for a remarkable stability of government. It is the differences, however, that we will find instructive. The first to note are the absences. The previous list began: Now David reigned over all Israel; and David administered justice and equity to all his people. (8:15)

This introductory sentence emphasized that it was David who was running things, as well as his primary role as chief justice of the land. Neither this introductory sentence, nor anything comparable, heads our cabinet list. To me this omission by the author delivers a loud and clear message: David is no longer in charge, and the less said of David's role as administrator of justice and equity the better. There is a vast vacuum at the top; the cabinet, from being a tool of David's, now sets policy in his place. There is something else missing; the earlier list concluded: And David's sons were ministers without portfolio. (8: 18)

David's sons no longer sit in on cabinet meetings; is this a change occasioned by Absalom's rebellion, or is it simply that the cabinet wants to distance itself from the issue of the succession to the throne?43 In their place we have a new face at the cabinet table, Ira the Jairite. 44 Does coupling Ira's title as "David's Minister," with the absence of any mention of David, imply that David no longer chaired the cabinet meetings and that Ira either represented him or served as a liaison between David and the cabinet? There is another new face at the table: Adoram. 45 He heads a new department of the government, one that did not exist twenty years earlier, the Department of Forced Labor. This is a noxious institution, copied from neighboring states in the region; relying on forced labor to construct public buildings, build fortresses, wall cities, etc. The workers are conscripted from their homes, and forced to work without pay, possibly on an annual basis, for a month at a time. 46 If we accept Gen. Yadin's reconstruction of David's reserve army system, 47 which involved one month's active army service

38. Forced labor battalions made up of adult males, conscripted to work without pay, often on an annual basis, for one or more months at a time. 39. The Secretary of State. See Chapter 25. 40. In 2 Samue/8:17 his name is listed as Seraiah. See Chapter 25, note 62. 41. Literally was David's priest. 42. That this is so may be not because of David but despite him. We know that David tried to dump Joab, and failed; perhaps the fact that others are still in their places is due more to their tenacity than desire on David's part.

43. Alternatively, the cabinet may wish to debate the issue on an ongoing basis, which would be impossible with the sons present. 44. Probably he hails from Havvoth-jair in the Giliad; is this a gesture by David in thanks for the support the Giliad gave to him during Absalom's rebellion, putting a Transjordanian in the cabinet? 45. He is most often called Adoniram in the Bible, His full name was Adoniram, son of Abda. (1 Kings 4:6) 46. Under Solomon conditions worsened; many workers had to serve four one-month periods a year. 47. See Chapter 25, Excursus VIII: David's War Machine.

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

445

every year, then we can propose the possible genesis of the forced labor battalions. As Israelite reserve units became increasingly unreliable, and with Absalom's rebellion actively treacherous, the reserves were disbanded in Israel. In place of active army service an equivalent period of unpaid labor may have been substituted. 48 By the last years of David's reign the system was sufficiently established and systematized to merit an official of cabinet rank to govern it and coordinate the labor force with the other arms of the State. In all lands and climes where this pernicious system has been introduced it has generated deepseated hatred. That, in Israel, the workers were undoubtedly fed and housed, and probably clothed, at state expense while on the job, did not lessen the fury this system of semi-slavery fed. The term by which we translated the Hebrew mas-corvee-is the name by which the French knew their version of this system. The corvee was one of the prime causes of the French Revolution; the mas is to be one of the main causes of the explosion that will eventually tear the United Kingdoms apart. One last word about forced labor-the place that it held in the economy. Earlier in the book, while discussing the economic consequences of imperial expansion, we raised the possibility that a serious recession and an ever-growing shortfall between government income and expenditure followed the end of the wars of conquest. 49 If this was indeed the case, then it is probable that the government simply lacked the money to implement its projects on the open market. Forced labor may have been introduced once the treasury no longer had the money to pay wages. Once introduced, it becomes an addictive habit. So large does it loom in the affairs of state that Adoram merits the number three slot at the cabinet table! The remaining point of interest in comparing the late cabinet with the earlier one is the changes in position that have occurred around the table. 50 Joab retains his position as "first among equals;" this is hardly surprising as he has wrested total control of the army from the king. His heightened status is indicated by his title having been changed from commanded the army (8:16) to commanded the entire army (20:23). In the absence of the king he probably chairs the cabinet meetings. The next point to notice is that Beniah, the commander of the mercenaries, and number two man in the army, has moved up from number six spot in the cabinet to number two. We have said that, with David in his dotage, the government was one step short of a military dictatorship. The fact that the two highest-ranking cabinet members are the men who control the army simply bears out this contention. That the third highest-ranking member of the government commands the forced labor battalions indicates clearly that what we are viewing is an authoritarian regime; a military autocracy. Israel, and to a lesser extent Judah, have come a long way from home rule and primitive tribal democracy. Samuel knew what he was talking about when he warned the Israelites of what was in store for them should they insist on a monarchy. The civilian components of the government, the Mazkir (Secretary of State) and the Scribe51 have been demoted from number two to number five position, and from number five to number six respectively. The religious component of the government, the priests Zadok and Abiathar, once so prominent in the number three and number four positions, have been demoted to the bottom of the list, outranking only Ira. This demotion simply mirrors the decline in religious values that has paralleled David's fall, and the steadily increasing prestige of the power brokers who now dominate and run affairs. On this note, which is, in effect, a summary of fifteen years of imperial consolidation and moral decline, the author lowers the curtain on her riveting, century-long, historical epic which has

48. Significantly, it appears that forced labor was never introduced in the Kingdom of Judah (the reserve system there, being loyal to the crown, was never disbanded), but only in Israel. 49. See "The Economic Consequences of Empire" in Chapter 25. 50. When we use the term "cabinet table" we are speaking figuratively. It is, in fact, highly unlikely that they sat around a table. It is much more probable that the members of the cabinet sat on benches around the wall of the chamber they used for meeting, or possibly in some sort of semicircle in front of the king's throne. 51. For a description of the functions and responsibilities of these offices, see "The Government" in Chapter 25.

446

THE RETURN OF THE KING: REAPING BITTER FRUIT

stretched from the birth of the prophet Samuel to the last years of King David. The author can go no further; what is yet to come lies beyond her horizon.

The play is done; the curtain drops, Slow falling to the prompter's bell: A moment yet the actor stops, And looks around to say farewell. It is an irksome word and task: And when he's laughed and had his say, He shows, as he removes his mask, A face that's anything but gay.

William Thackeray, The End of the Play

EPILOGUE:

THE ALTERNATIVE VISION

"Not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit," says the Lord of hosts. Zechariah 4:6

The end of the matter, all having been heard: fear God, and keep His commandments; for this is the whole man. Ecclesiastes 12:13

CHAPTER36

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL It will have blood they say: blood will have blood. William Shakespeare, Macbeth, III

The horror! The horror! Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness

INTRODUCTION TO AN EPILOGUE With Chapter 35 (2 Samuel 20) the Book of Samuel comes to a close; the uprising of Sheba and its suppression being the last chronological event recorded by the author. The description of the cabinet, which concludes the chapter, serves as a summary of the state to which David's reign has brought the People of Israel. The great sociopolitical transition from "primitive democracy" to the autocratic centralized state has been completed; the shape of things to come for the next half a millennium, the time span remaining to that part of the Biblical Age encompassed by the First Commonwealth, is now irreversibly set. What is to come will simply play out the pattern that has crystallized in this critical century. But the Book of Samuel does not end here; four chapters yet remain. While the curtain has rung down on the human drama, the central question of the Samuel remains unresolved. This was the issue raised by Hannah in the Prologue with her seminal pronouncement: not by power shall man prevail (1 Samuel2:9), her central insight that power is not the road that leads to success in life. In retrospect we realize that the body of the Book is actually a century-long demonstration of the truth of Hannah's insight. We have been beholding human beings with enormous potential and great skills attempting to achieve success, as the world sees success. But no matter how brilliantly they play the game of power their lives all end in failure. With the tragic ending of David-one of the most brilliant players of the game ever to emerge on the stage of history-the author rests her case. If he could not do it, who can? And we must concede that the author has built a strong argument that the game of power is a no-win proposition. It is not the high road to success, even in the narrowest understanding of the term. But what is the alternative? It is to this subject, as I see it, that the final four chapters of our Book are dedicated-the author's Epilogue to her Magnum Opus. But before we can begin to consider the author's proposed answer, we must first address a prior question: are we correct in assuming that these four concluding chapters are indeed a unified Epilogue? On the face of it, Chapters 21-24 of 2 Samuel consist of isolated fragments: episodes, lists and poems mostly dating from the early years of David's reign. They do not advance the historical narra-

450

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

tive. We can reckon with their presence at the end of Samuel in two ways: either the current arrangement is the work of the author or it is the result of other hands. Starting with the second possibility we might argue that the book halts in mid-stride because its author died, and that the book was published posthumously. The person who took the matter in band-a friend, editor, or executor-finding along with the book various documents containing material which had not been incorporated in the manuscript, simply added them on at its end and published the Book in this form. 1 Though perhaps the majority of scholars tend to some version of this theory/ I do not find it particularly credible. In the first place, the arrangement of the material in these four chapters is not haphazard. The components are not simply thrown together but form a carefully structured unit. This is how the final portion of the Book is arranged: A- a narrative episode from the early days of David's rule (Chapter 21 :1-14) B- exploits of David's heroes in the wars with the Philistines (21:15-22) C -two poems by David (22:1-23:7) B'- a list of David's heroes and their exploits (23:8-39) A'- a narrative episode from the early days ofDavid's reign (24:1-25) Though the sections are of uneven length the arrangement is clear. In the second place, when we step back and view Samuel as a whole we realize that these last chapters are an integral part of the structure of the work. The Book ofSamuel uses poetry as a framing device: the work's beginning, middle and end are buttressed with poetic works. The structure is as follows: A - a prose introduction (1 Samuel I). B- a poem: "Hannah's Prayer" (1 Samue/2: l-1 0). C- a poem at midpoint: David's Elegy over Saul and Jonathan (2 Samuel I: 17-27). This marks the central turning point of the Book. 3 B' -two poems by David: Psalm 18 and "David's Last Words" (2 Samue/22:1-23:7). A'- a prose conclusion (2 Samue/23:8-24:25). This symmetry bespeaks careful organization and planning. Moreover, of all the Psalms of David that could have been chosen to buttress the conclusion of the Book ofSamuel, the author selects Psalm 18, whose last verse echos the last verse of"Hannah's Prayer."4 There is yet a further consideration: these final four chapters, when considered as a unit, mirror the main body of the Book. In the Prologue the author has a woman, Hannah, set the theme for the Book-the nemesis of powerwhile the body of the Book demonstrates the validity of her thesis by illustrating its working in the real world. In the chapters under discussion, which we term the Epilogue, once again the author has a woman show the way. The Epilogue opens with Rizpah (whom we have already met as Saul's concubine); it is she who ushers in the subject by illustrating an alternative to the brutal game of power. The rest of the Epilogue is devoted to developing Rizpah's alternative contrapuntally, alternating between it and the theme of power. This complex orchestration, both the careful internal ordering of these last four chapters, the overall structure of the Book and the congruence of the themes argue strongly for Samuel's author having been responsible for the arrangement of these chapters as well as their content. 5 This final I. How books were "published" in ancient times is described in the Introduction: The Road to Samuel. 2. The most widely accepted version of the theory that the present arrangement of the final chapters of Samuel comes from hands other than those of the author is based on the assumption that the entire Book was patched together by editors, hundreds of years after the events depicted, from different and often conflicting ''traditions." This assumption we have specifically rejected in favor of postulating a single contemporary author for the Book. The reasons for this are outlined in the Introduction: The Road to Samuel. 3. David's Elegy serves both as closure for the "Tragedy of Saul" and as prologue to the career ofDavid as king. 4. For an elucidation of this point see the conclusion of Chapter 38. 5. If this is so, a question remains: why did the author decide to terminate her historical narrative where she did, with David still on his throne, and proceed to her summation and conclusion? While it is true that there is a logic

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

451

section thus acts not only as a grand summary, a tying together of the major lessons the author was trying to draw from her century-long overview but, having exposed the futility of the path of power, to point to a alternative and more productive path for humanity to tread. In the words of Brevard Childs: "the final four chapters, far from being a clumsy appendix, offer a highly reflective, theological interpretation of David's whole career adumbrating the messianic hope." 6 It is in this light that we shall read these chapters: as not only the author's conclusion to her Book, but also as the culmination of her deep meditation on the meaning of life's freedom and its tragic dimensions.

THE REVENGE OF THE GIBEONITES For the opening episode of the Epilogue the author turns back the clock more than a quarter of a century, to the early days of the United Kingdoms. The tale is as bloody and tragic as any in Greek drama. Its opening is dark with foreboding.

Now there was a famine in the land in the days of David; for three years [it continued], year after year, and David sought the face of the Lord 7 And the Lord said: "It is due to Saul and for the blood [that rests upon] his house, 8 because he put the Gibeonites to death. " So the king summoned the Gibeonites and spoke to them. (Now the Gibeonites were not of the people of Israel, but were a remnant of the Amorites, and the children of Israel had sworn to them, but Saul had attempted to wipe them out in his zeal for the people ofIsrael and Judah). And David said to the Gibeonites: "What can I do for you? How can I make expiation, that you may bless the heritage of the Lord?" (21: 1-3) A famine was not an uncommon phenomenon in ancient Israel; if the rains failed the crops would wither and die. In a subsistence economy, there were never large reserves. Seed grain had to be put aside to plant next year's crop and what was left would barely cover the minimal needs of the population. For the crops to fail three years in a row was a disaster; children, the elderly, and the ill would be dying of starvation, while strong adults would be reduced to walking skeletons. Such disasters were fortunately very rare - so rare as to be seen as outside the realm of natural occurrences. To

to the point at which the narrative breaks off, with David's career revealed to us in all its tragic dimensions and Israel's sociopolitical future now blatantly clear, would it not have been preferable to spin out the narrative a few more years and conclude with the death of the king? As it is, as far as the narrative goes we are left hanging. (Our reasons for rejecting the currently popular theory that the first two chapters of the Book of Kings form the conclusion of the Book of Samuel are laid out in Postscript: The Death of the King, note I.) It may be that the author had no option. Events beyond her control may have made it clear that she was unlikely to outlive the king. Or there may have been other reasons mandating an abrupt termination of a project of long duration. One possibility might have been anxiety that the next regime might be less tolerant of criticism of the founder of the dynasty than the current one, and that it might be wise to get the Book into circulation before it was too late. 6. Childes, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, p. 275. 7. The last time that the author records David consulting God's will by oracle (Urim and Thummim) is during the Philistine wars. By the time David was well ensconced in Jerusalem we find him assessing God's will by turning to a prophet (in this case Nathan). It would thus seem that we can date our episode not too long after the conclusion of the Philistine wars and before David ceased his practice of consulting oracles; i.e. in the first decade of his rule. 8. That is, the blood guilt that rests upon his house (see Chapter 21, note 7)

452

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

the Biblical mind, only a divine visitation could account for such calamity. 9 This background is necessary to understand David's reaction. The answer David gets from the priestly oracle he consults is explicit: innocent blood has been shed, is crying to heaven from the ground where it was spilt, and the famine is the punishment for the unexpiated blood of the Gibeonites. Here the author is forced to digress; the roots of the problem go back hundreds of years, to the time of the Conquest, and were obscure to many in her day-not everyone was cognizant of what was, even to them, ancient history. We were first introduced to the Gibeonites at the beginning of our book. 10 When our story opened they formed an island of non-lsraelites in the midst of Israel, a remnant of the pre-Conquest Amorite population. By a ruse they had managed to negotiate a treaty with the Israelites, secured by solemn oath, which guaranteed their right to remain, unmolested, in possession ofthe four cities that made up the Gibeonite Tetrapolis. 11 The author informs us that Saul, in his increasing instability and fanaticism, had attempted to exterminate the Gibeonite population. 12 This was not only heinous on humanitarian grounds, but also outrageous in that Saul was breaking an oath made to these people. That he failed in his attempt to eradicate the Gibeonites mitigates neither his deeds nor the bloodbath. Until atonement be made, the pall of blood-guilt would remain, hovering over the land like a miasma, poisoning heaven and earth alike. 13 The sins of the past press heavily on the present. David's task is clear: as head of State, he must repent and make expiation for the sin of his predecessor. As we have already learned, the first steps in the Biblical process of repentance are recognition of sin and confession. 14 Sins against one's fellow man require restitution, and only if David can obtain the forgiveness of the Gibeonites can atonement be made for the land. This is David's meaning when he says:

"What can I do for you? How can I make expiation, that you may bless the heritage of theLord?" 15 (21:3) But it is precisely here that David's problem becomes acute: the normal way to expiate a crime is to punish the perpetrator. But there is no criminal to punish; Saul is beyond the power of human retribution. David is facing an issue that is as alive today as it was then-how to make amends to survivors of past massacres for their murdered dear ones? Only they can fix the price of forgiveness. 9. One of the more explicit statements of this unquestioned belief in the Biblical era can be found in the following: Take heed lest your heart be deceived, and you turn aside and serve other gods and worship them; and the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and He shut up the heavens and there be no rain, and the earth shall yield no fruit, and you shall speedily perish from offthe good earth which the Lord is giving you. (Deuteronomy II: 16-17)

10. Chapter 4, especially note IS. See also Chapter 21, note 21. 11. Despite the trickery involved, the Israelites had no choice but to confirm the sanctity of an oath made in the name of the Lord. The treaty was open-ended, giving the Gibeonites perpetual resident status in the Land of Israel. The full background is related in the Book ofJoshua, Chapter 9. I2. We have already learned of his purge of the mediums and spiritualists, also ultimately unsuccessful. Only rarely, if at all, does religious or ethnic persecution achieve its goal over the long term, and then only at disproportionate cost. See the section entitled "Bring Me Up Samuel" in Chapter 18. 13. While to us this phrasing may sound like purple prose, these were the terms in which Biblical people saw these issues. 14. See Appendix: Psalm 51. 15. Meaning, as Rashi indicates, that you pray for the land and its people. Only the prayer of the Gibeonites can pierce the miasma of blood hovering over the land and induce God to repeal the punishment. For the significance of the phrase the heritage ofthe Lord see Chapter 31, note 14. Here the phrase refers to all the Land oflsrael.

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

453

The answer of the Gibeonites is uncompromising: they will not accept monetary reparations for their loss. This is a matter of murder; blood must be paid by blood. Yet as a small and disadvantaged minority, how can they presume, how can they dare to suggest that Israelites be executed? The ball is back in David's court.

The Gibeonites said to him: "This is not a matter ofsilver or gold between us and Saul, or his House; nor is it for us to put any person to death in Israel. " Then he said: "Whatever you say !will do for you." (21:4) David brushes away their diffidence; make your request and it shall be done. Given a carte blanche the Gibeonites put forth their demands:

Then they said to the king: "The man who consumed us, and who planned to exterminate us 16 so that we should have no place within all the borders ofIsrael, let us be given seven men, of his sons, and we will impale them [before] the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, on the mountain of the Lord! " 17 And the king said: "!will deliver them. " (21 :5-6) In Jewish terms the demand of the Gibeonites is outrageous. They are demanding that Saul's children (and grandchildren) be executed for their father's and grandfather's crimes, something explicitly forbidden both by Jewish law and principle. 18 But then we must remember that the Gibeonites were not Israelites; they were Amorites who despite their dispersal retained their pagan religion with all its precepts. Punishing children for the crimes of their fathers was normative practice in much of the non-Israelite Ancient Near East. 19 The Gibeonites are only demanding their rights, as they see their rights, free from the "nonsense" imposed upon the Israelites by their strange God. While in regard to some issues the Gibeonites and the Israelites see eye to eye-such as the right of the relative of a murdered person, the "avenger ofthe blood," to take revenge upon the murderer-in other matters, such as upon whom punishment may be meted out, the gulf between Israel and her pagan neighbors is unbridgeable. Why does David agree to this shocking demand that he hand over to slaughter seven innocent persons, some of them children? In the ftrst place he has promised. How can a king break his bond? Like Saul before him, once his word is given, even if foolishly, both his honor and his credibility demand that he stand by his pledge. 20 Secondly, there undoubtedly is public pressure; neither the oracle nor the demand of the Gibeonites is any secret. It is all in the public domain, and the mood of the starving population is understandably hysterical. If this is what it will take to get the Gibeonites to remove the blood-curse and bring the rains, so be it; it will be cheap at the price. David is under overwhelming pressure.

16. Reading with LXX; MT reads and plotted against us, so that we have been exterminated. 17. Reading with LXX; MT reads the chosen ofthe Lord. 18. Parents shall not be put to death for [the crimes ot] children, and children shall not be put to death for (the crimes of) parents; a person shall only be put to death for his own crime [literally sin]. Deuteronomy 24:16. Ezekiel will later devote an entire chapter of his Book (Chapter 18) to emphasizing this principle of personal responsibility, insisting that The soul that sins shall die; the son shall not suffer for the iniquity of his father. (18:20) 19. For example, the Mesopotamian Code ofHammurabi, the basis of much Ancient Near Eastern law, legislates that should a faultily constructed house collapse and kill the owner, the builder is to be put to death for criminal negligence. However, should the collapsing house kill the owner's son, then it is the son ofthe builder that is to be executed. (Paragraphs 229-230). Another example: If a man strikes another man's daughter, and she dies, the daughter of he who struck the blow is to be put to death (Paragraphs 209-210). 20. And this despite having, unlike Saul, sworn no oath, but only having promised. Saul was ready to sacrifice his son, Jonathan, to a foolish oath (see Chapter 8). There the army intervened to save their hero from Saul. There is no one to save Saul's descendants from David.

454

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

But there is a third factor as well, and we would be remiss to overlook it; this demand is a political godsend to David. This demand gives him a legitimate excuse to get rid of the last male members of the House of Saul, the only possible claimants to the throne. And it will not be of his doing; he is being forced into it; the public will acclaim the move and no one can blame him. 21 What relative weights David assigns to each ofthese factors (and perhaps to some others of which we are unaware) we have no way of knowing. That they all play a part in his decision we can be reasonably certain. The lambs are handed over to the slaughter.

Now the king spared Mephibosheth, son of Jonathan, son of Saul because of the oath of the Lord that was between them-between David and Jonathan, the son of Saul. 22 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth, 23 and the flVe sons of Merab, u the daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adriel, the son of Barzillai the Meholalite, and handed them over to the Gibeonites. And they impaled them on the mountain before the Lord; they perished together, all seven of them. (21:7-9) The horror of the event is deepened when we realize that many, if not most of the victims, are children; the oldest can be no more than teenagers. 25 These are turned over to a people of alien and, to our way of thinking, barbarous standards. One can only hope that the victims are already dead before they are impaled on tall spiked poles "before the Lord." There is an element of bravado on the part of the Gibeonites in all this. As we have already learned, there is an Israelite shrine on top of the mountain (we would call it a hill) at Gibeah.26 It is here, on an eminence directly facing the shrine, that the bodies of Saul's sons and grandsons hang, transfixed on their stakes. The God of the Israelites is being shown what true blood vengeance is, and in Saul's home town no less! And there the bodies are to be left, food for the hawks and the vultures, until the bones are picked clean of every last shred of flesh. 27 In effect the Gibeonites are saying: 21. In recent years there have been those who claim that this was a put-up job; that David stage-managed the whole affair, prompting the Gibeonites to make this demand. I think that this is far too Machiavellian an interpretation: the Gibeonites needed no prompting to make what was, for them, a perfectly natural and logical demand. It would probably have required real pressure to make them demand anything else. 22. See "A Friend in Need" in Chapter 12; the insurance policy that Jonathan took out when he forced David to swear that, if he ever became king, he would spare Jonathan's children has paid off. See also Chapter 26. 23. The confusion of two Mephibosheths in adjacent verses is due only to the author's practice of changing their names. Actually the two were quite distinct: Jonathan's son's real name was Meribbaal, while Rizpah's son was named Mephibaal; their original names are preserved in Chronicles. For the reasons why the author saw fit to rename both of them Mephibosheth, see Chapter 20, note 1. 24. Reading with LXX and Syr.; MT reads Michal, an obvious impossibility as she was David's wife, and childless to boot. 25. Mephibosheth, (whom David spares) was the only son of Jonathan, Saul's oldest son. He could have been fifteen at the most. The oldest child ofMerab, Jonathan's sister could not have been much older, and there were four younger brothers. And Rizpah, Saul's beautiful concubine, must have been still fairly young to have had Abner and Ish-bosheth fighting over her a half a dozen years earlier. Her children by Saul were probably somewhere between ten and fifteen years of age at the most. 26. In I Samue/I0:5 it is referred to as "the hill of God." We remember that when Saul returned home after being anointed by Samuel, his first act upon entering his hometown was to go up to the shrine (the high place) and worship (I Samuell0:13). M. Haran is of the opinion that the high place was a small Temple owned by the Kish family (Haran, Temples and Temple Service in Ancient Israel, p. 35-36). If this was indeed so, impaling Saul's sons and grandsons opposite the family shrine adds a yet further dimension to the Gibeonite's revenge. 27. This is not only bereft of all decency (the victims were, after aU, the offspring of royalty and therefore their bodies were due the respect norma11y accorded to such throughout the Ancient Near East) but also displayed an arrogant "in your face" attitude. The Gibeonites knew perfectly wel1, having lived among the Israelites for generations, that hanging a body to decompose and be eaten by animals was anathema to Israelites. Both law and custom demanded that even the most vicious criminal be accorded a decent burial no later than sundown on the

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

455

"You said we could do to them what we wanted; you don't like it? That's your problem; go choke on

it.

THE RETURN OF RIZP AH If this picture of seven small bodies, transfixed on their spikes, and silhouetted against a darkening sky horrifies us, how must their mothers have felt? Cast down from their once high and privileged station, living for years in exile in the Trans-Jordan on the charity of others, praying to be forgotten and to be allowed to raise their families in obscurity, having their children ripped from their arms-to be delivered to this! Of Merab we know nothing, not even if she is yet alive; it is upon Rizpah that the spotlight falls, for it is she whom grief and pain impel to action. Now they had been put to death in the first days of the harvest, at the start of the barley harvest (21 :9)

This does not mean that there is much of a harvest, if indeed any at all. This notation is simply for the purpose of setting the date of the execution; it takes place at the start of the barley harvest season, which is the middle of April. And Rizpah, the daughter ofAiah, took sackcloth and spread it out for herself on the crag from the beginning of the barley28 harvest until rain fell on them from the heavens; and she did not allow the birds of the air to come upon them by day, nor the beasts of the field by night. (21: 10) In one concise verse we are presented an appalling, yet unforgettable picture of defiance and desperate devotion. Rizpah will not abandon the bodies of her slaughtered children and those of her step-daughter, Merab. The length of the vigil is astounding: from mid-April until the first rains that come in October is a span of half a year! 29 Spreading sackcloth (which she had donned in mourning for her sons)30 as a crude tent on the crag on which her impaled sons and their nephews are hanging, day and night she remains on the alert to keep bird and beast from touching their bodies. To take them down and bury them is beyond her power-the Gibeonites will never permit this. All that is in her power is to keep the bodies from being eaten-and to this, with a passionate intensity, she devotes herself. If neither king nor Israelite establishment will intervene on the side of common decency, she will. Whatever lies within her means, whatever her hands are able to manage, whatever her heart tells her is necessary she will do. We are not told how she subsists through the hot and weary months of the scorching summer; obviously there are people in Gibeah, relatives of Saul, who bring her food. Nor are we told of the inevitable "well-wishers" who try to make her "see reason," "accept what cannot be altered" and to "give up her quixotic and self-punishing behavior." She obviously turns a deaf ear to them all and

day of his execution; he is, after all, a human being, created in the image of God. Leaving a body unburied polJutes the land. Saul polluted the land by breaking the treaty and shedding innocent blood, now the Gibeonites are "getting their own back" by polluting the land with these exposed corpses. See Deuteronomy 21:22-23 and also Joshua 10:26-27. The Israelites accorded the same burial rites to their enemies as they did to themselves. 28. Reading with LXX; MT Jacks the word barley. 29. Israel possesses a "Mediterranean climate" of two seasons: summer-a hot, dry season and winter-a cold, rainy season. The rainy season usually begins in late October with a spell of light rain (known as the Yoreh or "former rains"), followed by a dry spell. The heavy rains commence in December and continue through February. There are often showers in March until early April, that are called the Malkosh (the "latter rains"). 30. For rites of mourning in ancient Israel see Chapter 21, note 12.

456

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

quietly persists. And all the time the scandal spreads and intensifies. Finally it reaches a pitch that David can no longer ignore. David is hardly having an easy time of it. He, who has so publicly applauded the men of Jabeshgilead for their bravery in rescuing the bodies of Saul and his sons that the Philistines had impaled on the walls of Beth-shean, and who accorded them decent burial, must be finding the impaled bodies of Saul's offspring an ever-growing burden to his conscience, and an intolerable reproach to his sense of decency. Finally he can bear it no longer. Promises or no promises to the Gibeonites, Rizpah's tireless care fmally shames David into action. By taking upon herself the role of a solitary suffering proponent of wronged humanity, Rizpah has once again become a catalyst, bringing about a change in David's attitude, and subsequently in State policy. Now it was told David what Rizpah, daughter of Aiah, concubine of Saul, had done. Then David went and took the bones of Saul, and the bones of Jonathan his son from the men31 ofJabesh-gilead, who had stolen them from the wall o/2 Beth-shean, where the Philistines had hung them on the day that the Philistines smote Saul at Gilboa. So Davit/ 3 brought up the bones of Saul, and the bones of Jonathan his son from there, and he gathered the bones of the impaled So they buried the bones of Saul and Jonathan, his son, and the bones of the impaled, 34 in the land of Benjamin, in Zela, in the sepulcher of Kish, his father. Thus they did all that the king commanded; and after that God accepted supplication for the land (21: 11-14)

Rizpah's vigil, which transcends the injustice done to her children, has come to embody a silent protest against the terrible evils and suffering that indiscriminately fall upon human heads, as well as the obtuseness and hard-heartedness of those who tum away their faces from the suffering of others. Its moral power forces David to address not only the obscenity of the seven bodies rotting on their stakes in Gibeah, but also the injustice perpetrated upon the entire House of Saul. For close to a decade the cremated remains of Saul and his sons, martyrs to the cause of Israel's independence, have been allowed to molder in an impromptu grave in the distant Trans-Jordan because it is politically advantageous to David. Rizpah's solitary protest forces David to reconsider his actions, to repent of them and to reverse them. So the king gives his orders: the bodies are removed from their stakes in Gibeah (one can imagine the howls of outrage from the Gibeonites-but no matter). 35 The remains of Saul and his sons are exhumed from Jabesh and brought to Benjamin, and then all eleven, in a State Funeral/6 are interred in the family sepulcher of Saul's father Kish. The entire process could have consumed no less than a month. This is more than a reversal of State policy; it is a public act of repentance by David for the wrong he has done to the House of Saul, not only by turning the survivors over to slaughter but also, by calculated inattention, turning Saul and Jonathan into non-persons. And only now, after David's act of public repentance, does God relent and the heavens pour forth their benediction upon a parched land. And after that God accepted supplication for the land (21: 14)

31. Literally masters. 32. Reading with LXX; MT reads the public square of 33. Reading with LXX; MT reads he. 34. Reading with LXX; MT omits this phrase. 35. After half a year little would be left but the skeletons. 36. This would seem to be the implication of the phrase Thus did they all that the king had commanded, that the reinterment was a public Act of State.

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

457

WHAT MEANS THIS TALE? As we ponder the brutal episode we have just read several things should strike us. First, how different this tale is from the narratives that precede it. It is history-yes, but bathed in an unfamiliar light that gives it an almost surrealistic appearance. The treatment is intentional, for the real persons and real events are being overlaid with a new dimension, that of symbolism. Both persons and events are being treated not only as facts in and of themselves but additionally as symbols. David (not the David we have become resigned to, the broken king humbled by tragedy, but a younger, Imperial David, as yet unbowed) and Rizpah personify two opposites. David is the Power Master, operating on the grounds of pure expediency (which, at this time in real life he rarely did); 37 Rizpah is the powerless and suffering mother, bereaved of her children.38 They are being used as symbols ofthe powerful who lord it over the earth and the weak who are crushed beneath their boots. This use of historic events and personages in a symbolic manner is a precursor of what we find in the Epilogue as a whole. Secondly, unlike the body of the Book, the narrative is overtly didactic: David, the arrogant and ruthless politician is being humbled by the moral force of a powerless caring woman. What is here being summarized is the entire moral message of the book: that what counts in life is not the power in the strong and complacent hands of the mighty of the earth, but simple decency. The great, for reasons of political expediency, treat people as expendable objects. The ultimately self-defeating nature of expediency is one of the main wellsprings of the tragic dimension of life: For not by power shall

man prevail. In rejecting the paths of glory as the road to success and fulfillment in the world the author is not dismissive of power per se. She is not so naive as to believe in the possibility of a world without power. But power, she insists, is not the only reality. In Rizpah she presents us with an alternative: a way of life that finds its purpose in a radically different vision of what it means to be a successful human being. Call it moral integrity, call it a sense of responsibility to others, call it common decency - in the strength to stand for the just and the good the author finds not only the counterpoise to amoral power but, more to the point, the path by which humanity can achieve an enduring success in life. Rizpah embodies a woman's alternative to a man's world.

DAVID'S HEROES: THE LAST OF THE GIANTS Our next section returns to the world of men, providing a stark contrast with the picture of moral force humbling arrogant power. This is a depiction of David's war machine, the very personification of power. What we are being reminded of is that power is amoral-it is not only evil oppression but can be used for good as well. Here it is portrayed in combat, not with moral force but with alien power of a most awesome nature-giants-in a struggle to the death for Israel's independence and survival. And there is real allure to this picture of heroism. Coming right after the viciousness of David's use of power in the preceding episode, this section gives us both a more balanced view of the subject while serving as background and introduction to David's glorification of his military triumphs which immediately follows. 37. As we have repeatedly noted, his genius was ever to find the way of insuring that the imperative of power served a higher principle. It was the breakdown of this creative symbiosis, as epitomized in the Bathsheba Affair where expediency reigned supreme, that was the cause of David's downfall. 38. It is instructive to note the contrasts between Hannah and Rizpah, the two women who encase, as it were, our Book. Hannah begins empty-handed and gains a family; Rizpah begins with a family only to lose it tragicaily. Yet both rise above their individual misfortunes, and by their acts come to personify deep spiritual truths.

458

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

The author once again ratchets back the clock, this time a half a dozen years or so, back to the days of the Philistine wars. We remember that David's success at being crowned King oflsrael provoked an immediate reaction from the Philistines. Sweeping into Judah, they forced David to abandon his capital of Hebron and to retreat to his old base from his wilderness years, the stronghold of Adulam. 39 How much time elapsed from his retreat into the wilderness to his great victory at the ftrst battle of Emek Rephaim (the Valley of the Giants) we do not know. Whatever its length, this period was a time of guerilla warfare on the part of David and his men; skirmishes, ambushes, and smallunit actions. It is from this confused and chaotic interval, before the great battles that determined who would dominate the Promised Land, that the following four episodes are taken. 40 They are united by two themes: the heroism of David's warriors (which makes this section a ftt balance for the list of David's "Medal of Honor winners" yet to come), and the nature of the opponents over whom they triumphed-the last of the giants. We remember Goliath, whose slaying launched David on his brilliant career. At that time we noted that Goliath was not unique, but simply the most "outstanding" member of a remarkable family. We are now to meet some other members of this family.

Now once again the Philistines waged war against Israel, and David with his men went down and fought with them. Now David grew weary, and Ishbi-benob, one of the descendants of the giant, 41 was about to kill David-his bronze spear [head] weighed three hundred shekeli2 and he was girded with new [armor]-but Abishai, the son ofZeruiah came to his aid, and smote the Philistine and killed him. Then David's men took an oath, 43 saying: "You shall not go out with us to battle any more, lest you extinguish the lamp of Israel!" (21: 15-17) David has continued behaving as though he were still a regimental commander under Saul, or the leader of an outlaw band in the wilderness: engaging in combat with the enemy alongside of his men. This incident, in which he is almost killed, ends the practice. His men swear that they will not permit him to engage in combat in the future. He no longer is an army officer or a condottiere;44 he is now a king; henceforth, new rules will prevail.

Now after this there was another campaign against the Philistines, 45 at Gezer. 46 It was there that Sibbecai, the Hushathite, 47 smote Saph, 48 who was one of the descendants ofthe giant.

39. See Chapter 22, and especially note 5. 40. It is also possible that one or more of these incidents dates from the follow-up campaigns after the two decisive battles in the "Valley of the Giants." It is especially probable that the last episode, which took place in the vicinity ofGath, was an incident in the campaign that culminated in David's conquest ofthe city. 41. Hebrew Raphah, apparently the feminine singular of Rephaim, a race of massively proportioned human beings. See Chapter 22, note 7. 42. Reading in accordance with LXX. The Hebrew term kaino is obscure; LXX translates it as spear. As spears were not made of bronze, we assume that it is to the spear head that the author is referring; we note that Ishbibenob's spearhead, about 5 ~pounds, is one half the weight recorded for Goliath's iron spearhead. 43. Reading with LXX; MT adds the words to him. 44. A mercenary general; for a fuller explanation of this term see Chapter 17, note 1. 45. Literally there was once again war with the Philistines. I have rendered this phrase the same way in 21:19 and 21:20. 46. Reading with 1 Chronicles 20:4 in its parallel account. 2 Samuel reads Gob, an unknown site. 47. He was a member of the elite group, "The Thirty." See Chapter 28, note 8, and the Introduction to Chapter 39. 48. His name is recorded in 1 Chronicles 20:4 as Sapi.

THE MARTYRDOM OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL

459

And there was yet another campaign against the Philistines, 49 and Elhanan, the son of Jair, smote Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite; 50 the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam. 51 And yet another campaign took place at Gath, and there was a man ofgreat stature52 who had six fingers on each hand, and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in all! He too was born of the giant. And when he taunted Israel, Jonathan, the son of David's brother Shimeah, 53 smote him. These four were born to the giant in Gath. and they fell by the hand of David and his servants. (21: 18-22) This brought to an end this outsized family. From the conclusion of the Philistine campaigns we hear no more of giants in the 1and.54 Saving our comments about David's heroes and their exploits for Chapter 39, when we will be able to put them into the context of David's elite units and "medal of honor" winners, we now turn to the central pivot of the Epilogue, David's hymn of triumph.

49. Reading with 1 Chronicles 20:5; 2 Samuel adds at Gob. See note 46 above. 50. Reading with 1 Chronicles 20:5; 2 Samuel reads Elhanan, the son of Yaari-oregim, the Bethlehemite, killed Goliath the Gittite. On the basis of this rather jumbled verse in 2 Samue/21: 19 some scholars have tried to make a case that David never killed Goliath, but "appropriated" the victory of the unknown Elhanan, the son of Yaarioregim. I consider this highly unlikely; 1 Chronicles 20:5 would seem to preserve the original version of the text. 51. This phrase, identical to that used for Goliath's throwing spear, is a layman's description of a weapon common in Aegean armies but only recently introduced to the "Bible lands." The cord attachments to the spear, which made it resemble a weaver's beam in the eye of the Israelites, served to impart a spin to the spear when thrown, thus greatly enhancing its stability in flight and its accuracy. It would seem as though both Goliath and Lahmi specialized in the use of this Aegean import. 52. Reading with 1 Chronicles 20:6 and Targ.; 2 Samuel reads a Midianite- or a manfrom Maden if we follow the Qere (see Glossary), which Radak renders as "champion." 53. Reading with the Qere; the Ketib reads Shimei, an unusual spelling of the name. 54. We must remember that in those days, due to a far more Spartan diet than the one we have become accustomed to, the average adult height was significantly lower than it is today. These physical freaks would have appeared even more awesome to the people of those times than they would to us nowadays. To our eyes they probably would appear merely as excellent candidates for professional basketball.

CHAPTER37

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL 0 mighty-mouth'd inventor ofharmonies, 0 skill'd to sing ofTime or Eternity.

Alfred Lord Tennyson, Experiments

Two outstanding poems, each one very different from the other, form the centerpiece of the author's Epilogue. They testify to David's celebrity as a poet, earning him the title of "The Sweet Singer of Israel" (2 Samue/23: 1). The first of these is the religious masterpiece that has been incorporated into the Psalter as Psalm 18. This magnificent hymn of thanksgiving to God could have been composed anytime from the middle of the frrst decade of David's rule to close to the end of the second. As such it fits in well with the material surrounding it in the Epilogue, which dates from the earlier part of this period. It shows David at his best, both technically as a poet and spiritually. Reading it, no one can doubt the sincerity of his thankfulness to God for all the bounty poured forth upon him. And yet ... one might ask oneself just why the author saw fit to choose this particular psalm out of all those available for highlighting in the Epilogue? When one considers the possible alternatives, such as: The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me to lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul; He leads me in straight paths for His name's sake. Psalm 23:1-3 Or: When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars which You have established; What is man that You should be mindful of him, And the son ofman, that You should think ofhim? Yet You have made him but little lower than the angels. And have crowned him with glory and honor. Psalm 8:4-6

462

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

Or even: Lord, who shall sojourn in Your tabernacle? Who shall dwell upon Your holy mountain? He that walks uprightly, And works righteousness, And speaks truth in his heart. Who has no slander upon his tongue, Nor does evil to his fellow, Nor takes up a reproach against his neighbor; In whose eyes a vile person is despised, But he honors them that fear the Lord; He that swears to his own hurt, And does not change; He that does not lend out his money on interest, Nor takes a bribe against the innocent. He that does these things shall never be moved Psalm 15 1

Considering the large corpus of David's works one begins to wonder why exactly the author made the choice that she did. For Psalm 18 is a warrior's hymn of thanksgiving to his God for the triumphs and victories vouchsafed him. And his outpouring of thanksgiving, sincere as it is, is at the same time, a glorification of war, conquest and power. Preceded and followed in the Epilogue by the accounts of David's warriors and their deeds, it breathes with them a spirit oftriumphalism. This falls far short of the deep spiritual calm of Psalm 23, the radical wonder of Psalm 8, or the ethical focus of Psalm 15. This is a David whose success has gone to his head. I think that, as we read this outpouring of thanks, we should entertain the possibility that the author is less than overjoyed by what David is celebrating; that along with presenting David the poetic genius, she is also presenting a religious problem. To this problem she will return in the concluding chapter of the book.

THE BATTLE HYMN OF THE WARLORD2 I.

Now David spoke to the Lord the words of this song, on the day the Lord saved him out of the hand of all his enemies, and out of the hand ofSheol. 3

I. These three psalms are taken from among the 73 that bear titles attributing their authorship to David. For a discussion of the question of the authorship of the various psalms see Chapter 13. 2. The two versions of this hymn, 2 Samuel 22 and Psalm 18, while very similar, nevertheless do have points of disagreement. As has been our practice where there are parallel versions of the same original text, we will point up these differences where they are significant, it being borne in mind that due to an accumulation of archaic spellings and grammatical usages it is quite certain that 2 Samuel 22 is by far the older of the two versions: Albright dates it to the tenth century, i.e. the time of David (Albright, Yahweh and The Gods of Canaan, p. 22). On the numbering of the verses, see Appendix: Psalm 34, note 5. 3. That is, out of the grasp of the netherworld, the realm of the dead. The usual reading of this verse is out ofthe hand of Saul. My translation concurs with the analysis of Michael Dahood. Partially basing himself on an Ak-

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

463

This soaring paean of thanksgiving is by far the longest piece of poetry we have attempted to analyze. We have already tentatively dated its composition from the middle of the first decade of David's reign to near the end of the second. 5 Unlike the psalms we have already considered, the superscription to this hymn does not link its composition to a specific historic event, but vaguely refers to

the day the Lord saved him out ofthe hand of all his enemies ... (22: I) We thus have no alternative but to rely upon internal evidence. On the one hand, the hymn must have been composed prior to "the Bathsheba Affair." It breathes a spirit of supreme self-confidence, of a man at one with his conscience and his God-a mood that abruptly came to an end with the "Affair" and its shattering aftermath. 6 It seems inconceivable that David, after Nathan's denunciation and his confession of guilt, "I have sinned before the Lord" (2 Samuel12: 13), could have written:

The Lord has requited me according to my righteousness; According to the cleanliness ofmy hands has He recompensed me. For I have kept the ways ofthe Lord, And not wickedly departed from my God (21-22) David may have been many things, but in his religious life he was not a hypocrite. On the other hand, one cannot place the composition too early. We note the lines:

You have ... kept me to be a ruler of nations; Peoples whom I have not known [now] serve me. Foreigners cringe before me; As soon as they hear ofme they obey me. (44-45) With all the hyperbole of ancient poetic style taken into account, these words speak with the voice of an imperial conqueror. 7 As such, it is tempting to look on this hymn as a reaction to the Aramean

kadian psalm found at Ugarit (see note 5 below), which begins "Since the day you delivered me from the mouth of Death," he reads Sheol instead of Saul (in Hebrew, the consonantal spelling of Saul and Sheol are identical). He concludes: "rescue from the grasp of all his enemies and from the hand of Sheol fairly summarizes the contents of the entire poem" (Dahood, The Anchor Bible: Psalms/, on Psalm 18: I). 4. Psalm 18 inserts: I love You, 0 Lord, my strength. LXX and Syr. read likewise. 5. It will be well to begin by stating that the language used dates it to David's time. Comparisons with Ugaritic poetry have largely discredited the arguments of earlier generations of critics, who assigned its composition to a much later period. Ugarit was a major metropolis, a focus of international trade, located on the Syrian coast about seven miles north of the present Latakia. It was sacked and destroyed about 1195 BCE by the Peoples of the Sea (see Chapter 3}, roughly at the same time that the Israelites were settling Canaan. In extensive archeological excavations large libraries have been recovered. Their importance for us lies in the fact that the language of Ugarit-Ugaritic-is a language very similar to Biblical Hebrew. Biblical poetry proves to have been based on Canaanite-Ugaritic models that long predate it, and when we find Hebrew poetry written in a style very similar to Ugaritic poetry we know that no great gulf oftime can lie between them. 6. See Chapter 29. 7. The fact that, as traditionally read (see note 3 above), the superscription refers to Saul has led some commentators to assign the first part of the hymn to David's Wilderness years. The phrase and out of the hand of Saul, however, seems to me inappropriate to the contents of the psalm. While it is true that Saul had been an enemy of David, it is clear that he was in a different category from, say, the Philistines or the Arameans. Certainly the

464

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

wars. The first part could be a cry of relief at David's narrow escape from disaster before the gates of Rabbath-ammon while the second part a shout of triumph in the aftermath of the Battle of He lam. 8 But this can be little more than conjecture; the hymn is far too vague to allow us to conclusively attach it to any specific events. Yet ifthis were the case, it would place the genesis of this masterpiece at the very height of David's military career. At the very least, the composition seems to have taken place during the upswing of his career of conquest. The composition itself falls into two distinct and self-contained sections: the first is a hymn of thanksgiving to God for having saved the psalmist from great peril (2-20); the second a hymn to God, thanking Him for enabling the warrior to so decisively triumph over his enemies (29-46). These two separate hymns are joined by a bridge wherein the writer didactically lays out his theory as to why God acts as He does, and therefore why the writer deserves all the bounty showered upon him (2128). The entire hymn comes to a crescendo in the soaring conclusion (47-51). What ties these separate parts together is the theme of thanksgiving to God for the incredible assistance He has given to the psalmist. 9 The hymn, as it stands before us today, is a superlative poetic achievement, which moves and develops to a soul-stirring climax: the whole is greater by far than the sum of its parts. One fmal word: the hymn exists in two versions-the one before us, incorporated by the author into Samuel as 2 Samuel22, and the second in the Book of Psalms, where it appears as Psalm 18. As we have previously noted, the two versions are very similar but not identical. Of the two, our version is the earlier. 10 Psalm 18, the later version, was explicitly designated for use by the sanctuary choir, 11 and seems to have been edited with an eye to making it more suitable for liturgical performance: rendering some obscure phrases into more comprehensible language for the benefit of the average worshiper as well as "modernizing" some of the spelling and grammar. 12 As such, with very few exceptions, we have stayed with the choice of the author, giving the text as it appears in Samuel rather than as it appears in the Book ofPsalms. 13

second part of the hymn, and thus the final date of the composition, bears no relation to David's troubles with Saul. Reading the psalm as a unified composition (see note 9 below) leads me to accept Dahood's reading, which removes the entire problem posed by Saul. 8. See Chapter 27. 9. Some critics, focusing on the different subjects of the subsections, have contended that what we have are two hymns by two different authors, later combined and stitched together by an editor. We, however, find persuasive J. Kenneth Kuntz's conclusion to his analysis of the hymn: "In summary, we believe on rhetorical-critical grounds that Psalm 18 can, and should, be comprehended as an integrated whole, that there is no compelling reason to posit the existence of two distinct poetic compositions.... the psalm as primarily the product of one talented Israelite poet summons us to interact with it as a single composition having an integrity of its own. In short, this is how we perceive the text intends to be understood." (Kuntz, "Psalm 18: A Rhetorical-Critical Analysis," p. 21) It is of course possible that the poet composed the first part upon deliverance from danger, and then returned to expand his creation by adding an additional hymn. Poets are known to do such things even today. Indeed, if we hold to our assumption of Davidic authorship, even assuming that the two hymns were composed at different times is no bar to concluding that, building on a small gem composed at an earlier stage of his career, he later returned to expand it into the composite finished product we have before us today. 10. See note 2 above. 11. The preamble, as it appears in Psalm 18 reads: For the choirmaster: [a psalm] of David, the servant of the Lord, who spoke the words of this song on the day the Lord saved him out of the hand of all his enemies, and out ofthe hand ofSheol. (Psalm 18:1) See "0 Sing unto the Lord" in Chapter 24 for a discussion of the development

of the Temple liturgy. 12. It has also been "corrected" to conform to later usage. (Cross and Freedman, Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry, p. 82-85, and 86 note d) 13. Though our hymn is the earlier of the two versions, its language dating it to the lOth century BCE, this is not to imply that some editor worked it over to produce a "watered down" version for inclusion in the Psalter. Psalm 18 is every bit as good as our version in Samuel, it is just that various archaic spellings have been "modernized" and some "old-fashioned" turns of phrase have been brought in line with the poetic usage of later generations. But even though our hymn is the "pre-psalm" version, it was none-the-less composed with public use in mind.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

465

With this as background, let us begin our analysis of2 Samuel22.

HYMN 1: TO GOD THE SAVIOR 2. The Lord is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer! 3.

My God, 14 my rock in Whom I take refuge; My shield, and the horn of my salvation, 15 My stronghold and my refuge, My savior; You save me from violence. 16

4. Praised, I cry, is the Lord, And I am savedfrom my enemies.

5.

For the waves 17 ofDeath encompassed me; The torrents of The Pit18 assailed me.

6.

The cords ofSheozl9 encircled me, The snares ofDeath engulfed me.

7.

In my distress I cried out: "Lord!" To my God I called From His temple He heard my voice; And my cry [entered] into His ears.

8.

Then the earth reeled and quaked, The foundations ofthe heavens trembled; They reeled because of His anger.

9.

Smoke went up from His nostrils, And devouring fire from His mouth; Burning coals flamed forth from Him.

10. He spread open the heavens and descended, Thick darkness was under His feet

11. Mounted on a cherub20 did Hefty, Excepting the last verse (51), all reference to specific persons and events is blurred by the use of stereotypical language that any reader could apply to his/her own experiences. 14. Reading with LXX and Syr. (Psalm 18 has same meaning though with different wording); 2 Samue/22 reads The God ofmy rock 15. "The image of the 'hom of salvation' is probably to be understood as a symbol signifying 'strength."' (Weiser, The Psalms, p. 188). See note 22 below. 16. Psalm 18 omits my refuge, my savior; You save me from violence. 17. Literally breakers; Psalm 18 reads the cords ofdeath. 18. Literally Belial. Cross and Freedman find the root meaning of the term is "the place from which none arise," i.e. it is a euphemism for the underworld, the realm of the dead (Op. Cit., p. 22, note 6). Death, The Pit (Belial) and Sheol (the netherworld) are all here used as synonyms. 19. See Chapter 18, note 22. 20. A mythological creature; for a description see "The Liberation ofthe Ark of the Covenant" in Chapter 23.

466

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL Gliding/' on the wings of the wind.

12. He made pavilions of darkness about Him; A massing of waters; Lowering rain clouds.

13. In the brightness before Him Blazed fiery coals.

14. The Lord thundered from heaven, The Most High uttered His voice.

15. And He sent forth arrows, and scattered them; Lightning, and routed them.

16. The channels ofthe ocean were seen, The foundations of the world were laid bare; From the rebuke ofthe Lord, From the blast of the breath ofHis nostrils.

17. He reachedfrom on high, He took me, He drew me out ofmany waters.

18. He delivered me from my mighty enemy, From those who hated me For they were too strong for me.

19. On the day ofmy calamity they waylaid me, But the Lord was my stay.

20. He brought me out into a broad place; He delivered me because He delighted in me.

As we have previously learned, one of the standard ways of beginning a poem is to state one's theme. So the psalmist opens by declaring: The Lord is my rock, my fortress, and my deliverer!

The metaphor of God as a rock is repeated again and again until, by the end of the hymn-as the Rock of my salvation--it has become a name for God. It expresses the poet's sense of God's eternal steadfastness and reliability as a source of security. The picture is that of a vast, immovable crag in whose honeycomb of caves one can find absolute safety. If David was indeed the writer of the psalm, this figure of speech would have had special meaning to him, having spent several years of his life hiding from danger in the clefts and caves of cliffs and crags. The poet, expanding on this image, now piles on one metaphor after another: My God, my rock in Whom I take refuge; My shield, and the horn of my salvation, n 21. Reading with Psalm 18:11; 2 Samue/22 reads He was seen. 22. The horn of the wild ox was, in those days, a symbol of irresistible power (note Deuteronomy 33:17). We have already met this metaphor in Hannah's Prayer (1 Samue/2:10).

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

467

My stronghold and my refuge, My savior; You save me from violence. 23

Praised, I cry, is the Lord, And I am savedfrom my enemies. (2-4) Having stated his theme, the poet now turns to his personal experience that led him to this conclusion. Typical of all psalm literature destined for public use, the traumatic circumstances unique to the psalmist are concealed by poetic imagery-in this case the image of drowning-so that others in different life situations can read their particular conditions into the vague language. 24 The metaphor is not alien to us; we speak of persons drowning in troubles. Here the poet gives us a dramatic picture of a person out of his depth, being sucked down to a watery grave, unable to save himself.

For the waves ofDeath encompassed me; The torrents of The Pit assailed me. The cords ofSheoz25 encircled me, The snares of Death engulfed me. In my distress I cried out: "Lord!" To my God I called From His temple He heard my voice; And my cry [entered] into His ears. (5-7) His temple means "heaven," the place where God "dwells," as in Psalm 11 :4 The Lord is in His holy temple, The Lord, His throne is in heaven. God's answer is depicted in a torrent of traditional, highly anthropomorphic images. They are not meant to be taken literally?6 Using images of earthquake, volcanic eruption and violent storm, the writer expresses his sense of awe and wonder at the remarkable way God plucked him out of troubles when he was beyond helping himself. Putting what the writer is saying into colloquial prose we could render it as: "What You have done for me is unbelievable; You have overwhelmed me." But of course the hymn says it with far greater emotional force.

Then the earth reeled and quaked, The foundations ofthe heavens trembled, 27 They reeled because of His anger. Smoke went up from His nostrils, And devouring fire from His mouth; Burning coals flamed forth from Him. 28 (8-9) 23. Hebrew hamas. The author will return to this term in his conclusion (verse 49). 24. See Appendix: Psalm 51 for a discussion of the different styles of prayer in ancient Israel. 25. The picture is of the drowning man being dragged down to the underworld. 26. The author no more means to imply that God is a giant breathing fire (verse 9) than that the wind moves through the air because it has a set of wings (verse 11). 27. In those times the sky was conceived as something substantial resting on the tops of mountains, which supported it.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

468

Having depicted God's fury at the writer's enemies who had brought him to the very edge of disaster, God is now depicted as taking action with the image of a storm of hurricane proportions. He spread open the heavens and descended, 29 Thick darkness was under his feet. 30 Mounted on a cherub31 did Hefty, Gliding on the wings of the wind He made pavilions ofdarkness about Him; A massing ofwaters; Lowering rain-clouds. In the brightness before Him Blazed fiery coals. The Lord thundered from heaven, The Most High uttered His voice. And He sent forth arrows, and scattered them; Lightning, and routed them. 32 The channels ofthe ocean were seen, The foundations ofthe world were laid bare; From the rebuke of the Lord, From the blast of the breath ofHis nostrils. (10-16)

Concluding his depiction of the overwhelming power of God that he experienced with the image of a wind of hurricane force sweeping back the waters from the coast, laying bare the seabed, the writer comes back to his own predicament. He reached from on high, He took me, He drew me out of many waters. He delivered me from my mighty enemy, From those who hated meFor they were too strong for me. On the day ofmy calamity they waylaid me, But the Lord was my stay. 33

28. The image is that of a volcanic eruption; its sense is similar to that of the current expression: "he erupted in anger." 29. The heavens are pictured as curtains which God spreads apart as He begins to journey down to earth. 30. Biblical poetry constantly depicts God as shielding Himself from human eyes by enveloping himself in darkness; here in the form of black storm clouds (verse 12). 31. God was poetically considered to be "enthroned upon the Cherubim" (see Chapter 3); since, in the mind of the poet it is beneath God's dignity to get up off His throne when He comes down to take action, it is the throne that moves, God remaining seated in majesty upon it. 32. Thunder and lightning, God's "voice" and "arrows" scatter the writer's enemies.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

469

He brought me out into a broad place; He delivered me because He delighted in me. (17-20)

As we would say nowadays: "He got me out of a tight spot." Now we would expect a fulsome ''thank you" to conclude the hymn (and if this hymn was originally composed as an independent unit that is what undoubtedly followed), but as this unit is merely part of a larger composition the poet holds his thanks until the very end. Instead he builds a bridge between the first sub-hymn and the second by addressing the question of why God should have troubled Himself to intervene on his behalf.

THE WAYS OF GOD WITH MAN 21. The Lord has requited me according to my righteousness; According to the cleanliness ofmy hands has He recompensed me. 22. For I have kept the ways ofthe Lord, And have not wickedly departed from my God. 23. For all His ordinances are before me; Andfrom His laws I have not turned aside.

24. So I have been blameless before Him, I have kept myselffrom my iniquity.

25. Therefore the Lord has recompensed me according to my righteousness, According to my cleanlinesl4 in His sight.

26. With the loyal, You deal loyally, With the blameless man, 35 You show Yourself blameless.

27. With the pure, You are pure, But with the crooked You are devious. 28. A humble people will You save, But Your eyes are upon the haughty, to bring them low. 36

29. For You are my lamp, 0 Lord; The Lord lights up my darkness.

The writer declares that God was not simply being capricious when He delivered him. Far from being an act of unmerited grace, he insists that he deserves the treatment he got. God favored him because of the kind of life he led. He has kept God's commandments ever in his mind, he has followed them faithfully; he has never allowed himself to forget them or to sin by willfully breaking

33. I.e. support, something to lean on. The same word in Psalm 23 is usually translated as staff: Your rod and your staff, they comfort me. (Psalm 23:4) 34. Psalm 18 reads: According to the cleanliness of my hands ... 35. Reading with Psalm 18:26; 2 Samue/22 reads hero. 36. Psalm 18 reads: But You humble haughty eyes.

470

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

them. He has keft his hands clean and has led a blameless life: therefore God has rewarded him for his uprightness. 3 We return to verse 20, the conclusion of Hymn I, which is actually also the beginning of the bridge: He brought me out into a broad place; He delivered me because He delighted in me. The Lord has requited me according to my righteousness; According to the cleanliness ofmy hands has He recompensed me. For I have kept the ways of the Lord, And have not wickedly departed from my God For all His ordinances are before me; Andfrom His laws I have not turned aside. So I have been blameless before Him, I have kept myselffrom my iniquity. Therefore the Lord has recompensed me according to my righteousness, According to my cleanliness in His sight. (20-25)

From this the poet draws a remarkable lesson, generalizing from his personal experience to formulate a general principle governing the relationship between man and God. This principle can be summed up in one word; reciprocity. As man acts, so will God deal with him. With the loyal/8 You deal loyally, With the blame/ess39 man, You show Yourself blameless. With the pure You are pure; But with the crooked You are devious. A humble people will You save, But Your eyes are upon the haughty, to bring them low. (26-28)

This principle, which means that it is the human being that determines his or her destiny by the type of life led, is an act of faith and can only be an act offaith. 40 It can only grow out of one's experience

37. This blanket self-praise may sound suspect in our ears, but it seems that, at least at this stage of his life, David was being sincere. 38. Hebrew hasid, also has the meanings of kind and merciful. 39. Or upright. 40. This principle, emphasizing human freedom and the control one has over one's fate, is an essential part of Biblical faith. But it is far from the whole picture. Taken in itself it makes God a prisoner of human actions. This is incompatible with the central article of Biblical faith: the absolute and unconditional freedom of God. God may, for the most part, conduct his dealings with humankind on the basis of reciprocity, rendering mankind accountable for its behavior. But He always reserves the freedom to act as He sees fit: Then the Lord said to Moses: "I will grant grace to whom I will grant grace, and I will show mercy to whom I will show mercy. " (Exodus 33:17, 19) The converse of this dictum of reciprocity, the realization that life is unfair and that one often does not get what one deserves, is the subject of the Book of Job, with its conclusion that mankind can never

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

471

or be confirmed, in one's own life, by a commitment to act in accordance with its precepts. Since David's day countless numbers of people have lived by this principle, a tribute to the power of people to dedicate their lives through an act of faith. It is also a tribute to the power of this hymn, which is one of the most powerful exponents of this article offaith. 41

For You are my lamp, 0 Lord; The Lord lights up my darkness. (29t 2 With this avowal of faith in God and his dependence on Him to overcome the despondency and despair engendered by the tragic vicissitudes of life, the psalmist concludes his declaration of faith and simultaneously opens his second Hymn: the paean of the warrior triumphant.

HYMN II: GOD THE GIVER OF VICTORY 30. For You are my lamp, 0 Lord; The Lord lights up my darkness.

31. For with You I can crush a battalion; 43 With my God I can scale a wall! 32. As for God-His way is perfect; The word ofthe Lord is pure; He is a shield to all who take refuge in Him. 33. For who is God but the Lord? And who is a rock except our God?

34. The God, my mighty fortress, He has made my path straight. 44 35. He makes my legs45 like hind's [feet];

fathom the ways of God. Both principles are equally central to Biblical faith, the dialectical tension between the two poles forming one of the critical dynamics of Western religion. 41. This entire hymn, in the version that appears in 2 Samue/22, has been given heightened status within Judaism by being designated as one of the Scriptural Readings to be publicly read in the synagogue each year. Indeed, it is one of the very few readings to be read twice every year. 42. This verse is best understood in conjunction with Psalm 139:12:

Even darkness is not too dark for You; The night shines [for You] like the day: The darkness is just as the light. 43. Following the suggestion of Radak (Rabbi David Kimchi) ad loc; for the rendering of the Hebrew term gedud by the modem term "battalion" see Chapter 21, note 20. 44. Reading with LXX and Psalm 18; also Syr., Targ. and Vulg.; 2 Samue/22. Ketib (consonantal text) reads: has kept His path. 45. Reading with LXX, Syr. Targ., Vulg., and Psalm 18; MT reads: His legs.

472

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

He has set me upon my heights. 36. He trains my hands for war; My arms bend a bow ofbronze.

37. You have granted me the shield of Your salvation;

Your help has made me great!46 38. You have lengthened my strides under me, My feet have not slipped

39. I have pursued my enemies and have annihilated them;

I did not turn back until they were wiped out. 40. I wiped them out, I shattered them-they do not rise;

They are fallen under my feet. 40. You have girded me with strength for war;

Those that rose against me You have subdued under me. 41. You have made my enemies turn their backs to me, Even those who hated me-and I destroyed them. 42. They looked, but there was none to deliver;

Even to the Lord, but He did not answer them.

43. I ground them down like the dust of the earth; I crushed them, I stamped them down like the mire ofthe streets. 44. You have delivered me from the discords ofmy people,

Kept me47 to be a ruler ofnations; Peoples whom I have not known (now) serve me. 45. Foreigners 48 cringe before me;

As soon as they hear ofme they obey me. 46. Foreigner/9 lose heart;

They come tremblinlf0 out oftheir strongholds. As a complete short hymn in itself, this section also possesses its own introduction stating its theme. And like the last verse of the first mini-hymn, which served both as its conclusion and as the start of the bridge, so the last verse of the bridge serves as its conclusion and, simultaneously, the opening of the next section. Thus each part of this complex composition flows smoothly into the next.

46. Reading with Q; MT reads Your answering or Your condescension. 47. Psalm 18 reads made me. 48. Literally the sons ofthe stranger. 49. See note 48 above. 50. Reading with Psalm 18:46; 2 Samue/22 reads they came girded.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

473

For You are my lamp, 0 Lord; The Lord lights up my darkness. For with You I can crush a battalion; With my God I can scale a wall! (29-30) While the first hymn and the bridge are sufficiently general to apply to anyone who has been in deep trouble and been miraculously saved from total disaster, this next section is overtly military. Only by stretching an allegorical interpretation to its very limits can we read what follows as the thankfulness of a civilian for success in life. This is the victory hymn of a warrior, a commander of armies. And since the writer is not only named in the superscription, but signs himself at the conclusion, let us cease our references to "the psalmist" or "the poet" and call him by his name: David. David is saying that his experience of God grows directly out of his military success. With God's aid, he says, I am triumphant in war: in battle in the open field-For with You I can crush a battalion-as well as in the siege and conquest of fortified cities-With my God I can scale a wall. 51 I have tested my God, and His promises to those who put their faith in Him are upheld without fail. This is the meaning of the next verse:

As for God-His way is perfect; The word of the Lord is pure; He is a shield to all who take refuge in Him. (31) The word "pure" is actually a technical term from the field of metallurgy: it refers to the process separating the metal (usually silver) from impurities by intense heat, pouring off the liquid silver and leaving the dross behind. It is a metaphor used repeatedly in the Bible; through the heat of crisis a promise is tested to ascertain its purity-that is, its reliability. 52 Having stated his theme-from personal experience I can attest that it is God who has made my victories possible-David now lays forth his indebtedness to God. Starting with a set of rhetorical questions, he follows with a torrent of linked images expounding how God's aid has made him irresistible.

For who is God but the Lord? And who is a rock except our God? The God, my mighty fortress, He has made my path straight. He makes my legs like hind's [feet]; He has set me upon my heights. He trains my hands for war; My arms bend a bow ofbronze. 53 You have granted me the shield of Your salvation; 51. Could this be an allusion to the conquest of Jerusalem? 52. As in: The words ofthe Lord are pure words, Silver purified in an earthen crucible, Refined seven times. (Psalm 12:7) 53. Bows, of course, were made of wood (and, if composite bows, of hom and sinew as well). Bows were not made of bronze for the simple reason that no one could pull them. What David is saying by this metaphor is that God has multiplied his powers all out of proportion to the normal.

474

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

Your help has made me great! You have lengthened my strides under me, My feet have not slipped (32-37) The central image is that of a warrior treading a dangerous road, narrow and bestrewed with obstacles, leading alongside precipitous drops to dizzying heights. It is God Who has enabled him to successfully negotiate this fearful path to the heights of greatness, making his winding path straight, making him surefooted and nimble like the mountain deer, keeping his feet from slipping; the dangerous journey in retrospect seeming like a stroll along a wide highway. Only with God's help has he been able to make the perilous journey to victory and greatness, symbolized by finally arriving on the heights. Now David abandons metaphor to describe exactly what he means by setting him "on his heights:"

I have pursued my enemies and have annihilated them; I did not turn back until they were wiped out. I wiped them out, I shattered them-they do not rise; They are fallen at my feet. You have girded me with strength for war; Those that rose against me You have subdued under me. You have made my enemies turn their backs to me, Even those who hated me-and I destroyed them. (38-41) This is more than a description of winning a battle; this is a picture of total victory, the breaking and routing of an army. And it was God who made this all possible.

You have girded me with strength You have subdued [them] under me You made my enemies turn their backs to me That is, tum tail and run; but nothing helped them:

I have pursued my enemies and have annihilated them. I wiped them out, I shattered them ... And I destroyed them. Nothing can help them; in desperation they even appeal to the God of Israel, but He will not listen to them.

They looked, but there was none to deliver; Even to the Lord, but He did not answer them. I ground them down like the dust of the earth; I crushed them, I stamped them down like the mire of the streets. 54 ( 42-43)

54. Most streets in those days were not paved; the winter rains would turn them into seas of mud.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL

475

This is complete and absolute triumph. And now comes the payoff:

You have delivered me from the discords ofmy people, 55 Kept me to be a ruler ofnations; Peoples whom I have not known [now] serve me.. Foreigners cringe before me; As soon as they hear ofme they obey me. Foreigners lose heart; They come trembling out of their strongholds. (44-46) Absolute victory brings unconditional surrender; David concludes his martial career as ruler of an empire.

PERORATION: THANKS TO WHOM ALL IS DUE The hymn now soars to its conclusion: an emotional crescendo of thanksgiving from a warrior king to his God.

The Lord lives! And blessed be my Rock! And exalted be my God, the Rock ofmy salvation! The God who gives me vengeance, And brings down people under me; Who brings me out from my enemies, Who lifts me up from those who rise against me; You deliver me from men ofviolence. For this I will extol You among the nations, And will sing praises to Your name. (47-50) This is a thanksgiving proportionate to the bounty bestowed. God rules the world, saving David from his enemies and delivering them into his hands. The name and the wondrous deeds of the living God (as opposed to the gods of the heathens, which have no life for they are not real) will David proclaim among the nations in gratitude for His salvation. And at last, the coda: David's summation and signature:

A tower ofsalvation is He to His king; Showing love to His anointed: To David, and to his descendants, forevermore. (51)

Note the similarity of this coda to the conclusion of"Hannah's Prayer:"

The Lord judges the ends ofthe earth; Giving strength to His kingdom, 55. This could be a reference to the trials of the civil war that preceded the unification of the two kingdoms under his rule, or to the general contentiousness of the Israelites, a stiff-necked people (Exodus 32:9), a rebellious house (Ezekie/2:5), that made them so ungovernable.

476

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL And lifting up the horn of His annointed one. (1 Samuel2:10)

This echo, reminding us of Hannah's composition which set the agenda of Samuel, is one of the reasons the author chose this psalm of David as the poetic work appropriate to frame the Book of Samuel in parallel with "Hannah's Prayer." The concluding words of the psalm thus act as an introduction to the overt re-examination of Hannah's premise with which she concludes her Book.

CHAPTER38

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL TWENTY YEARS LATER But at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near. And yonder all before us lie Deserts ofvast eternity. Andrew Marvell, To His Coy Mistress The triumphant conclusion of the great hymn we have been reading, focusing on God's love to His anointed, to David and to his descendants, forevermore (22:51-that is, the promise of a perpetual dynasty-is what links the two masterpieces that form the centerpiece of our Epilogue. Two poems, united in a common preoccupation with rule and dynasty, yet so different in perspective and tone. A great gap separates them. The paean of thanksgiving of a warrior king to his God was penned at the height of David's powers and worldly success. In our second poem we face an old man, his strength and his powers rapidly waning. Much has David had to endure since those heady days: the sudden fall into the "Bathsheba Affair" and its shattering aftermath that forever broke his morale; the nightmare disintegration of his family-his household riven by rape and murder; the erosion of his rule, with rebellion following rebellion; his new status-sidelined in the role of little more than a figurehead, his former lieutenants now running the empire in his name. The author has leaped roughly twenty years of tragedy to provide us with a disturbing and sobering contrast. Has David learned anything from what he has endured? Many things have been taken from him over the years-his health, his self-confidence, the most beloved of his children, and most tragic of all, his magic touch: the charisma that made people follow and love him, the sure hand that could turn every crisis into fruitful opportunity. But one thing remains: his poetic genius. And to this an old man turns to sum up his life, and to pass on to future generations what hard wisdom he has achieved. This is the epitaph David has penned for himself. 23:1

Now these are the last words ofDavid: "The utterance ofDavid, the son ofJesse, The utterance of the man raised on high, 1 The anointed of the God ofJacob, And the Sweet Singel ofIsrael.

1. Q (Dead Sea Scrolls) reads: raised up by God.

478

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL: TWENTY YEARS LATER

2.

The spirit ofthe Lord speaks to me, And His word is on my tongue.

3a. The God ofIsrael has spoken;

The rock ofIsrael said to me: These opening lines are remarkable; there is nothing like them in the entire corpus of writings ascribed to David. Couched in archaic form, this is the preamble to a prophecy. The word that we have rendered as "utterance" (Hebrew neum) is a term exclusively used by prophets to designate a statement as an oracle, coming directly from God. 3 David is specifically claiming to speak in the name of God; that what he is about to utter does not have its roots in his poetic genius or his human insight, but transcends them. In his old age, he has had a vision revealing to him the workings of the world and of his place in it. This, he realizes, is his last word: his final religious summing up, a psalm written under the direct inspiration of God. 4 With these words the Sweet Singer of Israel will lay down his pen. 3b. 'He who rules justly among men,

Ruling in5 the awe of God 4.

Is like the morning light as sunrise, The brilliance of a morn without clouds, When, after the rain, grass [sprouts] from the earth. '

5.

For is not my House thus with God? For an eternal covenant has He made with me, Ordered in all things and secure; For will He not cause to prospel All my salvation and [my] every desire?

6.

But the ungodly are as thorns thrust aside, All ofthem; For they cannot be taken by the hand

7.

No man can touch them,

2. The Hebrew term zemirot is used exclusively in the Bible for religious poetry (see Appendix: Psalm 51, esp. notes 7 and 8). As such the phrase is sometimes rendered The Sweet Psalmist of Israel. Another possibility: the Hebrew word naim, which we have rendered as "sweet" also has the meaning of "beloved" or "favorite." Thus the phrase might be rendered The Beloved Singer ofIsrael or The Favorite singer of Israel. 3. See Chapter l, especially notes II and 13. The most exact parallel in the Bible to these opening words turns the clock back several centuries to the pagan prophet Balaam:

The utterance ofBalaam, the son ofBe or, The utterance ofthe man whose eye is opened, The utterance ofhim who hears the words of God, And sees visions from the Almighty; Fallen down, yet with eyes unveiled. (Numbers 24:3-4) These words are the preface to the third of Salaam's four oracles on Israel and its destiny. For Balaam, see Chapter 2, esp. note 12. 4. His final temporal legacies, what we know of them, are recorded in l Kings 2: l-9, l Chronicles 22:6-16, 28: Ill, 20-21, and 29:10-30. 5. Reading with numerous Hebrew manuscripts. 6. Literally cause to sprout.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL: TWENTY YEARS LATER

479

Except with iron or the staff of a spear. 7 They shall be utterly consumed with fire [as] in the day ofthe sirocco. 8

This little gem of a psalm divides into three parts: (One) The introduction, in which David claims divine inspiration (1-3a) (Two) The utterance: David relays what he has learned from God. (3b-4) (Three) David's amplification of the message, and its application to himself. (5-7) We have discussed the introduction; so let us pass directly to what David claims God said to him: 'He who rules justly among men, Ruling in awe ofGod Is like the morning light at sunrise, The brilliance of a morn without clouds, When, after the rain, grass [sprouts].from the earth.' (3b-4)

The poetry is exquisite, picturing the effects of just rule: as when after a rain, the sun rises on a cloudless mom, its light and heat causing the grass to sprout from the damp soil, clothing the land in a mantle of green. The just ruler is pictured as the sun, providing the conditions that foster the growth and flowering of his subjects. When we look beyond the poetic imagery there is one phrase that should catch our attention. David parallels the words He who rules justly among men, with Ruling in awe of God Note that David does not use the term awe of the Lord, a central concept oflsraelite faith, 9 but rather the more general term the awe of God This term, meaning something like "common decency," "concern for one's fellow," is a concept not restricted only to those who "know the Lord" or should "know the Lord," but rather has a universal application. Common decency and care for the other is a standard that applies to everyone. 10 Thus what might have seemed at first glance a rather banal content to a divine revelation proves, on closer examination, to be something quite extraordinary. What is being presented is a universal principle of government, applicable to all peoples and not limited just to the Children of Israel. States are to be run on the basis of justice, common decency and care rather than on the basis of personal aggrandizement, economic efficiency or naked power. All these, the pronouncement implies, are ultimately self-defeating; they don't cause the grass to grow, i.e. the people to flourish. The health of any state depends on the health of its people; a state that does not promote the flourishing of its people undermines itself and ultimately destroys itself. It is not political or economic systems, nor military might that promote the growth of a kingdom or commonwealth, but justice, decency and care. All this (and much more) is contained and implied by these few, simple lines.

7. Reading with LXX; MT seems to read: But a man who touches them, Must be armed in iron, and with the staffofa spear. 8. A stifling hot, dust-laden wind called in Arabic el-hamsin that in Israel, between April and June, blows in from the desert. In California a similar phenomenon is known as the Santa Ana. These winds suddenly cause the temperature to rise and the humidity to plummet, resulting in the withering of plants and weakness, heat strokes and death to humans. This is fire weather. Thorn and brush fires abound when the sirocco blows. (The translation follows the proposal ofShlomo Naeh, "A New Suggestion Regarding 2 Samuel XXIII7," p. 260-265.) 9. See Appendix: Psalm 34, "The Fear of the Lord." For a related concept, "the knowledge of the Lord," see Chapter I, "They Knew Not the Lord." 10. For the term "the awe of God" see Chapter 9, notes 8 and 10, and related text.

480

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL: TWENTY YEARS LATER

It is hard for us to realize how revolutionary this pronouncement was when it was frrst enunciated. In our age, living with the cumulative influence of the classical prophets of Israel 11 and their inspired rhetoric elaborating on this radical re-evaluation of the purpose and practice of statecraft, we find it familiar, almost commonplace-widely lauded (though rarely, if ever, put into practice). But in the ancient Near East such a point of view would have seemed, at the very least, bizarre, and to most, incomprehensible. This is one of the earliest, if not the very frrst statement of this point ofview. 12 Thus far the content of David's utterance, spoken in the spirit of the Lord; the divine content of his poem (and its implications). It is when David applies God's word to himself that out problems begin. For is not my House thus with God? For an eternal covenant has He made with me. Ordered in all things and secure; For will He not cause to prosper All my salvation and [my] every desire? (5)

What is David saying here? Can he be seriously claiming that justice, common decency and concern were the bedrock principles of his regime? Common decency dictates that you keep you hands off other men's wives. Justice demands that you do not arrange for the murder of inconvenient husbands. Care insists that you don't simply stand by when your daughter is raped. The dismal list could be prolonged ad nauseum. Is the old king attempting a cover-up, a rewrite job on the history of his reign? Or is he focusing solely on the early days of his career before the corruption of power undermined his integrity? Those were the days when, out of a sense of responsibility and at grave personal risk, he could rescue a ci~ of ungrateful fellow countrymen, 13 and when he could hold Saul's life in his hand and spare him. 1 Again and again he would do the magnanimous thing, the caring thing, where political advantage would have dictated otherwise. It was this period of his life that culminated in God's promise to establish his dynasty as an "everlasting House." Or, conversely, is he saying that these were my principles and that I really tried to live by them (implying that at the end it became too hard for him)? Whatever the case, the poetic image shifts. From using the sun as a personification of the ruler, it becomes a symbol for God. David seems to be suggesting rhetorically that, because of the decency of his reign, God's light and warmth will bring to fruition all his dreams. Somehow, the last decades of decline have been swept under the carpet. While all too human, this seems less than candid. It is when we come to the concluding verses of David's "Swan Song" that the perspective shifts. The first lines, the inspired part, embody the ideal of the godly, righteous ruler. The final lines contrast him to the godless and ego-driven people 15 who so often occupy positions of power. But the ungodl/6 are as thorns thrust aside,

11. The age of Classical Prophecy is considered to begin with Amos, who began his prophetic career about 200 years after David penned these lines, and continued through the Babylonian Exile and the return to Judea, culminating with Malachi some 300 years after Amos. 12. His is, of course, a necessary outgrowth of Hannah's axiom-for not by power shall man prevail-its application to a theory of government and an answer to the question: if not by power, then by what? 13. Keilah; see Chapter 13. 14. See Chapter 14. 15. See note 7 above. 16. Literally Belial, the Netherworld, the Pit (see Chapter 37, note 18). When used in conjunction with man, men, son/daughter, i.e. man of Belial, son of Belial etc. (the "man" being understood in our present case) it means something like "one destined for hell," a worthless, good-for- nothing, base person: the opposite of those who are in awe of God (verse 3b); thus egotistic, self-centered, lacking in common decency, "ungodly" as we have here rendered it.

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL: TWENTY YEARS LATER

481

All ofthem; For they cannot be taken by the hand No man can touch them, Except with iron or the staff of a spear; They shall be utterly consumed with fire [as] in the day of the sirocco (6-7) The picture is that of thorny bushes that are not only worthless but also dangerous. Get entangled and they will tear your clothing and pierced your flesh. You touch them at your peril. They must be kept at arm's length with poles and with metal tools. Yet formidable though they seem, they are ephemeral. They quickly bum up in the summer drought, with the coming of the hot winds. A more graphic and dramatic description of the ephemeral careers of the believers in, and practitioners of, amoral power would be hard to find. Have nothing to do with them, we are told; they may be quick to flourish, succeed and rise to power, overshadowing their more righteous neighbors, but in the nature of things their useless lives will vanish as quickly as tinder-dry thorn bushes. On the site of their ashes decent people, the wholesome grass, will sprout and grow under the sun of godly rulers. David, while focusing on his early days, could with some justification see them as fulfilling this ideal and meriting god's reward. But I suspect that he was increasingly aware that, for the last decade of so, his true depiction was that of thorns thrust aside, by life and by God. And while God would keep His promise with regard to David's House as a fair reward for his earlier virtues, he himself, at present, deserves only to be cast off. I make this suggestion because of the note on which David ends. The psalm, had it followed a logical progression, would have gone as follows: (I) the definition of the godly ruler, (2) the antithesis: the ungodly, and (3) the application to David: "fitting the definition of the godly your reward is ..."That David inverts this order, ending on so sour a note, implies that he is acutely aware of how far he has fallen from what he once had been. Too late, looking back in the light of his final illumination, David can begin to understand what went wrong with his life. When we compare these "last words of David," and the spirit that breathes from them, with the grandiloquent stanzas of David's previous triumphal ode one can hardly imagine a starker contrast. There everything is power and military triumphalism. Here we have a radical re-evaluation of what a successful rule is all about. Regardless of the source of this re-evaluation-how much was David and how much was God-it would seem that David has learned something from the cumulative disasters that have destroyed his life. In the words of Samuel Coleridge:

He went like one that hath been stunned, And is ofsense forlorn; A sadder and a wiser man, He rose the morrow morn. 17 Some such conclusion, it would seem, was the author's intent when she placed these two poems side by side, as the centerpiece of her Epilogue. This intent will become concrete in the author's final chapter where, in effect, David's Last Words become the author's final word.

TOWARDS A JEWISH THEORY OF GOVERNANCE Reading The Book of Samuel we have been repeatedly been made aware that, on its political level, the Book has been recording the struggle to develop a theory of government. With the beginning of the political revolution that ultimately transformed Israel from a loose confederation of tribes governed by a form of primitive democracy into a centralized imperial autocracy, one of the most 17. The Rime of the ancient Mariner.

482

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL: TWENTY YEARS LATER

pressing needs was for a model for this emerging entity and for a theory as to how it was to be run. We remember the various provisional guidelines formulated by Samuel, and his repeated "agonizing reappraisals" when they proved untenable. More than the clash of imperious personalities, it was the lack of clear and accepted guidelines that lay at the root of the prolonged conflict between Samuel and Saul. It was this same issue that underlay the confrontation with Nathan over the "Bathsheba Affair" that proved the turning point of David's reign. The people had demanded a king, but what was to be the role of this king? Up to a point the people had been quite clear in their minds as to what they wanted:

"we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; that our king may govern us, and go out before us and fight our battles." (1 Samue/8:19-20) To successfully prosecute the nation's wars and to govern the people-these goals sounded simple, especially as one could rely on several thousand years' worth experience of centralized autocratic governance in the Ancient Near East. One had only to model one's institutions on those of the states surrounding Israel to guarantee a form of government that had proven itself effective. And yet, as quickly became evident, this obvious answer, "that we also may be like all the nations, " simply would not do. Israel's political revolution was taking place in the shadow of her overarching Monotheistic Revolution, and the underlying postulates of monotheism were incompatible with the classic tyrannies of the Ancient Near East. To grasp the reality of the pagan world in which Israel was situated, and against whose background the Israelites were redefining themselves, we must remind ourselves that paganism is rooted in the recognition of nature as divine. Monotheism decisively rejected this worldview. To the faith of Israel, nature is but the handiwork of the One God who created the universe and all that is in it, Who freed the people of Israel from Egyptian slavery and Who entered into a covenant with them. To the terms of this covenant Israel, with a startling persistence, held true despite its heavy price. The keeping ofYahweh's 18 covenant meant relinquishing a great deal. It meant, in a word, sacrificing the greatest good ancient Near Eastern religion could bestow-the harmonious integration of man's life with the life of nature . . . the serene awareness of being at one with the universe. In this experience ancient oriental religion rewarded its devotees with the peace offulfillment. 19 The corollary of the pagan worldview was to make the main function of the king the maintenance of harmony with the gods of nature. Kingship partook of the realm of the sacred. It was the king who was the instrument of integrating society and nature. As such, kingship was invested with transcendental significance. But the boon was available only for those who believed that the divine was immanent in nature, and Hebrew religion rejected precisely this doctrine. The absolute transcendence of God is the foundation of Hebrew religious thought. ... To Hebrew thought nature appeared void of divinity, and it was worse than futile to seek a harmony with created life when only obedience to the will of the Creator could bring peace and salvation. 20 This stripped kingship of its primary role in the Ancient Near East. In an Israelite society the king could not be the one who insures the bond between man and nature. So if the Ancient Near Eastern model of kingship was incompatible with Israelite faith what then was to be the role of the king in Israel?

18. On the significance of this transcription of God's name see Introduction: The Road to Samuel, note 66. 19. Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, p. 342-343. 20. Ibid, p.343

THE SWEET SINGER OF ISRAEL: TWENTY YEARS LATER

483

Seen against this background David's answer is revolutionary. Government is removed from the realm of religion and is seen as essentially secular-or as secular as was possible in those days. Sacrifice will remain the function ofthe priests; reading the will of God is a subject for priests and prophets. The king is neither priest nor prophet. 21 He is a layman, in this no different than his subjects. His realm is that of justice and caring responsibility for the ruled; to promote a just and caring society that encourages the people to flourish and provides the individual the opportunity to fulfill his or her human potential. 2 This will become, in Israel, the aim and the justification of the State. Against this ideal the success of any government will be judged-and its legitimacy be gauged. The welfare of the people and the promotion of a just society are ideals to strive for; they are ends. But what about the means by which government is to achieve these ends? With this question we have returned to the issue of power, for government is, after all, the institutionalization of power. 23 To this question of means David has no answer. It remains for our author to grapple with this issue in the conclusion to her book. It is to David that the credit belongs of setting the goal of what a Jewish ruler should be, and by extension, what should be the goal of any government that recognizes the sovereignty of the One Just and Caring God. How this goal is to be realized will become one of the central issues for the prophets of Israel. But for the present it is enough that the dying David knows that the king, like all mortals, is judged by Heaven and now understands by what yardstick rulers are to be measured. If he suspects that, in the end, he has proved less than adequate, yet he has the consolation of knowing that he is leaving to future generations of rulers the key that may enable some of them to prove worthy of the responsibility their high calling demands.

'He who rules justly among men, Ruling in awe of God Is like the morning light at sunrise, The brilliance of a morn without clouds, When, after the rain, grass [sprouts]from the earth.

21. Nor, for that matter, a god, as was the case in Egypt. 22. This, in tum, is a direct corollary of the individualism promoted by the Monotheistic Revolution. See the discussion of this phenomenon in the section entitled "The Monotheistic Revolution" in the Introduction. Monotheism's freeing of the individual from the pagan bond of the collective raised the issue not only of the place of the autonomous individual in society but also, implicitly, of the role government should play in promoting individual welfare. 23. In our era we are all too familiar with the phenomenon of the totalitarian state, with utopian aims and the most brutal of methodologies, using unlimited power to force a "better society" upon its people whether they want it or not. Because of our awareness of the horrors of such institutions as the slave labor camps of the Gulag and the terror of the secret police in recent Marxist dictatorships, we tend to be extremely cynical of the hypocrisy inherent in totalitarian societies. It is well to remember, however, the noble aims and high idealism of many of the founders of these states, and of their early followers. The corruption of both rulers and ruled in these societies gives point to the axiom that noble aims are not enough; the means chosen to achieve the aims are the determining factor in the outcome.

CHAPTER39

DAVID'S HEROES: THE HALLS OF FAME Blow, bugles, blow! ... Honour has come back, as a king, to earth, And paid his subjects with a royal wage; And Nobleness walks in our ways again; And we have come into our heritage. Rupert Brooke, The War Sonnets, III

Continuing the contrapuntal structure of the Epilogue, the pendulum now swings away from David's belated recognition of the true function of a Monotheistic ruler, back to the triumphalism of his glory years. We remember that David's magnificent paean to his victories was introduced by a section on the "giant-killers," the exploits of some ofhis bravest followers. Now the author returns to focus on the men who made his victories possible. Living in an age in which democracy prevails, and the exploits of common people are daily brought to our attention in the media, we accept this sharing of the glory as only natural; a proper balancing of the picture. It requires a moment's serious thought to realize that this chapter was indeed quite revolutionary in its Ancient Near East setting. In those days kings did not share the glory; they monopolized it. To share the glory was to diminish the stature of the king (they were usually depicted on monuments as giants surrounded by their pygmy-sized soldiers and courtiers). That it was considered acceptable to publicly record that the great warrior, David, was almost killed, was rescued by his nephew, and then forced by his men to permanently relinquish a combat role 1 speaks volumes about the democratic ethos that still prevailed, even in the last autocratic years of David's reign. Perhaps this was one of the reasons for the author's insisting on the honor and glory that was the due of David's heroes; by emphasizing the role played by outstanding officers the author is subtly protesting the inexorable process of concentration of power in the hands of king and court. It is of a piece with her having previously highlighted Samuel's warning of where monarchy would lead? The author, no friend of autocracy, is once again championing the common man against the king. The fact that the author could write the way she did, exposing the foibles and failings of the king, and get away with it, suggests that she was not alone in her attitudes. There must have been a broad spectrum of opinion that agreed with her. This chapter is part and parcel ofthis overall point of view.

1. See Chapter 36. 2. See Chapter 5.

486

DAVID'S HEROS: THE HALLS OFF AME

The parallel account to our list of heroes, I Chronicles II: l 0-4 7, contains numerous differences from our text and we will draw freely upon it. The first of these variations is that the chronicler feels the need of an introduction to explain who these men were and why they are being listed:

Now these were David's chief warriors who strongly supported him in his kingdom, together with all Israel, to make him king according to the word of the Lord concerning Israel. (1 Chronicles 11: I 0) David seems to have created a series of honorary orders to publicly recognize exceptional acts of valor, above and beyond the call of duty. Today we would recognize such acts by awarding medals. Thus it would not be amiss to look upon these men as "Medal of Honor winners;" the heroes who, with David, won Israel's independence, and later forged vyi!~-~iJ? an empire. 3

"FAR ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY" These are the names of David's warriors: Josheb-basshebeth, a Tahchemonite, 4 chief of "the Three; "5 he wielded his speal against eight hundred7 and slew them at one time. And after him among "The Three Warriors" was Eleazar, son of Dodo, son of Ahohi. He was8 with David when they defied the Philistines who were gathered there for battle. 9 The men of Israel retreated but he stood firm. He struck down the Philistines till his arm was weary, and his hand stuck to his sword! 10 And the Lord wrought a great victory that day; and the men returned after him only to strip [the slain]. And a;jer him was Shammah, son ofAge," the Aararite. The Philistines had assembled at Lehi, 2 there was there a plot of ground full of lentils. Now the people had fled from before the Philistines, but he took his stand in the midst of the plot and defended it and smote the Philistines. Thus the Lord wrought a great victory. (23:8-12) Josheb-basshebeth, Eleazar and Shammah comprised a group known as "The Three Warriors," or simply "The Three." Their supreme courage and Herculean feats of valor, in each case apparently saving the day, set them above and apart all their fellow "medal winners."

3. These orders seem to have served functions beyond merely that of public recognition. See Chapter 25, Appendix: David's War Machine. 4. The name is given in 1 Chronicles 11:11 as Jashobeam, the son of Hachmoni. LXX suggests his name might originally have been Ish-baa! or Eshbaal, which was then changed to Ish-bosheth, and then further confused. See Chapter 20, note 1 for the reasons for these name changes. 5. Reading with LXX: MT reads chief ofthe captains. 6. Reading with 1 Chronicles 11 : 11; MT reads he is Adino the Eznite. 7. I Chronicles 11: reads three hundred. 8. Reading with 1 Chronicles 11: 13. MT omits these words .. 9. 1 Chronicles 11:13-14 reads He was with David at Pas-dammim when the Philistines were gathered there for battle.

10. I.e. he was unable to open his hand and release his grip upon his sword. His muscles wouldn't relax. 11. Pronounced Agai. 12. Reading with LXX; MT is unclear. Lehi was a site in Judah, not far from the Philistine border, mentioned in Judges 15:9.

DAVID'S HEROS: THE HALLS OF FAME

487

And now, perhaps in part to humanize these three killing machines, and in part to remind the reader what David was like in his prime, the author relates an episode from the days of the Philistine wars. The incident takes place after David has been crowned king of Israel but before his stunning victory at the battle of Baal-perazim, which was to prove the turning point of the war. 13 The Philistines have invaded Judah in force, compelling David to abandon Hebron, his capital, and retreat to his wilderness stronghold at Adullam. The greater part of the Philistine army is concentrated in Emek Rephaim, the Valley of the Giants, while contingents garrison the occupied cities of Judah. Among these is Bethlehem. These are dark days, when Philistine victory seems assured and David is leading what looks like a doomed guerilla campaign against unbeatable odds. This forms the backdrop of the action.

Once, during the harvest season, three 14 of the thirty chief men went down and came to David at the cave ofAdullam. 15 Now the mainforce16 of the Philistines was encamped in EmekRephaim; David was then in the stronghold [of Adullam] and there was a Philistine garrison in Beth!ehem. (2 3: 13-1 4). The time is the early autumn, prior to the beginning of the rainy season. 17 All through the summer no rains fall; the wadis are dry and many springs cease to flow. It is a time of water rationing. We can picture David and his men in the parched hills looking down on Bethlehem, David's birthplace. And David, in his thirst, remembers with longing the big cistern at the gate to the city, with plentiful reserves of water, even at the end of the long dry season.

And David said longingly: "If only I could get a drink ofwater from the cistern 18 which is by the gate ofBethlehem!" (23:15) It can be very dangerous for a popular and charismatic king to openly express his heart's desire in the presence of devoted followers. One is reminded of the English king, Henry II, whose petulant remark in 1170, "Who will free me from this turbulent priest?" 19 led four of his knights, who took him literally, to cross the Channel and kill Thomas Becket in Canterbury. Henry had no more intention of initiating the murder of his Archbishop-an act whose political consequences were to be catastrophic for his reign-than David has of risking his men's lives for a drink of water. But to the elite among David's followers his slightest wish is taken as a command for which they are ready to shed their blood.

Then the three warriors broke through the camp of the Philistines and drew water from the cistern that was by the gate ofBethlehem, and carried it back and brought it to David. (23:16-17) David's shock upon discovering that his men have taken him literally is evident from his reaction. Refusing the water, he pours it forth upon the ground as a libation offering to God. David is

13. For the course of the Philistine wars see Chapter 22. I4. Reading with the keri (the vocalized text), LXX and I Chronicles II :I5; the consonantal MT reads thirty. I5. See Chapter 13, for the location and importance of this refuge during David's wilderness years. I6. LXX and I Chronicles II:I5 reads Now the camp ofthe Philistines. I7. For a description of the weather patterns oflsrael see Chapter 36, especially note 29. I8. Reading with the keri (the vocalized text) and I Chronicles ll:I7, I8. The ketib, the consonantal MT, reads well. I9. Otherwise reported as: "What a parcel of fools and dastards have I nourished in my house, that not one of them will avenge me of this one upstart clerk!"

488

DAVID'S HEROS: THE HALLS OF FAME

willing to risk his men's lives, even to sacrifice them for cause, but not to satisfy a whim. This water, won by suicidal bravery, has been consecrated by their valor.

But he would not drink it; he poured it out to the Lord and said: "Far be it from me, 0 lord, that I should do this. Shall I [drink] the blood of the men who went at risk of their lives?" So he refused to drink it. (28: 16-17) It is easy to see why David elicited such extreme devotion from his followers in those days.

These things did the Three Warriors. (28: 17) With this phrase the author closes the first section of her list: that relating to the elite of the elite.

THE THIRTY: "FOR CONSPICUOUS VALOR" The author now proceeds to the lesser, but still highly prestigious order of merit: "The Thirty." But the grand total, as summed up by the author, comes to thirty-seven (verse 39). 20 This total probably includes both "The Three" and "The Thirty," but we have still to account for a discrepancy of four. The most likely explanation is that, as members of these elite fellowships died (or, more likely, were killed) others were promoted to fill up their places and keep the roster at full count. Of those listed we know of two who were killed: Asahel and Uriah? 1 There must have been others. This list must date from the early days of David's reign. The parallel list in 1 Chronicles 11:1047 contains an additional 16 names. My assumption is that the Chronicler's list dates from a much later period, perhaps after the conclusion of the great imperial wars, in which combat attrition would have been heavy, necessitating replacement of almost two thirds of the original medal winners.

Now Abishai, brother ofJoab, 22 was head of "The Thirty. " 23 He wielded his spear against three hundred and slew them. Now he had a reputation24 among "The Thirty;" among "The Thirty" he was the most honored and he became their commander, but he did not attain to "The Three." (23:18-19) It must have been a constant frustration to this proud son of Zeruiah to have come so close, yet never to have made first rank.

Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada, a valiant man25 from Kabzeel, 26 performed great deeds. He smote two lion-hearted [warriors] from Moab. 27 Once, on a snowy day, he went down into a pit and killed a lion. He smote a towering Egyptian; 28 now the Egyptian had a spear in his hand and he [Benaiah] went down to him [armed only] with a staff. He tore the spear 20. Actually only 36 names are recorded in this listing. 21. For the accounts of their deaths see Chapter 20 and Chapter 28. 22. Reading with LXX and I Chronicles II :20; MT adds the son ofZeruia. 23. Reading with Syr. and some Hebrew ms; MT reads "The Three." 24. Literally he had a name. 25. Reading with LXX; MT reads the son of a valiant man. 26. A town at the extreme south of Judah, near the Edomite border. 27. Reading with LXX; MT is unclear. Another way of rendering the verse is He smote two Ariels of Moab. (military units?) 28. Reading with I Chronicles 11:23.

DAVID'S HEROS: THE HALLS OF FAME

489

from the Egyptian's hand and killed him with his own spear! These deeds Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada, did; he was renowned among "The Thirty" but did not attain to "The Three. "And David made him commander ofhis bodyguard 29 Asahel, brother ofJoab, was among "The Thirty;" Elhanan, the son ofDodo, ofBethlehem, Shammah the Harodite, Elika the Harodite, Helez the Paltite, Ira, the son ofIkkesh, of Tekoa, Abiezer from Anatoth, Mebunai30 the Hushathite, Zalmon the Ahohite, Maharai ofNetophah. Heleb, son of Baanah, ofNetophah, Ittai, son of Ribai, of Gibeah of the Benjamites, Beniah ofPirathon. Hiddai ofNahale-gaash, Abi-albon the Arbathite, Azmaveth ofBahurim, Eliahba ofShaalbon, Jashen the Gizonite31 Shammah the Hararite Ahiam, son ofSharar, the Aratite, Eliphelet, son ofAhasbai, ofMaacah, Eliam, son ofAhitophel ofGiloh, Hezrai ofCarmel, Paarai the Arbite, !gal, son ofNathan, ofZobah, Bani the Gadite, Zelek the Ammonite, Naharai the Beerothite, the arms-bearer ofJoab, son ofZeruiah, Ira the Ithrite, Gareb the lthrite, Uriah the Hittite: thirty-seven in all. (23 :20-39) There is one name conspicuous by its absence from this list: Joab. How could he have been omitted? Brave he was to a fault. His personal leadership of the assault team that penetrated into the heart of Jebusite Jerusalem at the time of its capture was recognized by his being granted lifetime tenure as Commander in Chief of David's armies. 32 Perhaps David felt that his rank was sufficient, and that he was a de facto honorary member of the orders. Gen. Yadin suggests that "The Thirty" served as a supreme military council, responsible for the operational running of the army and its reserve system, and that Joab served as chairman of this council. If so, this might explain Joab's omission from the list: his rank precluded membership in orders over which he presided as Commander in Chief.

29. I.e. the foreign mercenaries, the Cherethites and the Pelethites. 30. 1 Chronicles 11 :29 gives his name as Sebbacai. 31. Reading with LXX and 1 Chronicles 11 :34; MT reads the sons ofJashen, Jonathan. 32. See Chapter 22, esp. note 31.

490

DAVID'S HEROS: THE HALLS OF FAME

These were the men who, both by their bravery and valor, and by their professional duties within the regular army, made David's reign possible, and enabled him to seize the hegemony of the region. It is fitting that, after 3,000 years their names live on alongside that of their king and hero.

CHAPTER40

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE The tumult and the shouting dies; The captains and the kings depart: Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice, An humble and a contrite heart.

Rudyard Kipling, Recessional, 1897 En rna fin git mon commencement. (In my end is my beginning)

Mary, Queen of Scots, (Motto embroidered with her mother's emblem)

The concluding installment of the Book of Samuel is unique. If we found the events with which the author opened her Epilogue gruesome-the impalement of Saul's offspring and Rizpah's ghastly vigil-we can only look upon her choice for the concluding episode as bordering on the bizarre. There is nothing like this chapter in the entire Book. The dominant spirit of the Book of Samuel has been that of tragedy. Its major figures have been drawn in the guise of tragic heroes whose lives soar triumphantly, falter and then disintegrate into disappointing conclusions. Despite their remarkable abilities and accomplishments, and the best of intentions, the flaws inherent in the human condition and the means employed in the pursuit of success checkmate their ambitions, leaving them with desperate and despondent endings. Samuel, Saul and David are all tried in the balance and ultimately found wanting. Yet in her final chapter the author alters the perspective, rising above the level of tragedy that pervades her Book. She accomplishes this remarkable shift by abandoning the format hitherto rigorously adhered to, that of narrative history, for that of allegorical symbolism. The author has prepared us for this shift. She began her Epilogue by treating David and Rizpah not only as historical figures but also as symbols of two very different approaches to life. In that episode the symbolism seemed but an added dimension to a piece of narrative typical of the author's style. In retrospect we will realize that she was prefiguring the radical change we are about to witness: allegory has seized pride of place as the author attempts to sum up the lessons of her centurylong saga. This is not to say that there is no historical basis for what we are about to read. I would contend that the events related in this chapter are historical, just that they have been ripped out of the context of the narrative as a whole. This lack of context is intentional. In history, it is time that determines the

492

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

progression of events; with fable it is the moral or the meaning that determines their order. What we are dealing with here is fable. 1 This is not an easy chapter to read, much less understand. Indeed many readers prefer to skip it altogether, while not a few scholars have tended to belittle or skittishly skirt the chapter, often asserting that this segment is not a part of the original Samuel but extraneous material tacked on to the Book by a late (and not overly bright) editor. But if we are to hold true to our original assumptionthe premise that underlies our entire treatment of Samuel-that the Book we hold in our hands today is a unified composition by a single author, then we cannot ignore the culminating chapter of this brilliant work. And if, while on our path to this present point, we have come to appreciate the author as a highly intelligent and literarily talented human being, then it behooves us to give serious consideration to the way she concludes her dramatic work. 2 This is the climax that she penned to her masterpiece, and we must take care not to be dismissive of what we are encountering, despite the difficulty. The chapter rests on the foundation of three historical events that took place (as we shall attempt to demonstrate) early in David's reign, not long after his conquest of Jerusalem. These events are, in order of presentation: first, a census of the population of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah ordered by David, whose implementation is entrusted to the military high command; second, a devastating epidemic; and third, the purchase of a hilltop immediately north of Jerusalem by David, and the erection thereon of an altar to God. These events form the factual base of the chapter, and were this all, the chapter would not differ in kind from everything that preceded it. What gives this chapter its surrealistic cast, and makes it read like an episode from a modem avant-garde novel, is the way these events are presented and how the author interprets them. It is this presentation and interpretation of the facts that transforms what would otherwise be a rather dry factual account of historical events into a surreal and introspective drama of improbable juxtapositions and fantastical ordeals that would seem more in place in The Arabian Nights. Not only will we attempt to understand the various facets of this remarkable chapter and the moral of the tale with which the author chose to conclude her Book, but we will also try to intuit precisely why the author chose to break stride, abandoning the style she maintained for the entire Book up to this point, and why she concluded on this gothic note. In form, this chapter resembles a layer cake: the foundation of historical happenings overlaid by a stratum of interpretation that enters murky theological waters of a type that, previously, the author scrupulously avoided. We will attempt to understand the underlying historical occurrences-what actually happened-and also to make sense of the explanations the author sees fit to give for what took place; explanations that transcend her usual fairly pragmatic frame of reference. We must ask ourselves several questions: why, of all the multitude of episodes in David's life that she left out of her main narrative, did she decide to resurrect, out of context, these particular events? And further, why did she abandon straightforward historical narrative for allegorical symbolism? Lastly, and most urgently, why did she conclude her century-spanning historical drama with, of all things, this tale? Answering these questions will form the burden of this chapter. We will analyze the separate strata independently of each other, each in its own terms. Only at the conclusion will we be able to recombine the parts into their original form for a final overview.

l. We often think of fable in terms of the fabulous, flights of fancy such as Aesop's Fables, where animals speak and act as though they were human beings. Obviously animals don't. But there is another meaning to this term: "A story of supernatural or highly marvelous happenings, as in legend, myth or folklore; a narration intended to enforce some useful truth or precept." (Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition) It is in this latter meaning that we use the term "fable," the creation of a marvelous narrative with the intention that, through it, the central truth or moral of the book will be conveyed to the reader. 2. See the opening section of Chapter 36, "Introduction to an Epilogue," for a structural analysis of the Book of Samuel which clearly indicates that 2 Samue124 is an integral part of the original plan of the Book.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

493

THE AUTHOR AS HISTORIAN The historian has to do more than chronicle events. It is his business to show why things happened and to discover the forces which were at work. In order to understand the meaning of historical facts, he has to measure the characters and penetrate the motives of the actors, as well as to realize the conditions in which they acted. J. B. Bury, The Ancient Greek Historians When viewing the events enumerated in this narrative our first concern is to place them in their historical context; when did they take place? Our answer must be: near the end of the first decade of David's rule. Several lines of reasoning lead us to this conclusion. The first is that David's "prophet in residence" is still Gad, David's spiritual advisor from his "wilderness years." 3 By the end of the second decade of David's reign, the time of his affair with Bathsheba, Gad has disappeared, to be replaced by Nathan. The second line of reasoning concerns the event that triggers the entire narrative: David's decision to take a census of all Israel. As we shall argue, this is the necessary act that has to precede the transition from a militia system to an army based on reserves. This decisive change, a process that must have taken years to organize and implement, was complete by the middle of David's second decade; we find the new system up and running at the beginning of the Aramean wars. 4 These two arguments set the upper limit. We can set a lower limit by noting that the narrative portrays David as ensconced in Jerusalem, and in a condition sufficiently secure to allow him to detail his Commander in Chief, Joab, to the duty of conducting the census in person. As David only shifts his government from Hebron to Jerusalem after seven and a half years of rule, we again come to the last years of that decade. 5 This makes sense; the pause between the violent period of the unification of the two Kingdoms under David, the Philistine wars and the conquest of Jerusalem on the one hand, and the beginning of the Wars of Empire on the other, is just the time that David would be preoccupied with the organization of the administrative apparatus needed to manage the United Kingdoms. The creation of a united and efficient army would have been one of his highest priorities at this stage of his rule. Having placed the action a couple of years after David's having settled into his new capital, we now come to the examination of the events themselves. They are three in number. I.

2. 3.

David determines to undertake a census of all the tribes comprising his two kingdoms. He appoints Joab to be in charge, but Joab is opposed to the project. Despite his general's protests David overrides him and the census goes forward. The enumeration takes close to ten months, and at the end of this period Joab reports the results to David. Shortly after the completion of the census a virulent epidemic sweeps the land. In close proximity to the foregoing, David purchases a threshing floor from its Jebusite owner and on this site raises an altar to God.

Let us analyze in detail the sections of the text that relate to these three events.

3. See Chapter 13, note 15. 4. See Chapter 27. 5. If we accept the year 995 BCE as the approximate date of David's moving his capital to Jerusalem, that would put the beginning of these events two to three years later; that is approximately 993-992 BCE.

494

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

THE CENSUS Now the king said to Joab, and to the army commanders that were with him; 6 "Make the rounds of all the tribes of Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, 7 and number the people that I may know their number. " But Joab said to the king: "May the Lord your God add to the people a hundred times as many as there are, while the eyes of my lord the king sees it! But why does my lord the king want [to do] this thing?" But the word of the king prevailed against Joab and the army commanders, so Joab and the army commanders left the king's presence to number the people, that is, Israel. (24:2-4) Two basic questions arise from this text: what is David's purpose in ordering a census, and why does Joab (apparently with the full backing of his army commanders) balk at carrying out the king's orders?8 The general purpose seems clear: to place into the hands of the new administration a summary of the manpower capable of military service. This, at least, is clear from the fact that the final summary is reported as 800,000 men9 who drew the sword (24:9). That is, the summary relates exclusively to men capable of military service. It excludes all other categories of people: children, heads of families not of military age, women, persons with physical defects, etc. 10 That the purpose is fundamentally military can also be inferred from the fact that the census is entrusted to an army commission-one that would be capable of evaluating military capability-and not entrusted to the civil authorities. But if this is the case why should Joab and his top officers resist the implementation of a census? A census will further their interests by determining the number of potential recruits. General Yadin has proposed that the secret of David's success during the first twenty years or so of his rule over the United Kingdoms derived from his highly original reorganization of the military. Starting with his own professional soldiers (the core of his battalion from the outlaw days, expanded since to at least regimental size) and the militias of his two kingdoms, Israel and Judah, David continued to build up his professional standing army, largely by recruiting foreign mercenary units. But he was limited as to how far he could carry this; a standing army costs a lot of money and his kingdoms were not rich. On the other hand the militia's lack of training, leadership and equipment made them unreliable. We dealt with this issue in Excursus VIII: David's War Machine. You will recall that David finds the solution to his problem by keeping his professional army small~ssentially a rapid reaction force-while reorganizing the militia into formal reserve units led by professional officers. These units are called to active service, on a rotation basis, one month a year. During that period they receive training and are available for immediate service by the side ofthe professional troops in case of emergency. This system of reserves provides a large pool of units far better trained and led than the old militia, while keeping the relatively expensive standing army small. 11

6. Reading with LXX; MT reads Joab, the commander of the army that was with him. 1 Chronicles 21:2 reads Joab and the commanders ofthe army. 7. A Biblical expression that we have come upon before, signifying "from one end of the land to the other." Dan was the northernmost city in Israel; Beersheba was the southernmost city in Judah. 8. Unlike a modem census, ancient population inventories were made specifically to control particular individuals; to identify who should be taxed, inducted into military service or forced to work. Thus an ancient census did not seek to count all of the people, or even a representative sample of them, but only those in particular categories, such as family heads or males of military age. 9. Reading with LXX and some Hebrew ms; MT reads valiant men. 10. In my eyes this is a decisive rebuttal to those who hold that an aim of the census was fiscal: to prepare the ground for a comprehensive tax. 11. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, p. 279-284. A fuller analysis is to be found in Excursus VIII: David's War Machine, page 343. The system worked well for two decades and made the imperial wars possible.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

495

So what provokes Joab's opposition? In addition to the innate conservatism of professional soldiers, who tend to resist new-fangled ideas (and their contempt for non-professional "weekend soldiers"), I think what we may be seeing is a profound difference of opinion between David and his officer corps with regard to basic policy. David's thinking is fundamentally economic: how to get the biggest punch for the least money. He knows that he does not have the economic infrastructure to support a large standing army. 12 Joab and his commanders, on the other hand, are unconvinced of the long-term reliability and military effectiveness of non-professional soldiers. You don't save any money if you lose a war. Better to spend more and build a highly reliable and efficient professional army.n However there may be another reason for the census, one that in no way negates the main military purpose we have proposed. David was ever a complex man, and his actions often simultaneously served several purposes. Carol Meyers has suggested that a census could lay the foundations of a future mobilization of labor battalions to serve as a workforce for vast public building projects, foremost among these being a temple dedicated to the God of Israel. 14 We have already noted that during the latter part of his reign he did replace reserve military duty with organized periods of forced labor (the corvee), 15 while his son, Solomon, was to rely almost exclusively on forced labor in his construction of the Jerusalem Temple. If this was indeed one of the purposes of the census, this also could explain the spirited opposition of Joab and his generals: the noxious institution of the corvee would have been anathema to the freedom-loving Israelites, and one can understand the military hierarchy oflsrael not wanting to be tarnished by association with it. 16 But David, after all, is the king; he overrides his generals' objections and sends them on their way.

So they crossed the Jordan and began from Aroer, and from the city which is in the middle of the Wadi ofGad, 17 then on to Jazer. They continued to the Gilead, and to Kadesh ofthe land of the Hittites, 18 and came to Dan, and from Dan 19 they went around to Sidon. They It finally broke down in the last decade of David's reign due to the increasing political unreliability of the Israelite reserve units. Note their role in the rebellions of Absalom and Sheba, Chapters 33- 35. 12. See the section entitled "The Economic Consequences of Empire" in Chapter 25, for an analysis of the economic reasons for the eventual collapse of the empire that David built. 13. Over the long-term events proved Joab right. By the end of his reign David was forced to rely almost exclusively on his professionals. Solomon's army was a professional army of long-term enlistees. 14. Carol Meyers proposes that the events we are discussing took place during the period when David brought up the Ark to Jerusalem and was planning to himself build a temple to house it (see Chapters 23 and 24). She then connects Nathan's declaration of God's rejection of David's plans to the outbreak of the epidemic recounted in our chapter (Meyers, "David as Temple Builder," p. 370-72). I believe that viewing these events in historical proximity is untenable, if for no other reason than that the prophet to whom David turns for approval of his plans was Nathan, while the central prophetic figure of our narrative is Gad. This implies a gap of at least a decade between the census and epidemic outbreak of our current chapter, and the events of establishing the Ark in Jerusalem and God's refusal to sanction David's Temple plans. On the other hand, taking into account the universal practice in the Ancient Near East of new monarchs legitimizing their regimes by constructing a temple, and the also universal practice of employing forced labor in temple construction (Meyers, Ibid., 364-68), it seems highly probable that, upon the conclusion of the Philistine wars, David did tum his thoughts in that direction and begin to lay his plans accordingly: preparing for a project that would only begin to mature a decade or so later. 15. Unpaid or partially paid labor exacted by public authorities; see Chapter 35: "The Power Elite." I 6. As it turned out, when David ultimately introduced forced labor into Israel, he sequestered it from the jurisdiction of the armed forces, creating a separate bureaucracy headed by a cabinet minister, Adoram, to implement the corvee (see Chapter 35). The resentment provoked by the corvee was such as ultimately to lead to the uprising that would split apart the United Kingdoms after the death of Solomon. 17. Reading with LXX; MT reads and they encamped at Aroer, on the right side of the town, that is in the wadi of Gad. The Wadi of Gad is possibly the ravine of the Jabbok, which cuts across the tribal area of Gad. Gad is the tribe that lies north of Reuben, on whose southern border Aroer is situated. 18. Reading with LXX; MT reads to the land ofTahtim-hodshi, an unknown district.

496

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE went on to the fortress ofTyre, and all the cities of the Hivites and the Canaanites; and they came out in the Negeb of Judah, at Beersheba. At the end of nine months and twenty days, after having traversed the entire country, they came to Jerusalem. 20 And Joab gave the sum of the census to David: now [in] Israel there were 800,000 men21 who drew the sword; and the men ofJudah 500,000 men. 22 (24:5-9)

Starting in the southernmost city in the Israelite Trans-Jordan, the census commission traverses the kingdoms in a counter-clockwise circuit, ending in Beersheba, and from there proceeds to Jerusalem. Their detailed report undoubtedly covers the country, district by district, including not only the numbers of militarily capable men in each, but also the particular skills characteristic of the region: archers, stingers, swordsmen, spear-men, etc. The verbal report given to David by Joab is only the tip ofthe iceberg.

THE EPIDEMIC Now the Lord unleashed an epidemic upon Israel . .. and of the people, from Dan to Beersheba there perished 70,000 persons. (24: 15)

The term used here is not the usual term for a plague (Hebrew magepha) but rather the word dever, usually translated as "pestilence." The term seems to relate to a disease that can afflict both humans and cattle,23 and many are of the opinion that the term refers to anthrax. An extremely contagious acute disease, anthrax is one of the oldest illnesses recorded in the annals of humanity. 24 To differentiate it from "plague," I translate dever using the modem term, "epidemic." It would seem, from the concluding verse in the narrative, that the epidemic is of short duration:25 So the Lord heeded the plea for the land, and the plague upon Israel was halted (24:25b)

THE ALTAR The third historic event recorded is the purchase, by David, of a threshing-floor from its Jebusite owner. Its location is approximately three tenths of a mile north of Jerusalem's walls, on the highest

19. Reading with LXX; MT is unclear. 20. The Chronicler omits the itinerary, but instead adds but he did not include the tribes of Levi and Benjamin [to the totals presented to the king]. 21. Reading with LXX and some Hebrew ms; MT reads valiant men. 22. We cannot rely on these figures. Inasmuch as it was not to a person's interest to be counted, or to give accurate information, a pre-modem census tended to be inaccurate, often wildly so. The figures given in our text seem inflated by a factor of ten at the very least. But the numbers given in LXX and I Chronicles 21 :5 are even higher. The totals, however, have no bearing on the narrative. 23. The classic occurrence of this term is in the fifth of the "Ten Plagues" that devastate the Egyptians prior to the Exodus from Egypt (Exodus 9: 1-7). There it is clearly a cattle disease. It seems likely that the sixth plague that immediately follows (of erupting boils on the bodies the Egyptians) involves the spread of the disease from the cattle to the human population. In other parts of the Bible dever refers to a contagious human affliction. 24. Besides the Bible, Homer, Hippocrates, Ovid, Galen, Pliny and Virgil also mention the disease. 25. We will also be able to infer a short duration from verse 13 below.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

497

point of the ridge. 26 Upon this high ground David erects an altar. Our author insists that Gad the prophet, under God's direction, chooses the site. 27

And Gad came to David that day and said to him: "Go up; rear an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor ofAraunah the Jebusite. "28 So David went up, in accordance with Gad's instructions, as the Lord had commanded And Araunah looked, and saw the king and his servants coming toward him, 29 so he went out from the threshing floor30 and prostrated himself before the king, with his face to the ground And Araunah said: "Why has my lord the king come to his servant?" And David said: "To buy the threshing floor in order to build an altar to the Lord ... " Then Araunah said to David: "Let my Lord the king take whatever seems good to him and offer it up: behold, [here are] the oxen for burnt offering, and the threshing boards and the yokes of the oxen for wood 31 All this, 0 King, Araunah gives to the King." And Araunah [further] said to the king: "May the Lord your God accept you. "32 But the king said to Araunah: "No! I insist on buying it from you for a price. I will not offer up burnt offerings to the Lord my God that have cost me nothing!" So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. 33And David built there an altar to the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. (24: 18-25a)

In addition to the choice of the site, the narrative focuses on the issue of purchase. This is property owned by a Jebusite, of the people of Jerusalem whom David has conquered. It is instructive to note that the conquered population is neither driven out nor dispossessed. They remain in possession of their property. Furthermore, when David needs a particular site he neither seizes it by right of eminent domain (which is very much within his prerogative), nor does he accept it as a gift. He insists on purchasing it at full price. This, for him, is not only a religious principle, but is the only way to acquire inalienable rights to real estate under the internationally accepted law of those days. 34

26. Threshing-floors are where, in pre-mechanical economies, grain is separated from its husks (referred to as chaft) by a process called winnowing. This involves throwing the mixed grain and chaff into the air. The chaff, being light, is carried away by the wind; the heavier grain falls back to earth. This requires an unobstructed site with a strong breeze. High ground is almost a necessity. 27. As we have already noted (see Chapter 22, "David the Great"), David is building his palace outside the northern city walls and an upscale suburb will be situated there by the end of the second decade of his rule. Thus the altar site will become increasingly accessible as the city grows toward it. 28. The Chronicler adds that it was an angel that instructed Gad to deliver this message (1 Chronicles 21: 18). 29. 1 Chronicles 21 :20 and Q add now Araunah was threshing wheat. 30. Reading with 1 Chronicles 21 :21; MT reads So Araunah went forth. 31. The actual threshing (the breaking apart of the kernels from their husks, prior to winnowing) is accomplished by oxen dragging heavy threshing boards or sledges back and forth over grain, which is spread on the stone threshing floor. 32. Note that Araunah, in speaking to David, refers to the Lord your God, while David refers to the Lord my God. Unlike Uriah the Hittite, Araunah the Jebusite has not taken upon himself the faith oflsrael. 33. The full price. For the way cash transactions were implemented, see Chapter 25, note 52. 34. This case parallels that of Abraham purchasing the burial cave ofMachpelah in Hebron (Genesis 23). In both cases the location is intended to become a sacred site and a permanent heritage of the People of Israel. In both cases the site is acquired from foreigners, and it is refused as a gift. Under Ancient Near Eastern law, gifts of land and land parcels purchased at a price under the full market value were subject to redemption (i.e. repurchase) by the original owner. Only purchase, at the full price in accordance with universally recognized law and custom, would confer recognition-an internationally recognized claim. The Jewish People thus, throughout the generations, could claim full ownership of its two most sacred sites in the Holy Land.

498

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

THE THEOLOGIAN The beginning and the end ofhistory are prophetic, they are no longer the object ofpure history. Friedrich von Schlegel, Fragments on Literature and Poetry So far we have found, embedded in the text, three separate and distinct historic events; each in and of itself of little intrinsic significance. Their importance lies in the way the author treats them, for she claims that they are causally linked. Implausible as it may seem, she insists that the census is the cause of the epidemic, while the epidemic is the cause of David's creating a new shrine next to Jerusalem. More-she claims that all these events are further linked to David: they are the directly enmeshed with his inner life. And at a deeper level yet, she posits that these happenings form a sort of mini-drama, orchestrated by God, and fulfilling His purposes. We begin by examining how the author proposes to connect these historical occurrences in a causal chain; a row of dominoes in which the fall of the first knocks down the second, and so on.

THE SIN The author begins connecting the separate events by insisting that the census ordered by David is a grievous sin, and that David himself is cognizant of the fact.

Now afterwards David was conscious-stricken35 thaf 6 he had numbered the people. 37 And David said to the Lord: "I have sinned greatly in what I have done. But now, 0 Lord, please pass over the iniquity of Your servant,for I have acted very foolishly. "38 (24:10) What is wrong with the census? We note that the census is opposed by the army high command, but that, we have suggested, is largely a policy dispute. 39 The sin, it seems to me, lies not so much in the census per seas in David's motivation in ordering it. These events are taking place at a high point in David's career: he has achieved the tour deforce of uniting the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel under his rule, he has defeated the Philistines so decisively that they will never again be a threat to Israel, and he has conquered Jerusalem, making it his capital. The United Kingdoms are now a regional power. David is building himself an opulent palace, commensurate with his new status, and laying the basis of a military machine that will enable him to flex his muscles in the entire region. Becoming a regional power (and, who knows, perhaps David's thoughts are already turning to the lure of imperial temptation), brings in its wake new imperatives, among them adherence to re35. Literally David's heart smote him. The same expression is used in the episode of the cave during the Wilderness Years, when David cuts off the comer of Saul's robe (1 Samue/24:6). Shortly after the act David realizes that he has done a foul deed and feels remorse. See Chapter 14. 36. Reading with LXX. 37. In MT there occurs here a break in the text where the reader can insert a penitential psalm. For an explanation of this process see Chapter 29, note 9. 38. The Chronicler underlines the point by prefixing to the author's comment about David being consciencestricken his own observation: Now God was displeased with this thing [i.e. the census]. (1 Chronicles 21 :7a) 39. It is worth noting that the Chronicler seems to understand our text as implying that Joab's objections were of a religious-theological nature (and he expands his version accordingly); perhaps the Chronicler's sources justify such an interpretation. It might be wise not to dismiss the Chronicler out of hand, but rather keep an open mind and give him the benefit of the doubt.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

499

gional norms. If Carol Meyers is right that the chief means by which a new regime in the Ancient Near East could legitimize itself and its prospective dynasty was by building an imposing temple to its chief deity, 40 then the probability becomes more certain that one of the main purposes of the census was to expedite the mobilization of an unpaid labor force for temple construction. But if so, this amounts to appropriating the sancta of religion for worldly political purposes. David intends constructing a temple ostensibly to the glory of God but actually for the purpose of enhancing the power and glory of a human king. And suddenly we are back to the early pages of our narrative: the elders of Israel using the Ark of the Covenant as a morale builder, as a tool to increase the fighting potential of the armed forces. We have seen that our author considers using religion as a tool of state policy a great sin; 41 worldly success seems to have gone to David's head. It speaks well of David that he confesses not only that he has done wrong, but admits that from the start he knew it was wrong. 42 Master politician and winner of wars, David has been taking on not only the outer trappings of the typical Ancient Near Eastern despot - building himself a grandiose palace-but the inner essence as well: the making of religion an instrument of state. David is adopting the pagan values of his fellow Near Eastern kings even though he knows better. 43

PUNISHMENT David's attitude, if we read the picture right, is pure hubris, 44 a sin that brings inevitable divine punishment in its wake. David knows this, but the headlong momentum of these glory days has pushed it to the back of his mind. As the author presents the tale, it is Joab's delivery ofhis report that brings David up sharply. Why? Does Joab report popular resistance to the census? We are not told, but the census was a universally hated institution in the ancient world. People understood perfectly well that its purpose was to enable the authorities to use them; and then as now, people don't like to be used. Whatever the reason, it is at this point that David's conscience reasserts itself. Stricken, he confesses his sinfulness to God and prays for forgiveness. But punishment there will be; arrogance, consciously persisted in, will not be overlooked. So the Lord unleashed an epidemic upon Israel ... and of the people, from Dan to Beersheba, there perished 70,000 persons. (24:15) 40. Meyers, "David as Temple Builder," p. 370-72. 41. See Chapter 3. 42. By using the term iniquity (Avon), David is admitting that what he did was more than mere error (Het). Avon is a technical term meaning doing evil with malice aforethought; knowing something to be wrong yet none the Jess doing it. See Appendix: Psalm 51, note 13 for a listing of the different kinds of wrongdoing and the terms used for them in the Bible. 43. It would be only fair to inform the reader that while I am hardly alone in this point of view, many commentators, both ancient and modern have seen things differently. A widespread opinion is that the sin lies not in David's motivation but in his modus operandi; how he went about the census. According to Exodus 30:11-16 (see also Numbers I: 45-7), the proper procedure for taking a census (for military purposes) is as follows: all males age 20 and over donate half a shekel as an atonement offering to the Lord (and then the half shekels are counted). The idea apparently is that in a war one is inevitably involved, directly or indirectly, in killing, and thus in need of atonement. Collecting atonement money as a census, even prior to mobilization, is a way of reminding all concerned that while wars are part and parcel of life on this planet, they do not take away the guilt of shedding blood. Inasmuch as David's census does not involve the collecting, counting and recording of atonement money from each man, the census is sinful: i.e. the sin lies in the fact that the census was "done in the wrong way." 44. Hubris: a Greek term denoting "Wanton arrogance or violence arising from passion or recklessness; insolent disregard of moral laws or restraints." For source see Chapter 8, note 41.

500

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

Up until the acceptance of the germ theory of disease in the nineteenth century, and the invention of antibiotics in the twentieth, people were helpless in the face of infectious diseases, terrified by them, and they saw them as divinely mandated punishments. To us the idea of a plague as divine punishment for sin is difficult to accept. 45 But beyond being part and parcel of her world, accepting uncritically what to her was a fact of life, the author is making a causal connection between two disparate historic events in order to make a moral point; call it a fable if you wish. For the purposes of her tale, the census is the direct cause ofthe epidemic.

FORGIVENESS As the epidemic reaches Jerusalem, David once again throws himself upon God's mercy.

Then David, upon seeing the angel [of death] who was striking down the people, spoke to the Lord, saying: "Behold, it is I who have sinned; it is I who have performed iniquity. But these sheep [the people], what have they done? I pray You, let Your Hand be against me and my father's house [only]. " (24: 17) In David's first prayer (see above), in which he confesses his sin, he nonetheless begs to be let off without punishment. This time he accepts full responsibility, with all its personal consequences. His prayer that the innocent be spared the consequences of their leader's failure opens the gates of divine mercy.

That same day Gad [the prophet] came to David, and said to him: "Go up; rear an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor ofAraunah the Jebusite. " So David went up, in accordance with Gad's instructions, as the Lord had commanded . .. And Araunah said: "Why has the Lord my king come to his servant?" And David said: "To buy the threshing floor in order to build an altar to the Lord, that the plague that is upon the people be stopped. ... " So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for 50 shekels of silver. And David built there an altar to the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. So the Lord heeded the plea for the land, and the plague upon Israel was halted (24:18-19, 21, 24b-25) Thus, as the author links these events, it is the sinful census that brings the plague as its punishment; that, in turn, leads David to build the altar as a means of petitioning God for forgiveness.

THE BRUTAL CHOICE But yet another bond, the author insists, joins these three events: a transformation of David's character. We begin with David the autocrat, with his plans for building an invincible military machine and a temple to glorify his reign, ramming through his census over the vehement objections of his army high command. We next see him ten months later, conscience-stricken over his own pigheaded arrogance-but with the census an accomplished fact, the military reforms based on the results already in the pipeline and plans for the mobilization of the labor force needed to build the temple already firmed up-asking God to retroactively pardon him and not exact punishment. But now befalls a strange episode (which up to now we have skipped over): God's response to David's plea.

And David rose up in the morning.

45. For a fuller discussion of this issue, see Chapter 4. Another aspect of the problem, of innocents suffering for the sins of others, has been addressed in Chapter !, note 16.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

501

(The assumption is that David's bout of conscience, his confession and prayer, take place in the small hours of the night.)

Now the word of the Lord had come to the prophet Gad, the Seer of David, 46 saying: "Go and speak to David: 'Thus says the Lord: Three [punishments] do I hold over you; choose one of them and I will do it to you!'" (24: ll-12) David is not being let off the hook; he will be punished. Worse-he is being forced to choose between three catastrophes; to the heavy punishment is added the burden of sorting out his priorities and deciding on what basis he will be punished.

And Gad came to David and told him, saying to him: "Shall thre/7 years offamine come upon you in your land? Or will you flee three months before your foes, while they pursue you? Or shall there be a three-day epidemic in your land? Now consider, and decide what reply I shall take back to Him Who sent me. " And David said to Gad: "I am in great distress I Let us fall, I pray, by the hand of the Lord, for great are His mercies; but let me not fall into the hand of man. " And David chose for himself the epidemic. 48 So the Lord unleashed an epidemic upon Israel, from the morning until the appointed time, and of the people, from Dan to Beersheba, there perished 70,000 persons. (24:13-15) David does not even consider famine. As king, he is immune to its sufferings; he can always assure himself and his family ample food. His conscience awakened, letting the innocent suffer for his sin while he gets off scot-free is unthinkable. On the other hand, he cannot shield himself from an epidemic. It will fall equally upon all; who will live and who die is in God's hands. 49 Having had ample experience with human beings, he prefers to place his trust in God's mercies rather than in those of his fellow man. The author now becomes highly anthropomorphic: the plague is personified-pictured as an angel of death, a destroying angel. 5° The description becomes dramatic in the extreme:

But when the angel [of death] stretched forth his hand [against] Jerusalem/' to destroy it, the Lord repented of the evil, 52 and said to the angel who was working destruction among 46. The term Hozeh, usually rendered as "seer" (as we do here) properly means "visionary," "one who sees visions." It is an archaic term that came to be largely replaced in the lOth century BCE by the more common Nabi, "prophet." Thus while Gad, who lived mostly in the lith century (surviving into the first years of the lOth century) is referred to as a Hozeh, his successor, Nathan, who was active in the middle of the I Oth century, is known as a Nabi. By the 8th century the term Hozeh developed the belittling connotation of one who makes his living out of his visions, i.e. a professional (Amos 7:12). The phrase the Seer of David has the sense of"David's court prophet," an official position something like "David's personal chaplain." See Chapter 24, note II. 47. Reading with LXX and 1 Chronicles 21 : 12; MT reads seven. 48. Reading with LXX. MT lacks this phrase. David not only decides against the second option: let me not fall into the hand of man, but he opts for the third. "The hand of the Lord" is a standard Biblical and Near Eastern euphemism for plague; see, for example, 1 Samuel 5:6. 49. The question of why 70,000 people should die for David's sin is not a problem that the author sees fit to address. Focusing her interpretation of the events on David's inner transformation, it is enough for the author that David ultimately will become sensitive to the suffering his misrule engenders. 50. In this the author is drawing on the description of the Tenth Plague in Exodus, where the plague is personified as "the destroyer" (Exodus 12:13, 23). The Hebrew term Malach means "an envoy," "a messenger;" thus a malach of the Lord is someone or something that carries out God's purposes. The Greek for "messenger" is angelos, which became in English "angel." 51. The Chronicler's version is even more dramatic: he pictures the angel of the Lord standing between heaven and earth, his drawn sword in his hand, stretched over Jerusalem! ( 1 Chronicles 21: 16) 52. That is, changed His mind.

502

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

the people: "Enough now! Stay your hand!" And the angel of the Lord was by the threshing floor ofAraunah the Jebusite. (24: 16) It is at this dramatic moment, with the epidemic having reached the outskirts of Jerusalem, about to devastate the capital, 53 that David finally gets his priorities right.

Then David, upon seeing the angel [of death] who was striking down the people, spoke to the Lord, saying: "Behold, it is I who have sinned; it is I who have performed iniquity. But these sheep [the people], what have they done? I pray You, let Your hand be against me and my father's house [only]." (24:17) The key word in this prayer is the term he uses to describe the people: sheep. Going back to the experiences of his youth, he at last grasps the true function of a leader: to fill the role of good shepherd to his flock. It is the duty of a ruler to care for his people and protect them; if things go wrong it is the shepherd that takes the blame and suffers the consequences. David's attitude is portrayed as having shifted dramatically from arrogant ruler, who looks upon his subjects as no more than tools to serve himself and his purposes, to that of shepherd whose responsibility is to serve his flock. He is now worthy of forgiveness. To the new David the prophet now comes to instruct him in founding a shrine on the threshing floor of Araunah, the furthest point the epidemic has reached. Not a grandiose temple but a simple altar of unhewn stone, 54 much as the humble patriarch Abraham in the misty past erected his altars as symbols of his faith. God will then forgive him. What we have been reading, it is now clear, is a moral fable constructed out of a series of historical events. In this fable all the "historic" events can now be seen as no more than external manifestations of the inner change that is taking place within David, a change of heart that will find its voice in David's Last Words. But is this change of heart an historical fact? From his own "Last Words" we know that a major re-evaluation did take place. In the light of the historical record, however, it seems highly doubtful that it took place so early. The David of Psalm 18 and David the Empire Builder appear one and the same person. To me what seems more likely is that the author, for the sake of her "morality play," is reading back the inner transformation of the dying David by a quarter of a century (or to be more exact, has moved the specific incidents forward to stand in close proximity with David's "Last Words"). Moreover, the author is taking the liberty of exercising her literary license to advance a step beyond the point that David reaches in his "illumination." In David's Last Words shepherds are not mentioned, only justice, common decency and care. The author is using her drama as a vehicle to convey her answer to the question that has been pending during the entire Book: if not power, then what? Her answer, which amounts to her conclusion, is: the nurturing of one's fellows. This is as far as she reaches in her search for an alternative to power-the image of the good shepherd. A magnificent master of prose, our author nonetheless falls short of Hannah. It requires a poetic gift to enable one to sum up an entire philosophy of life in one unforgettable line. Hannah had that gift, and used it to negate the universal consensus of mankind: not by power. ... Our author was unable to find the words to sum up her alternative; she could only hint at it symbolically. It was to take half a millennium until another great poet, the prophet Zechariah, could find the fitting words to complete Hannah's thought: "Not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit, " says the Lord of hosts. (Zechariah 4:6). These two, Hannah and Zechariah, the one near the beginning and the other near the close, sum up the Biblical Age.

53. David, of course, is unaware that God has put the epidemic on hold. 54. Exodus 20: 22.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

503

GOD'S PLAN We have reached the final stage of our analysis of this remarkable chapter. As the author tells it, these events don't simply happen. This entire morality play is produced and directed by God for His purposes, and we are told this in the very first verse: Now the anger of the Lord was once again kindled against Israel, and He incited David against them, saying: "Go, number Israel and Judah. " (24: 1)

What the author is saying is that the first domino is not the census, and it is not David who sets in motion the entire sequence of cause and effect. David himself is the first domino. It is God Who instigates the entire chain reaction. By giving David his head, God sets in motion the process that will achieve His ends. What are these ends? The first is to catalyze David's self-realization; to enable David to re-evaluate the meaning of governance. But there is a second purpose as well, one that is only to be realized in the fullness of time. The culmination and conclusion of this chapter, and thus of the entire Book, is David's purchase of Araunah's threshing floor, and the dedication of an altar on it. This threshing floor, as the Chronicler so carefully reminds us, on the peak of Mount Moriah, 55 is where the Temple will be built. David, in consecrating this altar is thus taking the first step toward building "A House of God." As it turns out, it will not be his to build. Years later, a new court prophet, Nathan, tells David that God vetoes his plans. And with his new understanding of the true duty of a ruler David can understand why, and can accept the verdict. He has gone on to build his military machine; he has "spilled blood in abundance" and "waged great wars." 56 That is part of the business of kings-the exigencies of rule can be brutal. He is thus not fit to build a Temple to God; his son, who will not be a man of war, will bring the dream to fruition. But David can prepare the way, and this he does. 57 We have now come to the central issues raised at the beginning of this chapter: why does the author tear these episodes out of their proper historic context, why does she choose to end her Book with them, and why does she decide to tell them in so uncharacteristic a manner, that is, as a fable? I think that we are now able to answer these questions. As we have repeatedly suggested, the real purpose of the author is to answer the question: What is the good life? What are the goals and the principles that one should adopt to guide one through the few years that have been placed at our disposal? She has been very straightforward with us; she opened Samuel with a statement of her proposition that not by power shall man prevail. The body of her Book, the tragic drama oflsrael's history from the end of the Age of the Judges through the establishment of the Davidic Empire, is a large-scale illustration of this thesis. Seen in this light the Epilogue becomes a restatement of the author's main theme, and her last chapter a concluding dramatization of it. Let us recapitulate--the Epilogue begins with a piece of barbarous expediency: David turns seven innocent youngsters over to slaughter as a sop to public hysteria and pagan intransigence (and incidentally to take a potential political liability off his back). In contrast to David, with his political obsessions, the author focuses on the powerless Rizpah and the selfless devotion of her terrible vigil. Then follow two paeans to David's heroes, the elite of his war machine, which frame Psalm 18, that magnificent glorification of David, the warrior king (the message embedded in David's Last Words58 is a preparation for the conclusion to come). Then we return to the final episodes and once again we find David, the man of might, building his war machine and preparing to build a temple (by forced

55. 2 Chronicles 3:1. 56. I Chronicles 22:7. 57. For the full exposition of the above, see Chapter 24. 58. David's rejection of expediency, of raison d'etat as the guiding principle of governance in favor of justice, human decency and care; see Chapter 38.

504

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

labor no less) to stabilize and glorify his regime. And here, in a riveting drama David is brought to heel. Repenting, he accepts a different view of his function as king; that of a good shepherd to his flock. The ideal of service replaces that of worldly success. In this fable we have returned to Hannah; the concluding chapter a vivid dramatization and development of her insight, based upon an interpretation of a series of historical events. But the author does not simply turn backward, the end recapitulating the beginning. For by highlighting David's repentance and change of heart in the building ofthe altar, the author is simultaneously turning her face to the future. This altar is destined to become the seed of Solomon's Temple59 that, in the author's view, will become the concrete symbol of the faith oflsrael. The House of God is to embody the vision of a way of life based not on power but on human decency and service, the vision of people realizing in their lives the image of God imprinted on their souls. By ending her Book with David's act of humility, his building a simple altar that is destined to become the focus of Jewish worship for the entire Biblical Age, the author is concluding her saga with the symbol of a bridge between heaven and earth. The author is no prophet; she has not been vouchsafed a preview of the future. She only knows that the altar that for almost three decades has been the main focus of Israel's worship will be the centerpiece of the Temple, and that the promise that David's son will build a temple holds hope for the future. The Temple that will come into being, built for the glory of God, will be a symbol of the possibility that, even in the midst of a world run by power and its necessities, mankind has the possibility of transcending itself. The author is leaving us with the message that religion is really about transcending the struggle for survival where creatures wage endless battles for dominance. As the author sees it, David's insight as to what the real function of a leader is, and his building of his humble altar, forms the true high point of David's life.

THE FINAL FABLE For heathen heart that puts her trust In reeking tube and iron shard, All valiant dust that builds on dust; And guarding, calls not Thee to guard, For frantic boast and foolish wordThy mercy on Thy People, Lord! Amen. Rudyard Kipling, Recessional, 1897 Having all the pieces in hand, we are ready to view this entire complex composition as the author wrote it. 60 Now the anger of the Lord was once again kindled against Israel, and He incited David against them, saying: "Go number Israel and Judah. So the king said to Joab, and to the army commanders that were with him: "Make the rounds of all the tribes of Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, and number the people that I may know their number. " But Joab said to 59. Chapter 24 records David's plan to build a House for God, God's veto of the proposal and the assurance that it would be his son who would carry the plan to fulfillment. Chapter 25 records David mobilizing the finances and stockpiling the materials that would make what was to prove a monumental undertaking possible. This altar is destined to become the nucleus of that Temple. 60. All the textual notes for this chapter have already been given when we dealt with its various segments. See above.

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

the king: "May the Lord your God add to the people a hundred times as many as there are, while the eyes of my lord the king sees it! But why does my lord the king want [to do] this?" But the word ofthe king prevailed against Joab and the army commanders, so Joab and the army commanders left the king's presence to number the people, that is Israel. So they crossed the Jordan, and began from Aroer, and from the city which is in the middle of the Wadi of Gad, then on to Jazer. They continued to the Gilead, and to Kadesh of the land of the Hittites, and came to Dan, and from Dan they went around to Sidon. They went on to the fortress of Tyre, and all the cities of the Hivites and the Canaanites; and they came out in the Negeb of Judah, at Beersheba. At the end of nine months and twenty days, after having traversed the entire country, they came to Jerusalem. And Joab gave the sum of the census to David: now in Israel there were 800,000 men who drew the sword, and the men ofJudah 500,000 men. Now afterwards David was conscious-stricken that he had numbered the people. And David said to the Lord: "/ have sinned greatly in what I have done. But now, 0 Lord, please pass over the iniquity of Your servant, for I have acted very foolishly." Now the word of the Lord had come to the prophet Gad, the Seer of David, saying: "Go and speak to David: 'Thus says the Lord: Three [punishments] do I hold over you; choose one ofthem and /will do it to you!"' And Gad came to David and told him, saying to him: "Shall three years offamine come upon you in your land? Or will you flee three months before your foes, while they pursue you? Or shall there be a three-day epidemic in your land? Now consider, and decide what reply I shall take back to Him Who sent me. " And David said to Gad: "/ am in great distress! Let us fall, I pray, by the hand of the Lord, for great are His mercies; but let me not fall into the hand ofman. " And David chose for himself the epidemic. So the Lord unleashed an epidemic upon Israel, from the morning until the appointed time, and of the people, from Dan to Beersheba, there perished 70,000 persons. But when the angel [of death] stretched forth his hand [against] Jerusalem, to destroy it, the Lord repented of the evil, and said to the angel who was working destruction among the people: "Enough now! Stay your hand!" And the angel of the Lord was by the threshing floor ofAraunah the Jebusite. Then David, upon seeing the angel [of death] who was striking down the people, spoke to the Lord, saying: "Behold, it is I who have sinned; it is I who have performed iniquity. But these sheep [the people], what have they done? I pray You, let Your hand be against me and my father's house only. " And Gad came to David that day and said to him: "Go up; rear an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite. " So David went up, in accordance with Gad's instructions, as the Lord had commanded And Araunah looked and saw the king and his servants coming toward him, so he went out from the threshing floor and prostrated himself before the king with his face to the ground And Araunah said: "Why has my lord the king come to his servant?" And David said: "To buy the threshing floor in order to build analtar to the Lord, that the plague that is upon the people be stopped. " Then Araunah said to David: "Let my lord the king take what seems good to him and offer it up: behold, [here are] the oxen for burnt offering, and the threshing boards and the yokes of the oxen for wood All this, 0 King, Araunah gives to the king. " And Araunah [further] said to the king: "May the Lord your God accept you." But the king said to Araunah: "No! I insist on buying from you for a price. I will not offer up burnt of-

505

THE ANCIENT SACRIFICE

506

ferings to the Lord my God that have cost me nothing!" So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels ofsilver. And David built there an altar to the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. So the Lord heeded the plea for the land, and the plague upon Israel was halted. (24: 1-25) With these words the author closes her Book.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The kingdom of David ... was a kingdom of men whose weaknesses stumble through the recorded pages, side by side with achievements extraordinary beyond those of comparable monarchs or monarchies. The books produced, the poems composed, are a central part of the most valuable legacy left us from the ancient world. For ancient Judah and Israel, the price was high, in every way, but the gain was greater. 61

61. David Noel Freedman, "The Age of David and Solomon," p. 313.

CONCLUSIONS

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY Let justice well up like waters, And righteousness as a mighty stream. Amos 5:24 Can a woman's tender care Cease, towards the child she bare? William Cowper, Olney Hymns

In the early evening of October 15, 1764, a young man, recently arrived in Rome, was musing amidst the ruins of the Capitol, the seat of government of the ancient Roman Empire. As he watched the last rays of the setting sun play on the broken columns and rehearsed in his memory the glory that once had been Rome, he became aware of an incongruous sound. From what had once been the temple of Jupiter 1 came the sound of chanting. Barefoot friars were chanting vespers. What had once been the central shrine of Roman religion was now a church. And unbidden the question arose in his mind: "How did that become this?" That young man was Edward Gibbon, and he devoted the rest of his life to try to answer that question. The result was the classic work, The History of the Decline and Fall ofthe Roman Empire. The Decline and Fall is not unique. All great books seem to have their beginnings in some central issue, a problem or question that demands of the asker an answer, and impels him or her to find that answer. It is the question that provides the motivation for writing what will become a classic. Having come this far in our study of the century-long saga that is Samuel, one of the greatest masterpieces to come down to us from the ancient world, it is time that we ask ourselves this basic question: just why was our Book written? What prompted the author to commence the arduous task of research, writing and polishing that eventually was to become one of the gems of world literature? As we noted in the Introduction, one can ignore the crasser motives of financial gain (one did not make money out of writing and publishing books in those days) or the lure of fame (most ancient authors did not sign their works; we have not the slightest clue as to the author's name). But motivation there must have been; by now we are aware of the wonderful craftsmanship and artistry that must have taken years of work. One does not devote intense effort without some strong reason. Of course, lacking the sort of autobiographical information we have from Gibbon, we can never be certain, but

1. It was now the church of the Zocolants, or Franciscan Friars.

508

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

having navigated the contents of this marvelous work, I think we are entitled to some moments of speculation. I would like to suggest the possibility that what prompted the process could have been the realization ofthe tragic nature of heroic endeavor. Perhaps it had its birth in the author's being spectator to the unraveling of David's life. 2 Why did his life, which began with such promise, and which initially enjoyed spectacular success, peter out in so unhappy a manner? Upon reflection, David was hardly unique. Look where one might, the careers of the great of the earth all seem to follow the same trajectory. What I am proposing here is that it was the example of these lives which led the author to ponder deeply the repeated failure engendered by the pursuit of worldly success, and consider the likelihood that the fault lay not in the specific personalities of the tragic figures themselves, but rather was systemic; that there is something self-defeating in the way we all function in the world. It was this disquieting thought that led to a questioning of the basic assumptions we entertain of how things work in the world. This, in turn, was what led to the intuition that in the striving for power, in the pursuit of dominance, lies the root of the malaise. Somehow, back in ages past, mankind had made a wrong turning, had gotten on a dead-end path. From time immemorial, humanity had adopted a way of life that was unworkable and deeply counter-productive.

THINKING THE UNTHINKABLE How could anything as basic ever come to be questioned? By this time it should be clear that this is exactly what Samuel is doing: questioning the unquestionable. I think the answer draws on several realms, first among them the philosophical and the sociological. Let us begin by examining these, each in turn. In the Introduction, we discussed the conceptual foundations of the pagan world-view in the Ancient Near East, and the startling contrast between it and the monotheistic revolution which challenged it. We there noted that a basic intuition of paganism is that power is the underlying reality of the universe. It is hardly a coincidence that a world which assumes the basis of existence to be power is a world that acts on this premise; the struggle for power and dominance simply mirrors the pagan understanding of nature. The Israelite monotheistic revolution rejected this premise of paganism: the underlying reality of the universe is not sacralized power but the one omnipotent God, Creator of heaven and earth. But although in theory nature and power were dethroned and desacralized, in practice, as a matter of cultural inertia, Israelites and Israelite society continued to function as the world had always functioned, operating in the patterns that follow logically and directly from the rejected premises. Power and dominance remained the way of the world. Our author is proposing to complete the monotheistic revolution, by rejecting in practice what had already been repudiated in theory, and advancing a way of life grounded in the premises of monotheism. It was only within the intellectual framework of monotheism that the all-pervasive paths of power could be challenged. Samuel is one of the final, and finest fruits of monotheism. There is a second possible explanation for why it is possible for the author to challenge the universal ways of the world, to think the unthinkable-an explanation that does not contradict the first but rather is complementary to it. In my earlier work, Four Biblical Heroines, I have discussed the role marginalization plays in enabling gifted persons to break out of universally accepted convictions and see the world in a new perspective.3 Marginalized persons, while living within a society, are nonetheless spiritually alienated from it. It is this very alienation that frees them from the consensual 2. We have from the start postulated that the author and David were contemporaries; see "Who Wrote the Book of Samuel" in the Introduction: The Road to Samuel, and especially note l 0. 3. Millgram, Four Biblical Heroines, p. 2ll-l3.

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

509

view of how things are and should be, allowing them to take a stance outside the group consensus, and thus question the unquestionable. We pointed out then that in the male-dominated world ofthe Ancient Near East, women, by the very fact of being women, were automatically marginalized. If one of our premises is correct, and our author is indeed a woman, this would go a long way to explain how the Book ofSamuel can adopt so radical a principle as the rejection of the efficacy of power.

A WOMAN'S CRITIQUE OF A MAN'S WORLD Accepting the hypothesis, even tentatively, that the Book of Samuel was authored by a woman raises large issues; how large we can only appreciate if we keep in mind that the central thesis of the Book is a radical critique of the way the world has always been run. As we have seen, the basis of the author's critique is not so much moral as pragmatic. The author insists that not only is power-hungry ambition wrong but, worse, it does not work. Far from leading to success in life, the paths of power are self-defeating. In practical terms power is neither the means to success, as the world counts success, nor is it the road to personal happiness or fulfillment. This insight, the central thesis of Samuel, is stated up front, at the very opening of the Book, in the section that I have designated as the Prologue. (It is revealing, I think, that the author uses a woman to proclaim this.) Seen in this light, the entire historical saga that dominates the Book becomes a century-long testing ground for the author's thesis. Real historical figures, persons of great natural talent, are displayed working out their destinies within the constraints of actual historical circumstances. But no matter how capable the individuals (the examples chosen - Samuel, Saul and David, the central figures of the era-were possessed of remarkable abilities), no matter how dramatic their initial achievements, their lives uniformly end in political and personal failure. The paths of power, the author is demonstrating, no matter how ardently and intelligently pursued, prove to be dead ends. It is this organizing argument that gives the Book ofSamuel its tragic cast. From the start I have contended that this is what the Book of Samuel is really about: a total reappraisal of human life. Success, happiness and personal fulfillment are not to be obtained by means of gaining power and dominion over one's fellow human beings, even when accompanied by the best of intentions and with the best of reasons. There must be another and better way, a way that works. If the author is indeed a woman, then an entirely new dimension is opened in our understanding of the Book. The world that we know, and that the author knew, a world organized around and dominated by the struggle for power, is historically a world made by men and for men. Thus what is being presented to us is a woman's critique of a man's world. The way the world is organized, she is saying, is wrong; it doesn't work. This is not the way it was meant to be, which is why it doesn't work. Her alternative, presented in the final chapters of her Book, which we have termed the Epilogue, sketches out a vision of a world grounded in care and responsibility rather than power. And once again it is a woman, Rizpah, who becomes the embodiment of this alternative vision. Thus far the agenda of the Book ofSamuel.

ETHICS AS JUSTICE VERSUS ETHICS AS CARE Continuing our examination of the premise of a woman authoring Samuel, what are some further implications of this contention? Let us turn to the structuring of the Epilogue. In our analysis of the Epilogue we took note of the contrapuntal manner in which it is constructed: sections celebrating power alternating with episodes highly critical of its use and abuse. David being the subject that, directly or indirectly, binds all the disparate sections of the Epilogue into a unity, the sections censorious of power are those which depict him as penitent over his infatuation with, and abuses of, the power that is his to wield. Specifically, the opening section of the Epilogue finds David juxtaposed with a woman who is presented as his antithesis; in their confrontation

510

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

it is Rizpah, the personification of powerlessness, who ends by humbling David. If we are correct in our finding that in the Epilogue we have the author's summation and the conclusions of her work (even as in the Prologue we discover that she has announced the theme that governs the Book), then it would appear no accident that in both the Prologue and the Epilogue she has provided us uniquely with a woman who acts as her mouthpiece. I would contend that in the choice of a woman to contrast with David-the prototypical male-the author is casting Rizpah as the embodiment of what, in her eyes, it means to be a woman. Underlying this depiction we can posit the tacit assumption that the human landscape is compounded of two worlds, a man's world and a woman's world, each with its respective priorities and values. Furthermore, the author seems to see these worlds as fundamentally opposed. This is a radical view of humanity. Can such a polarized vision be credibly maintained? In her influential work, In A Different Voice, Carol Gilligan has propounded that this is indeed the case. On the basis of research covering more than a decade, she contends that men and women inherently differ in how they perceive their identities, and differ as well in their fundamental values, their priorities and their approaches to life. Her investigations indicate that men typically see themselves as autonomous individuals in a hierarchical world, where power and achievement define their identities. Women, on the other hand, define themselves in a non-hierarchical context of human relationships, and judge themselves in terms of their ability to evince concern for others, and to act upon this concem--r as Gilligan puts it, to care. These differing self-perceptions lead to very different perceptions of morality. Men, she contends, experiencing life as a struggle for ascendancy and dominance, see morality in terms of a justice which dictates that despite differences in power, human beings should be treated fairly according to set rules. Women, on the other hand, who experience life as a web of relationships, see morality in terms of personal responsibility and the care one evinces for the other. Or as Gilligan puts it: While an ethic of justice proceeds from the premise of equality-that everyone should be treated the same- an ethic of care rests on the premise of non-violence-that no one should be hurt. 4 This pioneering insight has been expanded by Nel Noddings: Women ... prefer to discuss moral problems in terms of concrete situations. They approach moral problems not as intellectual problems to be solved by abstract reasoning [as men tend to do] but as concrete human problems to be lived and solved in living. Their approach is founded in caring... Faced with a hypothetical moral dilemma, women often ask for more information. . . . They want more information, I think, in order to form a picture. Ideally, they need to talk to the participants, to see their eyes and facial expressions, to size up the whole situation. Moral decisions are, after all, made in situations; they are qualitatively different from the solution of geometry problems. Women ... give reasons for their acts, but the reasons point to feelings, needs, situational conditions, and their sense of personal ideal rather than universal principles and their application. 5 If we adopt Carol Gilligan's appraisal of the reality of gender differences in moral psychology that emerge from her research, and Nel Noddings' depictions of these differences based on her obser-

4. Gilligan, In a Different Voice, p. 174. Her point is that men see aggression and violence as unruly impulses that must be contained by rules that insure a fair balancing of conflicting aims. Almost all moral systems have been built on this premise. Women, however, see violence and aggression as the outcomes of the hierarchical structure that humans have imposed on their relationships, and that inevitably lead to a sense of isolation from one another. Violence and aggression are thus perceived as a result of the breakdown of human connection and a sign of failure in human relationships. This can only be prevented by an abiding sense of responsibility for one another, a perception of the need for response and what she terms as "the activities of care." (p. 29f, 43-45) 5. Noddings, Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education, p. 96.

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

511

vations, we have a third account of why the Book of Samuel is questioning the unquestionable: a difference in the psychology of men and women.

THE ALTERNATIVE VISION The time has come to pause and summarize our analysis of Samuel up to this point. If we are correct in our hypothesis that the Book of Samuel was authored by a woman, then what we have before us is far more than a critique of power and its efficacy. It is a woman's radical critique of a man's world. It rejects not only power as the prime means of achievement but also hierarchy as the normative form of social organization. In sum, it finds fundamentally flawed and self-defeating the male vision of the world as a ladder to be climbed, with power as the key to competitive climbing, and dominance as the prize that comes of making it to the upper rungs of the ladder. It rejects the view that aggression and violence are extraneous facts of life with no inherent connection to the way the world is structured and run. It repudiates the conviction that violence can be contained through rules of fairness uniformly applied, termed ''justice." It rather sees violence and aggression as the necessary and inevitable outcomes of the hierarchical structuring of society and the all-pervasive struggle for success in attempting to best others in climbing to the dominant positions in the hierarchy (the top of the pyramid as it is often termed). And lastly-for an Israelite the most radical criticism of all-it implies that the regimen of rules we call justice is ineffective at controlling aggression and violence, for violence and aggression are not containable; try as we may to be fair, aggression will burst all bonds, and people will end up getting hurt. In sum, in the author's view, the man's world not only doesn't work but can't work. In juxtaposition to this male view of the world, we find an alternative vision sketched in outline, a woman's vision of how the world can and should be. Rather than trying to contain violenceultimately an impossible task-efforts should be directed to preventing it in the first place. This entails a restructuring of society and the way humans live their lives. If one sees aggression and violence as the natural outcomes of a society in which the persons who make it up perceive themselves as autonomous individuals, in constant conflict with each other for the prizes of power and dominance, then promoting self-conceptions in which people take responsibility for one another and care for each other will preclude the need to struggle, and prevent the genesis of violence. According to this alternative paradigm, the woman's vision of a world of community, mutual responsibility and care pre-empt the social fissures and breakdowns that lead to violence. Starting with these premises we can now understand why the author structured her Book the way she did. Samuel is built on the basis of gender differentiation. The main storyline of the Book, the socio-political drama of the rise of the Israelites from the brink of destruction to imperial greatness, and the simultaneous change in Israelite society from one of primitive democracy embedded in a loose tribal confederation into a highly centralized imperial autocracy, is the portrayal of a man's world. This is the world as it is, the way men made the world: hierarchical, with autonomous (and alienated) heroes striving for dominance-violent and tragic. Opposed to this world the author portrays women as exemplifying an alternative set of values and behaviors. With women, the human connection is the primary reality. Thus we fmd Abigail who, from a deep sense of responsibility for her people at Carmel, and also for David's character and future, takes decisive action not to defend against violence but to pre-empt it.6 We note Michal who cares so deeply for her husband that she sacrifices herself for him, destroy-

6. It is David's realization of how Abigail saved him from himself that prompts the respect and admiration that leads him eventually to marry her. See Chapter 15.

512

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

ing herself in the process. 7 Lastly, Rizpah, in her tragic vigil over the bodies of her murdered sons and nephews, is the most extreme example of care our author presents to us. 8 In the images of these three women, along with the image of Hannah, nursing her child prior to giving him up to the service of God, we find the embodiments of the values and behaviors central to her vision of an alternative and better world. Of prime significance to an understanding of the author's point of view, note that in her presentation, at the opening of the Epilogue, of the confrontation between raw power on the one hand and care and concern on the other -the episode which sets the theme of the conclusion-it is David who backs down, and not Rizpah. This crucial point is underlined in "David's Last Words," where at the end of his life this paradigmatic male hero re-evaluates his life and, finding it wanting, broadens his vision beyond that of power and justice, to embrace an ethic of responsibility and nurture for those entrusted to his care. This point is further elaborated in the final chapter of Samuel, a parable of David's education in responsibility and care. All is not lost, the author seems to be saying; man is educable. We now can understand why, historically, the game of power has almost exclusively attracted male players. It is men who have created and filled the heroic role: the Hectors, the Achilles, the Rolands and the Lance lots of the world. Men seem almost naturally to gravitate to the pursuit of power and dominance. Returning to our original question of what prompted the writing of Samuel, one can easily imagine a woman, sickened by the pointless waste and carnage of the heroic way of life, concluding that if ever there is to be another way, it is women who will have to pioneer an alternative vision. As we have noted, in pre-monarchic Israel society was typified by gender balance. There were two parallel worlds, a man's world and a woman's world, existing in tandem, each supporting and complementing the other. 9 With the rise of the institution of monarchy, with its astounding worldly success, and the concomitant rise of a power elite, an end was put to this primitive parity. The age in which women worked alongside, and on an equal footing with men, vanished in the glory of the urbanization produced by imperial dominion. Especially among the upper classes, where our author is almost certainly to be found, women were increasingly being marginalized--excluded from the workforce and from the society of men, segregated in women's quarters and diminished in influence. It is no accident that a sense of nostalgia pervades the Book of Samuel, a sense of loss for a world in which an Abigail could manage a huge ranch, give orders to foremen and face down bandits. It was from a woman of that now lost world, Hannah, that our author reaped the realization that the paths of power lead nowhere-For not by power shall man prevail. Humankind, she felt, must turn back from the blind alley down which it had increasingly been lured. Our author is proposing no less than a substitution of women's vision of the world for the prevailing male vision, and a woman's morality in the place of men's. We speculate that conclusions such as these are what led the author to pen her Book, peopling it with the women who would be the torch-bearers of her vision. We return to a point, seemingly casually made a few paragraphs ago, that in the context of "David's Last Words" the author seems to be implying that man is educable. This point is crucial. It is vital to realize that Carol Gilligan's research (of which we have made much and is indeed crucial to our analysis of Samuel)-research that reveals a clear gender differentiation between the selfunderstandings and priorities of women and men-does in no way imply genetic specific determinism. Her analysis is statistical, pointing to central tendencies with predictive value for large groups but with little to no predictive value for individuals. When dealing with an individual one must factor in not only typical dispositions, but also cultural-environmental influences and, most crucially, per-

7. See the section, "The Terror by Night," in Chapter 11. In this context Carol Gilligan's remark is germane: "Woman's moral strength [is] an overriding concern with relationships and responsibilities ... woman's place in a man's life cycle has been that ofnurturer, caretaker and helpmeet." (In a Different Voice, p. 17) 8. See Chapter 36. 9. See Introduction: The Road to Samuel, the section entitled "A Woman's Role in Ancient Israel."

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

513

sonal decisions if we wish to have any understanding of that person's behavior. The examples are legion of women who, despite the typical tendencies that Gilligan has documented, have proved eminently successful in the hierarchical and highly competitive modem business world. This simple fact should put paid to any idea of genetic determinism. But the argument cuts both ways: if individual women can succeed in a man's world and on man's terms 10 (with the proviso that they but possess the overwhelming desire to do so, repressing their tendency for care) then, the author is implying, men have the equal possibility of adjusting themselves to a woman's world, abjuring the struggle for power and dominance in favor of lives rooted in care and responsibility for their fellow human beings. This would seem to be the lesson the author draws from "David's Last Words;" if a David, the prototypical warlord of Psalm 18, can recognize the error of his ways and embrace an alternative ethic, then the possibility lies open for increasing numbers of men to follow the lead of women to an alternative way of life. Human beings have the ability to rise above their typical tendencies for a perceived higher good.

TACTICS Having decided to write a book, the question immediately arises: how can one convey such radical ideas to a public unaware that a problem even exists? Working backward from the finished Book, it would seem that the author developed a four stage program to meet her needs. The first stage was to state her thesis: that the pursuit of power is self-defeating. The second, to demonstrate convincingly and conclusively that what is wrong-why the pursuit of what the world deems success invariably fails-has nothing to do with the incompetence ofthe strivers, but is inherent in the goal and the means they choose for themselves. Only then, when the thesis has been satisfactorily demonstrated, can the possibility of an alternative vision be presented; not by imagining a utopia but by concrete examples. Some of these examples could be scattered throughout the book as precursors to a concluding section which would gather them together into a new frame. And as a subliminal harbinger of her conclusions, the author would gender-typify her work: men would fill the heroic, power-pursuing roles while to women would be assigned the function of exemplifying an alternative. Finally, the message must be packaged to sell. As we have said, we have been arguing back from the finished product-the Book of Samuel-to the thinking and planning that perhaps went into its genesis. Considering the careful structuring of the Book as we have it-the statement of its basic proposition in the Prologue, the historical demonstration of its empirical validity in the Main Body of the Book, and the suggestion of an alternative to the failed system in the Epilogue-the process leading to the form it took that we have outlined certainly falls within the realm of possibility, even probability. But even assuming that our conjectures as to why and how Samuel came into being are more or less accurate, we are now left with the question to what degree did the author achieve her aims? As to packaging, the author was brilliantly successful. Eschewing direct argumentation and the didactic essay form, the author chose to adopt the new and immensely popular medium of historical narrative. More, she seized on one of the most exciting issues current in her time: the spectacular rise of her people from obscurity and near extinction to empire and world-class status. By dramatically charting the century-long road that led to their current place in the sun she created a best seller. And more, by penning a literary masterpiece she assured that her work would never go "out of print." The proof of the staying power of Samuel is that we possess it today after almost three thousand years. With regard to the second item on her agenda-a convincing empirical demonstration that the pursuit of power, even by the most brilliant and most competent, is a losing proposition and a recipe 10. This has always been the case, even in the Ancient World. The prime examples have been women rulers who, from earliest recorded history, have more than held their own in the often ruthless struggles for power that have typified monarchical rule.

514

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

for tragedy-her success can be deemed only as moderate. Here she was up against the virtually universal tendency of people to turn national heroes into tin gods. The Israelites were no exception. Of her three major examples, only Saul was generally perceived as a failure. 11 As to Samuel and David, their spectacular early achievements and their greatness in spiritual matters have often blinded us to their ultimate failures in the political realm. As to what I contend to be the primary message of the Book-the utter futility of a world focused on the pursuit of power and dominance-the author cannot be given even a passing mark. The thesis has mostly been overlooked, and this despite the fact that it is openly stated in the Prologue to the Book, and highlighted in the Epilogue as the climax of a wonderful poetic composition. 12 Could it be that embedding the thesis in poetry over the long run obscured the message rather than highlighting it, and the brilliant and overwhelmingly dramatic narrative simply overpowered it? Or perhaps the proposition was too unconventional, too radical to be grasped by most people, mired as they were and are in the world as it is. If most readers did not so much as notice the author's claim that there is something wrong with the world, we can hardly be surprised that her prescription is almost invariably missed. In this the author can be judged to have failed almost totally. And yet over the years there must have been some who did understand. Samuel was after all canonized. Books were not canonized simply for being literary masterpieces (though literary failure would probably have disqualified a candidate for canonization), nor were works defined as Sacred Scripture for being au courant and immensely popular in the generation that they were written. With the collapse of the Davidic Empire and the breakup of the United Kingdoms upon Solomon's death, the tide of trendy triumphalism that first raised Samuel to popular success must have soured. Rather it was the revolutionary message of the Book, felt to be one of overriding significance to humanity, which led it to be deemed have been written under divine inspiration. As Samuel was felt to fulfill this criterion, there must have been those who understood the message sufficiently to consider the Book a candidate for inclusion in the Bible. Perhaps few in number but of sufficient influence as to be decisive, it was they who insured the inclusion of Samuel in Sacred Scripture. 13 It was among the prophets that the repudiation of power first took root, and among some of them the vision of a world based on care. 14

THE PROPHETS TAKE UP THE TORCH In speaking of the prophets, there is need at the start to quality our remarks. Of the pre-classical prophets we can say little, as only random snippets of their preachments survive 15-though the par-

11. To make matters worse, a concomitant tendency to stereotype Saul as an obstacle to David's advance, and therefore to vilify him, has not only robbed him of his tragic grandeur in popular opinion, but also obscured the greatness of his achievements. 12. Some of the most important statements in the Book are made in the medium of poetry: the main thesis of the Book in Hannah's Prayer (1 Samue/2:1-10), and David's re-evaluation of the true meaning of governance in "David's Last Words" (2 Samue/23: I-7). 13. The formal canonization of Samuel took place about a thousand years after its composition, but its de facto acceptance as a holy book probably took place within the first few centuries following its composition. 14. This is not to imply that besides the prophets the message found no resonance, but rather that the most receptive and proactive group in Israel seems to have been the one to have most absorbed the revisionist vision. 15. The division of the prophets oflsrael into "pre-classical" and "classical" is a modem one: while the former preached and acted, the so-called classical prophets also recorded (or had others record for them) their pronouncements in writing. The first of the classical prophets was Amos; being forcibly prevented from preaching led him to try, by default, to reach his intended public through the written word (see Amos 7: 10-17). The startling success of the little book that thus came into being led his contemporaries and successors to follow suit. The result is that we know more about the ideas and the categories of thought of the "classical" prophets, whose own

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

515

able of Elijah ~nd the "still small voice" can ?e very suggestive in our context. 16 But from the very advent of classical prophecy we are greeted wtth a continual drumbeat of denunciation of the reliance on power. And in tandem with this denunciation, we find a lauding of its opposite. Two examples will suffice. From Amos:

Can horses gallop on rock? Does one plow the sea with oxen? Yet you have turnedjustice into poison, And the fruit ofrighteousness to wormwood You who rejoice in that which is worthless, Who say: "Have we not, by our own strength, seized Karnaim? "17 Seek good, and not evil, that you may live; And so the Lord, God ofhosts, will be with you, Even as you have said Hate evil, and love good, And establish justice in the gate; It may be that the Lord, God ofhosts Will be gracious to the remnant ofJoseph. (Amos 6:12-13, 5: 14-15) And from his younger contemporary, Isaiah:

Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help, And rely upon horses And trust in an abundance ofchariots, And in horsemen, for they are very powerful; But they do not look to the Holy One ofIsrael, Neither seek they the Lord For thus says the Lord God, the Holy One ofIsrael: "You shall be saved by stillness and quiet, In calm and trust shall be your strength. " (Isaiah 31: I, 30: 15) It is true that the denial of the paths of power was far from being the central concern of the prophets. It was the all-consuming struggle against idolatry, and the passionate promotion of ethical writings have come down to us, than those of their predecessors, whom we know mainly through second and third party accounts. The further distinction often made, namely that the classical prophets differed from their predecessors in the content of their preachments (supposedly by a new emphasis on the ethical aspect of religion), rests on very flimsy grounds and, given how the distinction was introduced, obviously cannot be demonstrated. Indeed, there is circumstantial evidence to the contrary. The classical prophets never disassociate themselves from, much less denounce, the stances of their predecessors such as Samuel, Ahijah or Elijah. It would seem more reasonable to assume that, after making due allowances for normal variation among the extremely talented and individualistic members of that extraordinary calling that are termed "prophets," and the differing emphases called forth by changing social, political and economic circumstances, there was a continuity of message throughout the First Commonwealth.

16. 1 Kings 19:11-13. 17. A play on words: the Hebrew Lo davar, meaning literally "Something worthless" is also the name of a town in the Trans-Jordan (see 2 Samue/9:4 & 17:27), as is Karnaim (literally "horns"). Both these strategic sites had recently been conquered by the armies of Jeroboam II in his campaigns against Syria. Amos is here mocking the patriotic Israelites who are glorifying force of arms while practicing injustice, both deemed to be against the natural order of things (unshod horses cannot gallop on rock; one cannot plow the sea with oxen--r with anything else, for that matter).

516

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

living, that dominated their minds and their words. But the theme of "not by power" is an undercurrent in an increasing number of their pronouncements, finally rising to a crescendo upon the return from the Babylonian Exile. Here is Zechariah laying down to Zerubbabel 18 what God demands as the central principle of the restored commonwealth:

Not by strength, Nor by power, But by My spirit, Says the Lord ofHosts.

(Zechariah 4:6)

While the message that power and dominance are not the road to be taken made increasing headway among the prophets, there is also evidence that its associated vision, an ethic of care, also was making inroads among an increasingly widening circle of the spiritual leaders of Ancient Israel. From the first, though, the prorhetic ranks exhibit a clear split on this issue. In Amos, the first of the classical or literary prophets, 1 one searches in vain among his words for an echo of a theology of care, although it is clear that he thoroughly rejects power as a good. His eyes remain fixed exclusively on what we have termed an ethic of rules that lead to fair play, that we call justice: 20

Let justice well up like waters, And righteousness as a mighty stream.

(Amos 5:24)

The most dramatic image in the Book is the vision of the "God of the plumb line:"

Thus He showed me: and behold, the Lord stood by a vertical wall, 21 and in His hand a plumb-line. And the Lord said to me: "What do you see, Amos?" And I said: "A plumbline. "22 Then said the Lord: "Behold, I have placed a plumb-line in the midst ofmy people Israel; I will pardon them no more. The high places of Isaac shall be desolated, and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste, and I shall rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword!" (Amos 7:7-9) The picture is dramatic: a wall designed to be vertical is being checked by the architect with a plumbline, and the wall is out of plumb; it either was improperly built or the ground has settled, and it is no longer vertical. There is no remedy but to tear it down and rebuild it. The analogy to Israel is compelling: the wall is the people of Israel, designed to be a just society, and God, checking with the measuring rod of justice finds the society crooked, unjust. There is no alternative for God but to destroy that unjust society and rebuild it from scratch. This is the central theme of Amos: justice is the meas-

18. Zerubbabel, a distant descendant of David, was the civil leader of the recently re-established Jewish community in Jerusalem. 19. Amos was active during the reign of Jeroboam II (782-743 BCE), the ruler of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. The dates of his ministry fall somewhere between 765 and 750 BCE. 20. The key terms employed for this vision, the normative Biblical vision of the ethical life-what God demands of humanity-are the words Tzedek (righteousness, what is just) and Mishpat Gustice, legal judgment). The sum of these two terms, very often used virtually interchangeably, is what we term ''justice." On the other hand, the terms that are used to delineate what we have called an ethic of care are Hesed (loving-kindness, goodness) and Rahamim (compassion, an intense motherly feeling toward another-the root of Rahamim is Rehem or womb, thus the feeling a mother has for the child of her womb). While the terms signifying justice (Tzedek, Mishpat) appear nine times in this tiny nine-chapter work, Rahamim is mentioned but once (l:Il), while Hesed is conspicuous for its total absence. 21. Literally, a plumb [that is, absolutely vertical] wall. (The term anach is unique to the Book ofAmos and its meaning unclear; of all the meanings suggested, the traditional one of"plumb-line" seems by far the best.) 22. A string with a weight at the end, used by builders and architects to check perpendiculars.

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

517

ure of society and the justification for its existence. God judges society with this measuring rod, and if society proves unjust it has lost its right to exist and will be destroyed. Amos' younger contemporary, Hosea/3 championed a radically different approach. He apparently suffered a particularly traumatic personal experience in being unable to cease loving his unfaithful wife. After throwing her out he took her back again and succeeded in rebuilding his family with tender loving care. In this way he found himself coming to a deeper understanding of God. 24 If he, a mere human being, could find it within himself to so care for his wayward wife, taking responsibility for her and winning her back, how could he suppose that God, in Whose image he had been created, did not similarly care for His people and feel responsible for them? This insight developed into what we might call a theology of care, which implies an ethic of care. Compassion became central to his Book. Summing up his newfound understanding of what it means to "know the Lord" is his version of a new and better world in which God enters into a new covenant with Israel, with God promising His people:

I will betroth you to Me for ever; I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and justice, And in loving-kindness and compassion, And I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness, And you shall know the Lord (Hosea 2:21-22) When we compare this dream with that of Amos' vision of God with the plumb-line of justice measuring mankind, we see a re-evaluation ofthe nature of God and of His relationship with humanity. Note that righteousness and justice are not written off, but rather are supplemented with lovingkindness and compassion. Nevertheless, it is loving-kindness and compassion that take pride of place, because God cares. 25 What I wish to suggest is that we are seeing here an example of the validity of the author's assumption that men are educable. If our reasoning as to when Samuel was written is accurate, then the Book had been in circulation for over two centuries before Hosea's marital crisis erupted. While there is currently no way to prove that Hosea had read Samuel, yet as an extremely literate man it makes excellent sense to assume that he was familiar with the perennial best-seller and one of the classics of Israelite literature. In the same way that I contend that Jeremiah, demonstrably under the influence of Hosea, inherited the idea of an ethic of care from him, so do I suggest that Hosea's personal crisis led him to recognize in Samuel an alternative way of understanding both God and man. What I am arguing is that while being a woman was probably a necessary element in the genesis of a clearly conceptualized ethic of care, once that ethic had been formulated and sketched out in what quickly became a "classic," if intelligent (and Hosea was supremely intelligent) one did not have to be a woman to get the message. 26 23. Active from about 750 until just before the final destruction of the Kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE. 24. As most commentators, I take the first three chapters of the Book of Hosea as autobiographical, the events portrayed therein having led the prophet to the theological viewpoint he expounds. 25. As opposed to the Book ofAmos, in which loving-kindness is never mentioned and compassion but once in passing, in Hosea references to Hesed (loving-kindness) and Rahamim (compassion) outnumber references to Tzedek (righteousness) and Mishpat Gustice). 26. We have no way of knowing how many persons, men and women alike, grasped what we contend to be the inner message of Samuel, and were influenced by it during the two century hiatus between Samuel's first appearance and Hosea's writing of the Book that goes by his name. What we have today are the literary works that survived the centuries and became part of the Bible. All that we can say is that the seeds planted in Samuel may have lain dormant for this period only to spring to life with Hosea, but it is even more likely that there were others during those long years who, like Hosea, grasped the import of the Epilogue but left no surviving record of the fact.

518

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

This divide between the old theology and the new, as exemplified in the writings of the last prophets of the Kingdom of Israel, Amos and Hosea, carried on into the future. The greatest prophet of the next generation, Isaiah of Jerusalem/ 7 very much a spiritual pupil of Amos, continued to proclaim the ethic of justice.

How the faithful city has become a whore, She that was full with justice, Righteousness lodged in her, But now murderers! ... Zion shall be redeemed with justice, And her repentant ones by righteousness. (Isaiah I :21, 27) The God of the plumb-line remains central to Isaiah's vision. 28 It was only at the remove of a century, in the waning years of the Kingdom of Judah, that the ethos of Hosea once again found its voice in the life and preaching of his disciple, Jeremiah: 29

Thus says the Lord: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, Neither let the mighty man glory in his might, Nor let the rich man glory in his riches; But let him who glories glory in this: That he understands and knows Me, For I am the Lord who acts with loving-kindness, Justice and righteousness in the earth; For these things do I desire," Says the Lord 30 (Jeremiah 9:22-23) Note once again that justice and righteousness are not forgotten but rather supplemented. Lovingkindness comes first. The ethic of care has pride of place in this critical summary. 31 What I am suggesting is that there had been formed a literary tradition of care, stretching from Samuel, through Hosea to Jeremiah; a minority voice it is true but yet one never silenced. By the end of the First Commonwealth at least some of the prophets had internalized this ethic, and had expanded it into a revised understanding of God: a just but also a caring One. This understanding was to become a permanent part ofthe heritage oflsrael.

27. Isaiah was active in the Kingdom of Judah from the last year of the reign of King Uzziah (740 BCE) until the last years of the reign of King Hezekiah, Uzziah's great-grandson (approx. 697 BCE). 28. Despite Isaiah's overwhelming emphasis on the ethic of justice, yet a certain minimal awareness of HesedJoving-kindness (one reference) and Rahamim-compassion (5 references) do exist-but spread over 39 chapters! All in all, Isaiah remains a staunch upholder of the justice ethic of his model, Amos. 29. Jeremiah was active as a prophet in Judah from approximately 626 BCE until the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, and then for a few further years in Egypt, to which he had been forcibly abducted. 30. These verses have been previously quoted in another context. See Chapter I, the section entitled "They Knew Not the Lord." In passing it is worth noting that they were considered by the great philosopher Maimonides (1135-1204 CE) of sufficient importance to make them the foundation of his greatest philosophical work, The Guide for the Perplexed. 31. This is not to say that justice and righteousness are being belittled by Jeremiah. References to these outnumber those of loving-kindness and compassion by a ratio of 5:2. It is rather that at critical moments he sees fit to put caring first.

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

519

SUMMING UP If we have read the central message of Samuel correctly, the author seems to be suggesting the replacement of a man's world with a woman's, and the male ethic of justice with a woman's ethic of care. The author has made a strong case that a man's world, a world built around autonomous individuals striving for dominance by means of power, is counterproductive and self-defeating. But would a woman's world work any better? Possibly not. While men might be able to recognize the self-defeating nature of the way they have structured the world, is the commonality of mankind capable of adapting to a non-competitive way of life? If Gilligan's research is on the right track we may be forced to the conclusion that competitive power-based striving is an integral part of the behavior exhibited by men. If this is indeed so, this bodes ill for any attempt to institutionalize society on the basis of care, responsibility and compassion. Men make up roughly fifty percent of humanity. And then there is what has been called the human condition, the reality that all forms of human endeavor have their intrinsic limitations. Whatever system we may try, we find that it contains its own internal contradictions. One could counter that this is a moot question: we will never know if a woman's world could work until it is tried. This rests on the assumption that an alternative world order to the hierarchical power-based world that we know has never been tried. But is this indeed so? Can we afford to ignore the scores of utopian and socialist communities, such as Ararat, one of the earliest, founded in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries? These were attempts to create non-hierarchical co-operative communities based on mutual responsibility, concern and sharing rather than on competitive struggle and dominance. All were conceived as seed-beds for the transformation of the larger society: as models and as training grounds for an alternative way of life. The best that can be said for these experiments is that they never took off; most simply imploded. 32 The one possible exception to this generalization may be the Israeli kibbutz movement. The kibbutzim (plural of kibbutz), settlements founded with the ideal of communal non-competitive living, are the longest-living successes of the entire nineteenth-twentieth century utopian-socialist drive to found an alternative way of life. Yet while some claim that it is too early to write off the kibbutz movement, the general perception is that it too has failed. To the extent that the kibbutzim still survive, the levels of communal living and non-competitive economic structure have been attenuated, often to the vanishing point. Many kibbutzim today are little more than relatively luxurious suburban bedroom communities for people who work in the competitive Israeli business community. 33 Yet it would be premature to say, on the basis of these experiments, that a "woman's world" has proved as unworkable as the "man's world" that we know. The possibility remains that all these abortive attempts were fatally compromised by the prevailing environment of hierarchical power in which they came into being. Can a society of care survive in a world in which power is the ultimate arbiter? Will not such a society be faced with a dilemma: either succumb to force because one refuses to meet

32. The great 20th century Communist experiment can be disregarded. While largely energized by ideals of equality, non-competition and mutual responsibility, from the moment of implementation by the Bolshevik Party the realities belied the proclaimed idealistic program. The USSR (as well as other states that followed the Communist model) structured itself on a hierarchical basis and ruled by the unbridled use of naked power. And indeed, could it have been otherwise? The Bolsheviks were a revolutionary party, and revolution meant violent seizure of power, and retaining power in the face of ongoing attempts to unseat the revolutionaries. In practice there was never any chance of the state "withering away." It can be argued that the dissonance between the professed vision and the ugly reality was one of the major reasons for the eventual collapse of the USSR: one more object lesson in the uselessness of power to achieve human aims. 33. But then were the kibbutzim ever really the antithesis to the world of power? For the period when the kibbutzim were at their height, they were a prime breeding ground for the elite of the Israeli armed forces. Even today, in what may be a stage of terminal decline, kibbutz members are still conspicuous in making up a large part of the officer corps of the army, as well as providing a high percentage oflsraeli air force combat pilots.

520

TOWARD A NEW CONCEPTION OF MORALITY

it on its own terms/4 or succumb to force by adopting its means to defend oneself? Yet another reason for the failure of these experiments may be that almost universally it was men who initiated and implemented them. Perhaps men are not suited to lead in this type of endeavor. While it is true that any evidence for the unworkability of a society of care is far from conclusive, the suspicion cannot be avoided that a society based on care without power is as untenable and self-defeating as a society based on power and dominance. Perhaps the path taken by Hosea and Jeremiah, the two main protagonists among the prophets for a revised vision of God as a caring deity, is the wisest. Instead of replacing one extreme by the other, they opted to embrace an ethic of care while retaining the ethic of justice. This may seem messy from a logical point of view, but in championing a just world that is also a caring world, they were rejecting simplistic formulae. In sum, the message of Samuel that power and dominance are not the road to be taken, was taken up and appreciated by progressively greater numbers of the spiritual leaders of Israel as time progressed. But the feminist side of the message of Samuel, the alternative way of nurture and care remained overlooked and unappreciated by all but a few. And it was men (the classical prophets were all men) 35 who were the ones to carry on that part of the message that ultimately became mainstream theology: the dream of a world at the end of days in which power plays no part.

And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, And their spears into pruning-hooks; Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, Neither shall they learn war any more. But every man shall sit, each under his own vine and his own fig tree, And none shall make them afraid (Micah 4:3-4) We currently inhabit a world of constant and intensifying conflict, of recurring and deepening cycles of violence. The way of power has failed to bring about the dream of a peaceful world. From the days of Samuel an alternative vision of how the world could function has flickered at the peripheries of our perception. Perhaps it is the ignoring of this message, and the concomitant neglect of that half of humanity best suited to implement it, that has condemned both message and vision to the status of an alternative not taken.

34. Attempts at peaceful, non-violent resistance to force have historically succeeded only against opponents strongly motivated by the prophetic ideals of justice and the support of the underdog-the Gandhian non-violent campaign against the British and the Civil Rights movement in the United States being two examples. When faced with determined and ruthless devotees of the cult of force (as in the Prague Spring uprising against Communist totalitarianism) non-violence has proved a dismal failure. 35. There were women prophets, but with the exception of Deborah (whose triumphal ode is preserved in Judges 5}, either they never wrote, or their writings have been lost. So we have little idea of the contents of their preaching and no way of knowing if it differed in any way from that of their male contemporaries.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING (1 KINGS, CHAPTERS 1-2) In one respect the ending of the Book of Samuel is unsatisfying. While the author has made her philosophical point, as far as the historical story line goes there is no closure. The last part of the historical narrative is organized around the struggle to succeed to David's throne, and the Book ends with the succession unsettled. It is not the author's fault that we are left empty-handed. She could not tell us how David's story ended if David was still alive when she finished her masterpiece. But there is a sequel to her work: the Book ofKings. 1 Though the Book of King; takes up where Samuel leaves off, it is a very different kind of book, composed hundreds of years later and with an entirely different purpose in mind. Like all great works, this book is written in order to try to answer an urgent question. Kings dates to the Babylonian Exile-that is, after the conquest of the State of Judah, the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian armies of King Nebuchadnezzar, and the exile of the survivors to Babylon. 3 This was the greatest disaster that had befallen the children of Israel in their thousand-year history, and the Book of Kings is meant to address the question: "Why did this happen to us?" The writer's4 search for an an1. Since the mid-1920s, under the influence of Leonhard Rost, a hypothesis has become widely accepted that links 1 Kings 1-2 with 2 Samuel 9-20 as a single document. Supposedly written by a contemporary author in order to explain how it was that, of all David's sons, Solomon was the one to succeed to David's throne, this document has become known as "The Succession Narrative." As the years passed, the theory has developed a momentum of its own and has tended to become entrenched despite mounting problems (for example, it has proved impossible to achieve a scholarly consensus as to where this hypothetical "Succession Narrative" commences). In recent years the theory has come under increasing attack within the scholarly world. In 1981 Peter Ackroyd went so far as to insist that one must "look more closely at a position which has acquired something of the status of 'critical orthodoxy'. No hypothesis in Old Testament scholarship which reaches such a status must be allowed to go unquestioned ... because a hypothesis must never be allowed to become more than it really is." ("The Succession Narrative (so called)," p. 388) Gillian Keys, on the basis of comparative styles, language, theological outlook and content analysis, has come to the conclusion that 2 Samuel 10-20 and 1 Kings 1-2 are clearly written by different hands (The Wages of Sin, p. 55-70). I find both the presented evidence and the reasoning compelling. Accordingly, I hold that 1 Kings 1-2 is a sequel to Samuel, by a different author, and thus it is a mistake to read back into Samuel the concerns and the point of view that appear in 1 Kings. This conclusion forms the basis of my analysis. 2. Like Samuel, Kings was originally written as one book, and only later was divided into two books. See Chapter 19, note 1. 3. We date the composition of Kings in the same way as Samuel: by the last historic event recorded in it-the reprieve of King Jehoiachin from prison in the year 561 BCE. Unlike the Chronicler, the person responsible for the composition of the Book of Chronicles (see Chapter 18, note 37), the writer of Kings knows nothing of Babylon's defeat by Persia, and of the proclamation of the victorious King Cyrus in 538 BCE freeing the Jews and allowing them to return to rebuild their ancient homeland. Sometime during this 23 year period the Book of Kings was written, "published"-and had become so sacred that it could no longer be updated in the light oflater events. 4. We will call the author of Kings "the writer" to distinguish him from "the author" of Samuel.

522

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

swer takes him back more than 400 years. In David's last days he locates what he takes to be the beginning of the train of events that led to the catastrophe. So he begins his book there, picking up where the ancient Book ofSamuel had concluded. We will be treating the first two chapters of the First Book of Kings as a postscript to Samuel, and using them to close the ledger on those actors of that ancient drama who are all there; now we will fmd out what became of them. But we must not lose sight of the fact that this is not the purpose of the writer of the Book of Kings. For him these two chapters serve the same purpose as the opening section of Samuel: they are the prologue to his book. In them he sets the theme that will dominate his four century-long history of the people of Israel, and these two opening chapters are colored by foreshadowing; after all, the writer is presenting us with what he sees as the beginning of the end. Even without the body of his book, in which he leads us down and ever down the slippery slope, we will still be left with the haunting question implied by his Prologue (and made ever more insistent with each succeeding chapter of his book): Could it all have gone some other way? Was there anything that would have made a difference?

1. THE STRUGGLE FOR THE THRONE The boast ofheraldry, the pomp ofpow 'r, And all that beauty, all that wealth e 'er gave, Awaits alike th' inevitable hour, The paths ofglory lead but to the grave. Thomas Gray, Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard

THE HOT WATER BOTTLE The curtain rises on a David almost unrecognizable. A number of years have slipped by since we left him, but the passage of time alone is insufficient to explain the change. Would our author, with all her honesty, ever have pictured David like this? And yet, perhaps it is indeed the same man, being observed from a different perspective. The writer of these chapters has his sources; we need not question his facts despite the passage of 400 years. 5 But the light in which he shows these figures so familiar to us is bleak, even chilling. For the writer, hindsight has not been kind to David and his circle. Now King David was old, advanced in years; 6 and [although] they covered him with bedclothes he could not get warm. So his servants said to him: "Let a young maiden 7 be 5. The Chronicler, writing about 35-50 years after the composition of Kings, lists some of his sources, which would also have been available to the writer of Kings. Some ofthese sources were by contemporaries of David. See Chapter 18, note 37. 6. LXX reads very old, but this detracts from the force ofMT. "Old, advanced in years" is an unusual expression, used only two other times in the Bible: in reference to the patriarch Abraham (Genesis 24:1) and to Joshua (Joshua 23:1). If this phrase was used to invite comparison it is not very flattering to David. In the case of Abraham it introduces Abraham's efforts to ensure an auspicious future for God's promise by acquiring a proper wife for his son Isaac. In the case of Joshua, he is making efforts to ensure the future of the children oflsrael in their land by initiating a new covenant between the people and God, reaffirming their loyalty to Him. In David's case the phrase introduces an old man in his dotage, giving no thought for the future, and thus leaving that future to the mercy of court intrigue. Thus in his very first phrase the writer strikes a somber note.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

523

sought for my lord, the king, and let her serve the king and be a nurse to him; she will lie in your bosom and my lord the king will be warm. " So they sought for a beautiful girl throughout all the border ofIsrael, and they found Abishag the Shunammite, and brought her to the king. Now the girl was extraordinarily beautiful; she became the king's nurse and attended him, but the king knew her not. (1 Kings 1: 1-4) The picture is pathetic: a feeble old man with circulation so impaired that he is constantly cold. This is probably the last year of his life, putting his age at 70 or close to it. For those days this is old indeed. The only remedy those who minister to him can prescribe is a warm body, a kind of human hot water bottle, to supply the heat under the covers that his body is no longer capable of providing. She can also do double duty, serving as his full-time nurse. We are not told what David replies to this proposal. He probably voices no objections to search parties going forth. The choice falls upon one Abishag from Shunem, a village to the north of Jezreel. 8 We are told that she is exceptionally beautiful: the king deserves only the very best. She is also very young, fourteen at the most. That she has a placid, cheerful nature and is a responsible person we can plausibly assume; if she is to be an effective nurse these qualities would be vital. Upon entering her new profession she seems to give full satisfaction. She nurses. the king and keeps him warm, and here her duties end. The king knew her not; David, the great lover, is now impotent. Considering Abishag's beauty this may be very frustrating for David; on the other hand he might be beyond all that and simply indifferent. I doubt whether the author of Samuel would have been so brutal in her depiction of David in his dotage.

THE PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE Now Adonijah, the son of Haggith, put on airs, saying: "I will be king. " He provided himself with a chariot and horsemen, and fzfty men to run before him. 9 His father had never restrained him 10 in his entire life saying: "Why have you done this?" Now he was also very handsome; he was born after Absalom. (1 Kings 1:5-6) As ifwe had not had enough of David's fractious brood, we are here introduced to more ofthe same. 11 Amnon and Absalom having bloodily departed the scene, and Chileab (or Daniel), Abigail's son, having probably died in childhood, Adonijah, born after Absalom, is now David's oldest surviving son. Naturally enough he sees himself as the prime candidate to succeed his father. 12 Self-centered, forbidden nothing, Adonijah is now set in his ways. He is no adolescent. Born in Hebron, he is now in his middle to late thirties. Ever since his brother Absalom's death, he has been 7. I.e. an adolescent just past puberty. For the meaning ofthe term bitulah see Chapter 30, note 9. 8. The village seems to have had a reputation for producing beautiful women. 9. See Chapter 32, and especially note 14. 10. Reading with LXX; MT reads grieved him. 11. For a chart listing David's oldest sons, their mothers and their birth order, see the section entitled "Intermission in Hebron" in Chapter 20. "Sons of a polygamous marriage could be distinguished by their matronymics; for example, Adoniyah ben-Haggit (l Kings 1:5). Extant examples are confined to king's sons, polygamy being more likely in the royal family." (F. I. Anderson, "Israelite Kinship Terminology," p. 31) 12. This, of course, was only presumption. The principle of primogeniture--the right of the oldest surviving son of a king to succeed him-had not been established at this time in either Israel or Judah. Indeed, we have no conclusive evidence that it ever became accepted in either of the two kingdoms. But in light of the fact that David had never (to the best of our knowledge) indicated otherwise, it was reasonable for Adonijah to assume that now it was he who was heir apparent to the throne.

524

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

eagerly waiting for the day when the crown will be his. Boasting of his future, he apes the pageantry of his older brother; he makes no attempt to disguise his expectations. But one year follows another and David doesn't die. Adonijah begins to lose patience. So:

He conferred with Joab, the son of Zeruiah, and with Abiathar the priest, and they supported him. 13 But Zadok the ~riest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and Nathan the prophet, and Shimei and Rei 4 and David's warriors did not side with Adonijah. Now Adonijah sacrificed sheep, oxen, and fatlings at the stone of Zoheleth, which is by Enrogel;15 and he invited all his brothers, the king's sons, and all the royal officials of Judah/ 6 but he did not invite Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the warriors and his brotherSolomon. (1 Kings 1:7-10) We see here a badly divided government. For the past five years or so David has lost all control over events. The government is, in effect, in receivership. Joab is the real ruler, but the cabinet over which he presides 17 is very much split. It would seem that the background to the split is generational. Benaiah, Zadok, and Nathan, all coming to the fore in Imperial Jerusalem, are probably almost a generation younger than Joab and Abiathar who were with David from the start of his Wilderness Years. It appears very much like a case of progressive "Young Turks" who have little patience with the traditionalism and out-of-date ways of the "Old Guard." Adonijah, born in Hebron, and living his formative years before the heady days oflmperial glory, and probably sharing many of the conservative values of Joab and Abiathar, is anathema to this clique. They seem to have settled on Solomon as their man-though why we are not able to say. At this time Solomon is, at the most, 18 years of age; possibly even less (according to the calculation ofS. Yeivin, Solomon was 16 at his accession 18). The lines are drawn. The writer seems to assume that it is Adonijah that brings things to a head, but I am not so certain. It might just as well have been Joab, sensing erosion of his control and wanting to cement his position by ending the waiting game. Either way they determine to create a fait accompli. Many commentators see Adonijah's attempt in the light of Absalom's, and thus read the narrative as an attempted putsch. I think this is a complete misreading of the plotter's intentions. There is never any thought of overthrowing David; Joab's old-fashioned loyalty to his uncle could never countenance anything of the sort. I think their aim is simply to force David's hand and make him acquiesce in formally recognizing Adonijah as his successor. It is logical, it will put to rest any lingering uncertainty, and, after all, David has never said no to Adonijah. Make public declaration that Adonijah is the heir apparent and David will give it his stamp of approval. This is to prove a fatal blunder. It seems that it never occurred to the plotters that the "Young Turks" could get to the king, take him over, and use him to checkmate them. The method of the "Young Turks" is to use Bathsheba as the opening wedge: she apparently has unrestricted access to the king. Nathan pulls out all the stops in appealing to her jealousy of a rival wife (Haggith), her ambition (for both her son and herself) and her fear (that should Adonijah ascend the throne he will have her and Solomon murdered). Bathsheba needs hear no more. She takes her instructions and then acts upon them. 13. Literally: And his words were with Joab . .. they followed him and aided him. 14. Who were these people? They obviously were "movers and shakers" but they are neither introduced nor identified. Shimei may be the Shimei the son of Ela who, when payoff time came, ended up with the governorship of the eleventh provincial district (1 Kings 4:18). OfRei we know nothing. 15. A spring near Siloam, to the southeast of Jerusalem, on the border between Benjamin and Judah. This was the spot chosen by Jonathan and Ahimaaz as their secret contact point with Hushai's emissary during Absalom's rebellion. See Chapter 33, and especially note 21. 16. Literally: all the men ofJudah [who were] the King's servants. 17. See Chapter 35, "The Power Elite." 18. Encyclopaedia Biblica VII, col. 693.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

525

Then Nathan spoke to Bathsheba, Solomon's mother, saying: "Haven't you heard that Adonijah, Haggith 's son, rules 19 and our lord David doesn't know it? But now, let me give you advice so that you may save your life and the life of your son Solomon. Go, get in to King David and say to him: 'My lord the king, didn't you swear to your handmaid saying: "Solomon your son shall reign after me, and he shall sit on my throne?" Then why is Adonijah reigning? ' Then, while you are still there speaking with the king, I will come in after you and confirm your words. " So Bathsheba went into the room where the king was (now the king was very old, and Abishag the Shunammite was attending to the king). 20 And Bathsheba bowed and prostrated herself to the king, and the king said to her: "What do you want?" And she said to him: "My Lord, you swore to your handmaid by the Lord your God: 'Solomon your son will rule after me, and he shall sit on my throne. ' But now, behold, Adonijah reigns; and you, 21 my lord the king don't know it. And he has sacrificed oxen, failings, and sheep in abundance, and he has invited all the king's sons, and Abiathar the priest, and Joab, commander of the army; but Solomon your servant was not invited. Now the eyes of all Israel are upon you, my lord the king, to tell them who shall sit upon the throne of my lord the king after him. Otherwise it will come to pass, that when my lord the king lies with his fathers, that I and my son Solomon will be counted as offenders. " (I Kings I: 11-21) Wait a moment; what is all this about an oath? There is not the slightest hint in the Book of Samuel about any promise to Bathsheba, or anyone else for that matter, that Solomon would be king. Nor does the writer of Kings at any point conftrm that David has made such a promise. One can even go so far as to say that there is not the slightest indication in either Samuel or Kings that Bathsheba had ever thought such a thing until Nathan tells her to say it. What Bathsheba says to David may be true or it may not; the writer neither conftrms nor denies her statement. He leaves the question open. 22 The ball is now passed to Nathan:

She was still speaking with the king when, behold, Nathan the prophet arrived They told the king: "Behold, Nathan the prophet. "And he entered before the king and bowed down to the king, his face to the ground 23 (1 Kings 1:22-23) Now we understand why Bathsheba was sent in ftrst. She can enter the king's presence at will. Nathan cannot. He has to be announced, and may be admitted or not as the king pleases. Once Nathan is in, Bathsheba departs to leave him a clear fteld. 24

And Nathan said: "My lord the king, have you said: 'Adonijah will reign after me, and he shall sit on my throne?' For he has gone down this day and has sacrificed oxen, andfat19. I.e. has taken over. 20. Note the way the writer returns to emphasize David's extreme age. Is he implying senility? 21. Reading with numerous ancient manuscripts; MT reads and now my lord the king doesn't know it. 22. James Ackerman, in Knowing Good and Evil, calls our attention to a very profound insight into how the Bible works: "As [Meir] Sternberg points out, when characters in the Bible claim that a statement was made that does not appear in the text, the narrator is nudging the reader toward the truth of the matter by forcing us toquestion that claim." p. 55. 23. This is a very different Nathan than the prophet we carne to know in Samuel. We don't remember his prostrating himself when he confronted the king over the Bathsheba affair, nor when he brought to David God's veto over his plans to build a temple. The calling of prophet seems to have degenerated over the years into a mere title; Nathan here functions as a typical courtier, an intriguing court functionary. 24. We shall shortly see why this assumption is necessary.

526

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

lings, and sheep in abundance, and he has invited all the king's sons, and Joab the commander of the arm/5 and Abiathar the priest. Behold, they are eating and drinking in his presence and saying: 'Long live King Adonijah!" But as for me, I your servant, and Zadok the priest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada and Solomon your servant were not invited. Has this thing been brought about by my lord the king, without telling your servant who shall sit on the throne ofmy lord the king after him?" (1 Kings 1:24-27) Now the ball is in David's court. Will he buy it?

And King David said: "Call Bathsheba to me", and she came into the king 's presence and stood before the king. And the king swore [an oath], saying: "As the Lord lives, who has rescued my soul out of all trouble, as I swore to you by the Lord, the God of Israel, saying: 'For Solomon your son will reign after me, and he shall sit on my throne in my stead', thus will I do this very day!" Then Bathsheba prostrated herself before the king, with her face to the ground, and said: "May my lord, King David, live forever!" (1 Kings 1:28-31) David not only accepts the challenge but also resolves to act. This leaves us with two alternatives, neither one very savory. Nathan and Bathsheba are telling the truth: Bathsheba has managed to wheedle or nag David into making her a promise that her son will succeed to the throne, the promise having been kept a secret all these years (she having confided the secret to Nathan). This would make the succession rest on a private promise to a favorite bedmate. Or conversely, the whole story of a promise is a fiction, and David is too senile to remember whether he ever promised anything or not. 26 In either case, the way David handles his succession, an affair of state of the utmost moment, is frivolous in the extreme. Whichever way one reads it, David has fmally made up his mind. The attempt by the "Old Guard" to force a decision in their favor has backfired.

THE COUNTER-STRIKE Whatever David's infirmities of body and mind, having made up his mind he reveals that he still retains his capacity for decisive action.

So King David said: "Summon to me Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophef 7 and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, " and they entered into the presence of the king. And the king

25. Reading with LXX; MT reads and the army commanders. 26. One further matter needs mentioning: shortly after Solomon's birth (Solomon being the name given to him by his mother) the author records Nathan giving the child a second name: Jedidiah (Beloved of the Lord). See Chapter 29, Postscript. The author tells us that God loved Solomon and that Nathan named him at the Lord's behest. With hindsight, knowing what Solomon became, it is all too easy to read back into this single verse a divine nomination as successor to the throne. But this is unwarranted; had Nathan understood his act of naming the child as a response to an oracle from God designating Solomon as God's choice among David's sons, then why didn't Nathan remind David of the oracle? It would have carried greater weight at the crucial moment than a mere promise (even under oath) to a wife. This seems to indicate that the baby-naming ritual (it was common to confer upon children a second name) was carried out by Nathan in his capacity of court official, with no one attaching any special significance to the event. The author's statement (not Nathan's) that the Lord loved him could simply have meant that, unlike Bathsheba's first son who had so tragically died, this child would live and not bear the burden of his parents' crimes. 27. Nathan must have gone out when Bathsheba was called back in; David's commitment was made to Bathsheba alone. Zadok and Benaiah must have been waiting outside with Nathan to find out which way the cat would jump.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

527

said to them: "Take with you the servants ofyour lord, 28 and mount my son Solomon on my own mule, 29 and take him down to Gihon. And let Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anoint him there king over Israel. And you shall blow the shofar30 and proclaim: 31 'Long live King Solomon!' Then bring him ul 2 and come and seat him on my throne; he will succeed me as king. Him have I named as33 leader34 over Israel and Judah!" Then Benaiah the son of Jehoiada answered the king, and said: "Amen! And may the Lord confirm the words of my lord the king/35As the Lord was with my lord the king, so may He be with Solomon; and may He make his throne greater than the throne of my lord King David" (1 Kings 1:32-37) Time is of the essence. By their public act of staging a sacrificial feast at which Adonijah is being proclaimed the heir-apparent the Old Guard has created a reality that, if not checked before it can gain momentum in the public mind, will become irreversible. David immediately orders a counterdemonstration, anointing Solomon at the Gihon spring and proclaiming him heir-apparent, seating him on David's throne and proclaiming him as David's designated heir. While Solomon will have all the ceremony of a formal coronation there is something makeshift and shabby about it. This is a ceremony held in a fortress with only the corps of foreign mercenaries as witnesses. 36 Then a military procession, complete with band and anyone who could be rounded up, making as much show and noise as possible, culminates in a hurried enthronement in the palace. The contrast cannot be greater between this and the public sacrificial feast at En-rogel, in the presence of the princes of royal blood and all the Judean royal officials. 37 In comparison Solomon's investiture reads almost like a palace coup d'etat.

So Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada and the Cherethites and the Pelethites38 went down, and mounted Solomon on King David's mule and conducted him down to Gihon. And Zadok the priest took the horn of oil from the Tenr 9 and anointed Solomon. And they blew the shofar and all the people [present] cried: "Long live King Solomon!" And all the people went up after him, playing on pipes 40 and rejoicing with great joy so that the earth was split with their noise. (1 Kings 1:38-40) One further remark needs to be made about Solomon's elevation to the throne. Despite all the ritual, these proceedings are totally secular. Both Saul and David, Solomon's predecessors, had been chosen by God and anointed by a prophet at God's command. Solomon is the first king to ascend the throne of Israel solely by human choice, his anointing a priestly ritual performed by royal command. David may have felt this lack and so commanded Nathan the prophet to participate in the ritual anointing-perhaps to give it a flavor of divine sanction. In the event only Zadok performs the ritual. Perhaps he insists on his sole prerogative as high priest to perform the religious ritual; perhaps Na-

28. The Royal Bodyguard, the mercenaries commanded by Benaiah. 29. For the mule as an animal reserved for the use of royalty see Chapter 30, note 38. 30. The ram's horn. See Chapter 8, note 7. Here it is being used as a trumpet making proclamation. 31. Literally say. 32. To Jerusalem; Gihon was halfway down the slope below the eastern side of the city. 33. Literally commanded to be. 34. Nagid (in the sense of"the one designated"). See Chapter 6. 35. Reading with LXX; MT reads: May the Lord, the God of my lord the king, so ordain. 36. At that period the Gihon spring was enclosed by massive fortifications. See Chapter 22, note 26. 37. Perhaps the aim was only to proclaim Adonijah heir to the throne of Judah; that is where his primary support lay. 38. David's Philistine mercenaries. See Chapter 25, note 69. 39. Probably the tent pitched by David to contain the Ark of the Covenant is meant. 40. I.e. on wind instruments.

528

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

than voluntarily steps aside-a prophet has the right to anoint a king only on God's command. God here remains silent. It is almost as if God, having chosen Israel's first kings is stepping aside, saying: "All right, now let's see how well you can do on your own." 41 The suddenness and the speed of the counter-strike catch the Old Guard completely by surprise. Despite what we shall see are excellent sources of information inside the palace, the coup is over before Adonijah and company can even be informed. The news, when it arrives, comes too late for either prevention or counter-measure. Now Adonijah, and all the guests who were with him, heard [of it]just as they had finished eating. Joab, hearing the sound of the Shofar, said: "What means this trumpet blast?"42 He was still speaking when, behold, Jonathan the son of Abiathar the priest arrived "Come in, " said Adonijah, "for you are a worthy man and [evidently] bring good news. " Then Jonathan answered Adonijah, saying: "But King David has made Solomon king! The king has sent Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the son ofJehoiada and the Cherethites and the Pelethites, and they have mounted him on the king's mule. And Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet have anointed him king in Gihon43 and have come up from there rejoicing; and the city has gone into an uproar! That is the noise that you have heard Furthermore, Solomon is seated on the royal throne; furthermore, the king 's servants have come to congratulate44 our lord the king, saying: 'May Go~5 make the name of Solomon greater than your name, and may He exalt his throne above your throne. 'And the king bowed down on the bed. Furthermore the king said thus: 'Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, who has granted of my offsprinl6 to sit this day upon my throne, my eyes seeing it."' (1 Kings 1:41-48) This bombshell produces a long moment of shocked silence, then panic. Then all the guests of Adonijah rose in terror; and each went his own way. And Adonijah, infear ofSolomon, rose and went [straight] to the Tent ofthe Lor~ 7 and seized hold ofthe horns of the altar. 48 Now it was told to Solomon, saying: "Behold, Adonijah is in fear of King Solomon; behold, he has seized the horns of the altar, saying: 'Let King Solomon swear to me first of all that he will not put his servant to the sword!' " 49 Then Solomon said: "If he prove to be a worthy man, not one hair of his head shall fall to the ground; but if wickedness be found in him he shall die!" So King Solomon sent, and they brought him down from the altar, and he came and prostrated himself before King Solomon. And Solomon said to him: "Go to your house. " (1 Kings 1:49-53) 41. God's silence with regard to the choice of heads of state is not permanent. In the very next generation God sends the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite to designate Jeroboam to overthrow the dynasty of Solomon and to reign as king of Israel (1 Kings 11 :29-40). And this case is not the last. It seems that from God's point of view the choice of Solomon is problematic, to say the least. But He does not intervene. 42. Reading with LXX; MT reads "Why is the city in such an uproar?" 43. Jonathan obviously was not among Adonijah's guests; perhaps he was left in Jerusalem to keep an eye on things. It is most unlikely that he was present at the Gihon ceremony, and seems to be relying on reports of David's instructions (his inside sources are good but tardy). For our knowledge of what actually occurred at Gihon we must rely on the narrator. 44. Literally: bless. 45. Reading with Keri, LXX, Vulg. and Targ; Ketiv and Syr read your God. 46. Reading with LXX and Syr.; MT reads one. 47. Reading with LXX; MT lacks the words to the Tent ofthe Lord. 48. There were upward projections at each of the four comers of an altar, which were called "horns" since they resembled them. In the Ancient Near East anyone reaching a shrine and laying hold of the altar's horns could claim sanctuary (which is why the term "sanctuary" has become a synonym for a religious shrine). 49. Literally: that he will not slay his servant with the sword.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

529

In this last little scene we are being told something beyond the mere facts. That Adonijah's first reaction to the news of his brother's ascension is to seek sanctuary is our frrst intimation of Solomon's character. We also notice that Solomon has lost no time in taking charge, acting as regent. 50 We further note the ambiguous nature of the promise that he gives to Adonijah. He swears no oath; he merely puts him on warning, obviously leaving the determination of how worthy or wicked his brother will be to himself. Adonijah's attempt to extract a pardon from Solomon-a not unreasonable expectation inasmuch as it was common practice throughout the Ancient Near East that on ascending to the throne monarchs would grant general amnesties51-has failed. This is not Solomon's way. Adonijah will have to make do with being let off on probation. There is no kiss of reconciliation. He is warned to behave himself, and brusquely sent home. The opposition has splintered; Solomon has seized the reigns of power. The struggle for the succession is past history. 52

2. THE GODFATHER'S LEGACY Revenge is a dish that is better eaten cold Sicilian proverb

The finale of David's life that now awaits us is so disturbing that we must pause to ask ourselves to what degree we can accept the account as accurate. For if we do accept it we are left with feelings bordering on disgust. The question is indeed in place for we hold that this account is not contemporaneous but rather was written some 400 years after the event. And yet, for the writer to pen an account so divergent in content and tone from the other records that we have of David's last days would be strange indeed unless he had very good reasons. 53 Unless we consider the writer of Kings to be an unprincipled inventor of historical fiction-an extremely unlikely assumption, as he is consistently confirmed where we have parallel sources-we must assume that he based his account on some record or records that he considered reliable. This would most likely have been some "insider's account" of what went on behind the scenes. 54 50. A regent is one who governs a kingdom in the minority, absence or disability of the king. This is what Joab was doing in everything but name. Now Solomon assumes the role officially (which also implies formal acceptance that David is no longer capable of ruling; Solomon now rules in his name). 51. Note David's pardon of Shimei ben Gera on his return from the victory over Absalom and regaining his kingdom (see Chapter 34). 52. It is only fair to note that this whole somber tale is unique to the Book of Kings. The Chronicler, writing between 35 to 50 years later, and with the Book of Kings before him, opted to omit the entire story of the succession struggle. He makes do with the bland statement: Now David was old and full of days; and he made his son Solomon king over Israel. (I Chronicles 23:1). He also quotes David telling Solomon that he based his choice of him on a dream in which God named him as his successor (1 Chronicles 22:6-13) but declines to comment on this version of events. By discreet omissions of distasteful episodes recorded by the author of Samuel and the writer of Kings, and by focusing on David as a religious figure, the Chronicler manages to present a much more edifying picture of David's last days. 53. The contrast between the accounts of David's final summing up as presented by the author of Samuel {"The Last Words of David"-see Chapter 38), the Chronicler (1 Chronicles 22-29) and the account before us is extreme. We must never lose sight of the fact that the writer of Kings undoubtedly had at hand the Book ofSamuel, as well as most, if not all the other sources used by the Chronicler. 54. Such accounts, usually laced with the kind of scandal that makes the front pages of modem tabloids, have proven to be some of our best sources of the "goings-on" at ancient royal courts. A prominent example is Pro-

530

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

How much of this account is factual and how much the elaboration of our writer? The question is relevant because the account before us purports to be the transcription of David's oral instructions to Solomon, a situation that makes the presence of a secretary taking stenographic notes most unlikely. Two possibilities occur to us: that the conversation was overheard (oriental palaces are notorious for eavesdropping) or that later remarks by Solomon, referring to his father's death-bed directives, were noted- and noted down. Both of the above would have conveyed the essence of David's instructions but not the actual words in which they were uttered. It remained for the writer to incorporate these summaries into an appropriate speech. 55 My reading of the matter is that he could never have brought himself to compose a scene that blackened the memory of so great a man and national hero unless he had before him sources that convinced him of their reliability and truth. As it was, he took upon himself an onus that he has not quite lived down to this day. Exhibiting the clay feet of an immensely popular hero is not exactly the way to win friends and influence people. To summarize our argument, I think the writer, basing himself on sources in his possession and which he believed to be truthful, took the courageous step of showing a side of David that others had deemed wise to pass over unmentioned. I think he was right to do this. In the event, the positive aspects of his account are echoed by the Chronicler, while the negative aspects find their reverberation in the events that shortly followed.

Now when David's time to die drew near, 56 he charged his son Solomon, saying: "I am going the way of all the earth; be strong and show yourself a man, and keep the charge of the Lord your God, walking in His ways, keeping His statues, His commandments, His ordinances and His testimonies as written in the Teaching of Moses, 57 in order that you may succeed in all that you undertake and wherever you turn. In order that the Lord may keep His word which He spoke concerning me, saying: 'Ifyour sons shall take heed to their way, to walk before Me in truth, with all their heart and with all their soul, 58 your line on the throne ofIsrael shall never fail. "59 (1 Kings 2: 1-4) This is all very fine and very upright, and indeed this admonition is largely paraphrased by the Chronicler (1 Chronicles 22:12-14, 28:6-7, 9, 20) in his depiction of David's final testament to his son. Only two false notes are struck here: the first is the slant given by David to God's promise. Let us review it; this is what Nathan said to David in the name of the Lord:

When your days are over and you lie with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own issue, and I will establish his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be [like] a son to me; when he commits wickedness I will chastise him with the rod of men, with the a.fflictions of the sons of men. But I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I removed before you. So your house and your

copius' Secret History which exposes the sordid side of the court of the Emperor Justinian the Great at Constantinople. Suetonius is another example of an author who, owing to his insider positions as a studiis and a bibliothecis (which gave him access to the private correspondence of the early emperors as well as the secret service reports on members of their families), was able to later write the remarkably informative and scandal-laden Lives ofthe Caesars. 55. See page 90, Excursus III: The Problem of the Historian 56. Literally: Now the days of David drew near that he should die. 57. Literally: The Torah ofMoses. 58. Reading with LXX and Vulg.; MT adds said He. 59. This admonition is phrased in the style of Deuteronomy, which had been canonized in 622 BCE and was thus Scripture in the days of the writer. If we are correct in that what he had before him was the gist of what David said to Solomon, and that it was he that cast it into a formal speech, it was only natural that he should have phrased it in the language of Scripture (a style foreign to the speech of David as presented by the contemporaneous author of Samuel).

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

531

kingdom will be sure before Me forever; your throne shall be established for all time. 60 (2 Samuel?: 12-16) In Nathan's oracle all the emphasis is on the perpetuity of David's line. There is a conditional element, but it is minor in comparison to the overriding motif of permanency. Here the emphasis has been reversed: in his admonition to Solomon David is unable to leave the theme of how conditional the promise is, how much it depends on Solomon's good behavior. Does this tell us something about David's estimate of Solomon's character, of the direction in which David is afraid Solomon will head?61 The other false note sounds in the admonition be strong and show yourself a man, i.e. be tough, be valiant. Toughness and courage are not usually, in Biblical terms, considered the necessary prerequisites for leading a Godly life and being faithful to God. The term is usuallr used in the Bible when encouraging people to nerve themselves for unpleasant or dangerous acts. 6 Perhaps David is thinking of what it takes to hold a throne; maybe he is thinking ahead to the second part of the legacy he is leaving. From lofty admonitions about walking in God's ways and keeping his commandments David now gets very specific, and in a way shockingly at variance with his previous generalities:

"Furthermore, you know what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me; what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel-to Abner the son of Ner and to Amasa the son of Jether: he killed them, avenginl3 the blood of war in peacetime, staining the girdle about his loins and the sandals of his feet with innocent blood! 64 Now you act in accordance with your wisdom: don't let his white hair go down to Sheol in peace!" (1 Kings 2:5-6) Is David serious? While Amasa's murder is relatively recent, Abner's, which seems paramount in David's mind, 65 took place more than 35 years before! Does David bear a grudge that long? But the matter seems far more personal and urgent to David. Note how he begins: You know what Joab the son ofZeruiah did to me, then the sudden switching of gears: what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel. I suspect that Abner and Amasa are convenient excuses; bringing a murderer to justice, even tardily, will look good in the public eye. But I think the real resentment boiling within David was personal, what he did to me. So what did Joab do to David that needs requiting? Upsetting David's plans? Talking to him like a Dutch uncle and dressing him down? 66 Turning him, David, into a figurehead these past several years? Or perhaps it was the killing of Absalom, which David could never bring home to Joab, and which he dare not bring up to Solomon (if Joab had not killed him, Absalom would now be king not Solomon)? Whatever David's deep and probably convoluted motives, the instruction is unambiguous. "You are wise," he exhorts his eighteen year old son, "you will see to it that the old man doesn't die peacefully in his bed." David knows he doesn't have to say any more, and that his son is quite capable of "doing what is necessary." The next piece of unfinished business is one of repaying a debt of gratitude. (It would have been nice if David could have found it in his heart also to be grateful to Joab who, on at least two

60. See Chapter 24. 61. Is this the slant of the writer? Knowing how Solomon would end up, is his knowledge influencing the way he frames David's testament? Or was this spin already in his sources? He had Samuel, with Nathan's original oracle, before him. What made him reverse the emphasis? 62. So I Samuel 4:9, 26:15. 63. Reading with LXX; MT reads and he put. 64. Reading with LXX and Syr. MT reads blood ofwar. 65. Joab's alibi-that he was legitimately avenging the killing of his younger brother, Asahel, during the Civil War-referred to Abner, not Amasa. See Chapter 20. 66. See Chapter 33.

532

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

occasions, had saved David's throne, and probably also his life, and had been keeping his head above water for the last five years or more.) But be kind to the sons of Barzillai the Gileadite, and let them be among those who eat at your table; for they befriended me67 when I fled from Absalom, your brother. (1 Kings 2:7)

But now, back to business: Now behold, you have with you one Shimei the son of Gera, a Berljamite from Bachurim, who cursed me with a grievous curse on the day I went to Mahanaim. And he went down to meet me at the Jordan, and I swore to him by the Lord, saying: 'I will not put you to the sword 'Now therefore, do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man and know what to do with him: send down his white hairs to Sheol with blood!"

That is: "I swore to him, but my oath doesn't bind you. Kill him!" And David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the City ofDavid (1 Kings 2:8-10)

This is a terrible legacy to leave a son: a hit list. And in accepting it Solomon seals his destiny. There now follows the formal chronological summary ofthe reign of a monarch upon his death: Now the days that David ruled over Israel [totaled] forty years; in Hebron he reigned seven years and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years. 68 And Solomon sat upon the throne of David his father, and his rule was firmly established (1 Kings 2: 11-12)

3. THE THRONE OF BLOOD It is not, therefore, necessary for a prince to have all the above-mentioned qualities [mercy, faith, integrity, humanity, and religion], but it is very necessary to seem to have them. I would even be bold to say that to possess them and always to observe them is dangerous, but to appear to possess them is useful. ... A prince must take great care that nothing goes out of his mouth which is not full of the above-named ftve qualities and, to see and hear him, he should seem to be all mercy, faith, integrity, humanity, and religion.

Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince

THEFATEOFAFOOL Of Adonijah's character we have, to date, learned a little. We have been told that he is spoiled, that he is ambitious and that he was associated politically with the Old Guard and thus, apparently, at one with them in outlook. Now we are to learn something further: Adonijah is a fool. His very life depends on keeping a low profile, yet before much time has passed we find him pushing himself to the fore. 67. Literally: drew near to me. 68. These are round figures; the writer of Kings always rounds out his figures. We know from Samuel that David's reign in Hebron actually amounted to seven and a half years.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

533

Now Adonijah, the son of Haggith, came to Bathsheba, the mother of Solomon. And she said to him: "Do you come peaceably?" He said: "Peaceably." And he said: "I have something to say to you." And she said: "Speak." So he said: "You know that the kingdom was mine, and all Israel expected me to reign. But the kingdom was turned about and become my brother's, because it was the will of the Lord And now, I have one request to make ofyou; do not refuse me." And she said to him: "Speak." And he said: "Please ask King Solomon-for he won't refuse you-that he give me Abishag the Shunamite to wife. " (1 Kings 2:13-17) Up to now the Adonijah we have seen has probably been following the advice of old and wise heads. The choreography of his bid for recognition as heir apparent was likely Joab's. But now we see him on his own and his stupidity is monumental. He approaches one of his most implacable enemies, one who rightly sees in him a potential threat to her son. Then he reminds her that he was the legitimate and recognized heir, with the implication that many still see him as such. His disclaimer that Solomon is king by divine will is disingenuous; who should know better than Bathsheba that it was intrigue and the mercenaries that put Solomon on the throne, and that neither prophetic nor priestly oracle legitimize the coup? Then, to cap this chronicle of foolishness, he asks her to intervene with her son to give him Abishag! Putting the most generous interpretation on his actions, Adonijah may think this a perfectly reasonable request. David dead, Abishag's job is over and she is at loose ends. And she is very beautiful. Adonijah seems to be implying that she would make a nice consolation prize in place of the kingdom. 69 What he is really doing is providing an excuse that enables Solomon to eliminate him. Bathsheba makes no attempt to warn him off. Quite the contrary, she graciously agrees to carry out his request. (No one can blame her afterwards if things go wrong; as always, she is only doing what she has been told and initiating nothing.)

So Bathsheba said: "Very well, I will speak to the king on your behalf." Then Bathsheba came to King Solomon to speak to him regarding Adonijah. Now the king rose to greet her, and bowed down to her, and seated himself on his throne. And a chair was placed70 for the King's Mother/ 1 and she sat on his right hand And she said: "I have a small request to make ofyou; deny me not. " And the king said to her: "Ask, mother, for I will not deny you. " And she said: "Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to your brother Adonijah as wife." And King Solomon answered, saying to his mother: "Why do you ask for Adonijah Abishag the Shunammite? Ask for him [also] the kingdom! For he is my older brother-for him, and for Abiathar the priest, and for Joab the son of Zeruiah!" Then King Solomon swore [an oath] by the Lord, saying: "The Lord do to me, and more also, if this word does not cost Adonijah his life! And now, as the Lord lives, Who has established me upon the throne of David my father, and Who has made me a house as He promised, Adonijah shall be put to death this very day!" So King Solomon sent Benaiah the son ofJehoiada; and he struck him down, and he died. (1 Kings 2:18-25)

69. Various commentators make much of the fact that Oriental monarchs inherited the harems of their predecessors, and the supposed fact that getting one's hands on one of the widows of a deceased king somehow gave one a claim to the throne. But Abishag was not David's widow. The writer is very careful to define her position as David's nurse, not his concubine; he even goes out of his way to insist that David was never intimate with her. All this was well known in court circles, but if Adonijah therefore assumed the request was innocent and legitimate he must have been politically naive in the extreme. The issue was not whether the request was innocent, but whether it could be twisted to make it look as though it were a political ploy. Neither Solomon nor Bathsheba felt sufficiently secure to pass up this chance of eliminating a perceived threat. 70. Reading with LXX and Syr., MT reads and he placed. 71. The Queen Mother was a high-ranking and extremely prestigious position in the Israelite court.

534

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

Solomon needs no urging; no sooner does Bathsheba speak than Adonijah is liquidated. And here we are not only introduced to the bloodthirsty ruthlessness of Solomon's nature, but also to his propensity for self-justifying (and hypocritical) bombast. Solomon is never responsible for any of the nastiness that will punctuate his regime; it is always the victim's fault-he brought it on himself.

THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF ELI: CONCLUDING CHAPTER Solomon has no intention of stopping here. As he has indicated in his indignant and sarcastic reply to his mother, only the purge of the entire leadership of the Old Guard will do. Abiathar is next on the list.

And to Abiathar the priest the king said: "Get you to your estate in Anathoth/2 for you deserve to die. But today I will not kill you, for you bore the Ark of the Lord my God before David my father, and because you suffered all the hardships that my father suffered " So Solomon expelled Abiathar from being a priest unto the Lord (thus fulfilling the word of the Lord, spoken concerning the House ofEli at Shiloh). 73 (l Kings 2:26-27) Why belonging to the wrong political party should merit a death sentence for the inoffensive high priest is a question that would take some explaining to the public. It is never a wise policy to murder priests; it just doesn't look good. This is probably the real reason for sparing his life. So the old man (he must be close to 70) is thrown out of his position and exiled to his family fields, there to live out his remaining years-probably under house arrest. The priesthood being hereditary, his son Jonathan should by rights succeed him, but Solomon is hardly one to respect hereditary rights. What is the good of a purge if you can't put your own supporters into the plush positions? So his backer Zadok will get that job when the spoils are divided up Next on the list: Joab.

THE MURDER IN THE SANCTUARY But Joab doesn't wait to be hunted down.

When the news reached Joab, since Joab had supported Adonijah and had not supported Solomon 74 he fled to the Tent of the Lord and seized the horns ofthe altar. 75 And when it was told to King Solomon that Joab had fled to the Tent of the Lord, and behold he is by the altar, Solomon sent Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, 76 saying: "Go, strike him down!" So Benaiah came to the Tent of the Lord and said to him: "Thus commands 77 the king: 'Get 72. A town about five miles northeast of Jerusalem. The town will become famous as the birthplace of one of Abiathar's distant descendants, Jeremiah the prophet. 73. This parenthetic remark by the writer does not mean to imply that this was part of Solomon's motivation. Solomon probably never gave it a thought. The writer is introducing us to something that will be one of his main themes: that human beings, acting out of their own worldly and often sordid motives, inadvertently are fulfilling God's larger purposes. Thus the writer reminds us that by his act Solomon is bringing closure to the open-ended saga of the curse on the House of Eli. After almost a century the final blow falls. (See Chapter I) The way the Greeks put it was: The mills ofthe gods grind slow, but they grind exceeding fine. 74. Reading with LXX, Syr., and Vulg.; MT reads Absalom. 75. See note 48 above. 76. LXX reads: Solomon sent to Joab, saying: "What has come over you that you have fled to the altar?" Joab said: "Because I am afraid ofyou and I have fled to the Lord." Then Solomon sent Benaiah the son ofJehoiada, saying: "Go, strike him down!" 77. Literally: says.

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

535

out!'" "No!" he said, "For here will/ die." So Benaiah brought this word to the king, saying: "Thus said Joab, and thus did he answer me. " Then the king answered him, saying: "Do to him just as he said Strike him down and bury him, thus taking away from me, and my father's house, the innocent blood that Joab spilt. The Lord return his blood upon his own head, in that he struck down two men who were more righteous and better than he; he killed them with the sword, without my father's knowledge-Abner the son of Ner, the commander of the army of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, commander of the army of Judah. Now their blood has returned upon the head of Joab, and upon the head[s] of his descendants forever. But to David, and to his descendents, and to his house, and to his throne may there be everlasting peace from the Lord. " So Benaiah the son of Jehoiada struck him down and killed him; and he was buried in his own house in the wilderness. (1 Kings 2:28-34) Solomon's hatchet man, Benaiah, seems to have some scruples about murdering a man in sanctuary. Solomon has none; after declaiming a speech for public consumption about how Joab deserves what he will be getting and how clean Solomon's hands are, he orders Benaiah back to murder him at the altar. This time Benaiah steels himself and does it. The old warrior, brutal and bloody-handed, brilliant commander and loyal supporter of David is, without fanfare, laid to rest at his ranch in the Southern Wilderness. He no longer merits a state funeral. In the new regime he has become a non-person. With the opposition purged, now is the time to pass out the rewards to those who put him on the throne. First on the list is the hatchet man who commands the Praetorian Guard: 78

Then the King appointed Benaiah the son ofJehoiada as [commander] of the army in place ofJoab/9 and the King appointed Zadok the priest in place ofAbiathar. (1 Kings 2:35) Benaiah gets the job of Commander in Chief of all the armed forces, which will shortly become a completely professional army. Zadok is moved up from being in charge of the Tabernacle and great altar at Gibeon to "The Lord's Tent" in Jerusalem containing the Ark of the Covenant. These two ancient parts of the sacred worship will be recombined in the Temple that is to be built. 80

FINISHING THE JOB One obligation remains from his father's deathbed instructions for his dutiful son to perform, 81 the last item on David's "hit list:" Shimei. 82 78. The corps of bodyguards ofthe Roman Emperors, usually made up of foreign mercenaries; a term often used to refer to any body of professional soldiers used as bodyguards for a head of state. 79. Literally: in his place, referring back to Joab in the previous verse. 80. Plenty of other jobs remain to be distributed. For our purposes we only mention Nathan's pay-off: two of his sons end up as cabinet ministers: And Azariah, the son of Nathan, was over the Provincial Governors; and Zabud, the son ofNathan, was Minister without Portfolio and The King's Friend. (I Kings 4:5) 81. The writer maintains a pointed silence with regard to the fulfillment of David's admonition to show kindness to the sons of Barzillai. 82. "Now behold, you have with you one Shimei the son of Gera, a Benjamite from Bachurim, who cursed me with a grievous curse on the day I went to Mahanaim. And he went down to meet me at the Jordan, and I swore to him by the Lord, saying: '/will not put you to the sword. ' Now therefore, do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man and know what to do with him: send down his white hairs to Sheol with blood!" 83. That is, Shimei is to be confined to the city and the area just outside the walls, no further than the distance between the walls and the Wadi Kidron (the bottom of the steep valley lying to the east of Jerusalem), in other words he is to stray no more than four hundred feet beyond the walls. For wadi see Chapter 17, note 34.

536

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

Now the king summoned Shimei, and said to him: "Build yourself a house in Jerusalem and live there; do not go forth from there anywhere. For the day you go forth and cross the Kidron wadi, 83 know that you will certainly die; your blood shall be on your head " And Shimei said to the king: "I accept. As my lord the king has spoken, thus shall your servant do. "So Shimei dwelt in Jerusalem many days. (1 Kings 2:36-38) In effect Shimei is put on warning and confined to Jerusalem, there to live from the revenues of his estates in Benjamin. This is a leash unlikely to hold over the long term. It doesn't.

And it came to pass that after three years two of Shimei 's slaves ran away to Achish, son of Maacah, King of Gath. Three years of absentee landlordship take their toll on estate discipline, and things begin to come apart.

And when it was told Shimei, saying: 'Behold, your slaves are at Gath, " that Shimei rose, saddled his donkey and went to Achish at Gath to claim his slaves. So Shimei went, and brought back his slaves from Gath. (1 Kings 2:39-40) Why does Shimei break parole? Does he think that the terror following Solomon's ascension is now over and that a "thaw" has set in? Or perhaps it is a matter of economic desperation. Should his labor force evaporate while he personally cannot work his holdings, he will be reduced to penury. Whatever the reason, he takes his chance. Solomon has been waiting for just such a situation.

And it was reported to Solomon that Shimei had left Jerusalem for Gath and had returned So the king summoned Shimei and said to him: "Did I not make you swear by the Lord, and warn you saying: 'On the day you go forth and go anywhere know that you will certainly die?' And you said to me: 'I hear and I accept. ' Why have you not kept your oath of the Lord, and the command which I commanded you?" And the king said [further] to Shimei: "You know in your own heart all the evil which you did to David, my father, and the Lord has returned your evil upon your head! But King Solomon shall be blessed, and the throne of David shall be established before the Lord forever. " And the king gave orders to Benaiah the son ofJehoiada; he went out, and struck him down, and he died. The last item can now be checked off the list.

And the kingdom was established in the hand ofSolomon. (2:41-46)

LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT This is a succession bathed in blood. Over the years Solomon has not lacked apologists. Good reasons have always been found for what he did, usually variations of Machiavelli's previously quoted dictum:

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

537

for how we live is so far removed from how we ought to live, that he who abandons what is done for what ought to be done, will rather learn to bring about his own ruin than his preservation. . . . therefore it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself, to learn how not to be good. 84 Yet the writer of Kings does not come out and excuse what took place (nor does he come out and condemn it). Ostensibly he withholds judgment, letting the facts speak for themselves. But he does give us a hint as to his real thoughts, above and beyond the lurid picture he paints. Right after David's death he summarized the situation thus: And Solomon sat upon the throne ofDavid his father, and his rule was firmly established (1 Kings 2:12) Now, after the bloodbath, we are told: And the kingdom was established in the hand ofSolomon. (1 Kings 2:46) The more recent summary lacks the word firmly (the contrast is even more striking in the original Hebrew). Is the writer hinting that Solomon's position was more secure before he took his drastic steps to "establish himself," that his efforts have actually weakened his position? A study of the next nine chapters, which cover the reign of King Solomon, can indeed substantiate this interpretation. Read carefully, what we have is a picture of an ever-intensifying Oriental despotism, one that increasingly alienates the public, and undermines the good will upon which all regimes rest. In fact, the ground is being prepared for the disintegration, upon Solomon's death, of the United Kingdoms oflsrael and Judah. Once again Machiavelli: I will only say, in conclusion, that it is necessary for a prince to possess the friendship of the people; otherwise he has no resource in times of adversity.... Therefore the best fortress is to be found in the love of the people, for although you may have fortresses they will not save you if you are hated by the people.85 This is a lesson that David once knew, and in old-age forgot. This is a lesson that Solomon never learns, and so he never realizes what harm his bloody purge is doing to him. His reign can be viewed as one long effort to secure his position while actually he is busily sawing off the branch on which he sits. He will never be able to achieve the validation of his rule that he so deeply feels he requires-the sanction of divine election possessed by Saul and David before him. 86 It is this lack that lies behind his repeated bombastic claims to legitimacy. He overaws the people with his grandiose buildings, his wealth and his intellectual brilliance (his wisdom was to become proverbial)-but his coldness alienates them and his oppression rouses fierce hatred. The fmal straw is Solomon's apostasy-his worship of pagan gods-and God rejects him, even as He rejected Saul. 87 So in the end divine 84. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter XV. 85. Ibid., Chapters IX and XX. 86. Even in Solomon's famous dream at Gibeon (1 Kings 3:14) in which he asked God for wisdom and was granted it, the writer concludes the vision not with an unambiguous statement of favor but with a rephrasing of David's deathbed warning that his future depends on his good behavior. Solomon remains on probation. His later vision (1 Kings 6:11-13) is no more than a pointed reminder that God's grace will always be conditioned on his faithfulness to God and His commandments. 87. Now it came to pass, when Solomon grew old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not whole with the Lord his God . .. For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom, the detestation of the Ammonites. And Solomon did that which was evil in the eyes ofthe Lord ... And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel,

538

POSTSCRIPT: THE DEATH OF THE KING

legitimacy is to come, not to Solomon, but to the rebel who will tear apart the United Kingdoms; God sends the prophet Ahijah to designate Jeroboam as His chosen (1 Kings 11 :26-40). By the end of Solomon's reign all that is left of the Empire that David had built is a facade. After the collapse, David's grandson is left with only the backward little kingdom of Judah. The long journey into oblivion is underway. Might it have been otherwise? Possibly not. Solomon was a brilliant tyrant, but then Adonijah was a fool. Perhaps there was a better candidate to succeed David from among his fourteen surviving sons, but David never took it upon himself to groom any of them for rule, much less take the responsibility of choosing the best among them to succeed him. The succession went by default, and with this political failure the entire political edifice that David worked so long and hard to build also failed. What remained from the political debacle was the memory of David the God-seeker; David the Sweet Singer of Israel. And as the centuries passed, this side of David loomed ever larger in the minds and hearts oflsrael. The story of David the warrior, David the politician, David the empire builder is fascinating, even breathtaking-but that is ancient history, long ago and far away. It is the psalms that still live today in the hearts oflsrael, David's permanent gift to his people and to all humankind.

Who had appeared to him twice, and had commanded him concerning this very thing, that he should not go after other gods; but he kept not what the Lord commanded. And the Lord said to Solomon: "Inasmuch as this has been your mind, and you did not keep My covenant and My statutes which I have commanded you, I will assuredly tear the kingdom from you and will give it to your servant. " ( 1 Kings 11 :4-11)

APPENDIX 1: PSALM 34 1.

(A Psalm) of David; when he feigned madness1 before Abimelech, who drove him away, and he departed

2.

I will bless the Lord at all times; His praise is ever in my mouth. My soul shall glory in the Lord; The humble shall hear and rejoice. 0 magnify the Lord with me; And let us exalt His name together. I sought the Lord, and He answered me; And delivered me from all my fears. Look to Him, and shine; And your faces will never be downcast. 2 This poor man cried, and the Lord heard; Andfrom all his troubles saved him. The angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him, And delivers them. Tesr and see that the Lord is good; Happy is the man who takes refuge in Him. Fear the Lord, you His holy ones; For those who fear Him lack nothing. The young lions suffer want and hunger; But they that seek the Lord lack no good thing. Come, 0 sons, listen to me; I will teach you the fear ofthe Lord Who is the man who desires life? And loves days, that he may see good? Keep your tongue from evil, And your lips from speaking guile. Turn away from evil, and do good; Seek peace, and pursue it. The eyes ofthe Lord are toward the righteous, And His ears to their cry. The face ofthe Lord is against evildoers, To cut offtheir memory from the earth. When the righteoui cry the Lord hears,

3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

I. Literally, "when he changed his judgment." 2. Reading with LXX and Syr.; MS reads They looked to Him and shone; And their faces will never be downcast. 3. Literally Taste used in the sense of"experience directly." The term is used identically in Proverbs 31:18. 4. Reading with LXX; MS reads They cried, and the Lord heard.

540

19. 20. 21. 22. 2 3.

APPENDIX l: PSALM 34

And from all their troubles He delivers them. The Lord is near to the brokenhearted, He saves the crushed in spirit. Many are the misfortunes of the righteous, Yet from all of them the Lord delivers him. He keeps all his bones; Not one ofthem is broken. Evil shall slay the wicked; And they that hate the righteous will be held guilty. The Lord redeems the soul ofhis servants, And none ofthose who take refuge in Him will be condemned

This is a remarkable psalm, one that has found its way into wide liturgical use. If this is indeed one of David's earliest compositions it is a brilliant initial effort. The psalm movingly captures the aftermath of a traumatic experience. Reflecting on what he has undergone, the author's first reaction is to share the overwhelming gratitude he feels for coming through unscathed, then he tries to draw, for himself and for others, lessons for living. Thus the psalm falls into two parts; verses 2-ll, the invitation to join with the author in giving thanks to God, and verses 12-22, instruction on how to live a long and worthwhile life. Verse 23 closes the psalm, as verse l, the superscription, opens it. 5 As has been previously noted, the superscription ascribes the psalm's composition to David's narrow escape from Gath. For well over a hundred years scholars have never wearied of pointing out the superscription's "mistake," that the ruler of Gath whom David escaped was named Achish, and not Abimelech. In their eyes this proves that the editor doesn't know what he is talking about; that the connection to David and the event are mere fabrications. It seems strange, when looking at the matter in cold blood, that this position can be advanced seriously. Any editor from a period later than the age of David would have had the Book of Samuel before him, no less than do modem scholars. He would have been as aware of the discrepancy as they. Why then didn't he "correct" his superscription to dovetail with the story as presented in Samuel? Perhaps because he knew more than we know, and in his eyes there was no contradiction. One possibility is that the word Abimelech (literally "My Father is King") was not a specific name of a person but rather the generic term for "ruler" of Gath (and possibly other cities in the region). 6 Another possibility is that, as most people in those days, Achish had more than one name. An historian referring to Napoleon in one paragraph, and then referring to the same person in the next as Bonaparte, is not making a mistake. Both were the legitimate names of one and the same person. When one person is sometimes referred to as "David" and at others as "the son of Jesse," there is no contradiction. All of the above is simply meant to act as a counterbalance to the certainty of many notable scholars, and to suggest that the person who wrote the superscription to the Psalm may not unavoidably have been dimwitted, unable to see the obvious. While not necessarily smarter than his modem scholarly critics, he may well have known something that we do not. It is a possibility worth considering; at the very least we should keep open minds. Giving the authors and editors of the Bible the benefit of the doubt is often the better part of wisdom. Two brief remarks with regard to the poetic forms taken by the psalm, forms that were not invented by David or his generation but inherited from the past. 7 Firstly, the poetic form itself. Each verse is divided into two parts. First-a short statement of fact or intention, followed by a second

5. The verses are numbered differently in the Hebrew and the Christian Bibles. The Hebrew Bible treats the superscription as verse one, while the Christian Bible does not, and starts numbering only with the next verse. Thus verse two in the Hebrew Bible is treated as verse one in the Christian. We here follow the Hebrew form of numbering. 6. In much the same way as Pharaoh (literally "Great House") was the generic term for "ruler" in Egypt. 7. See Chapter 13, note 2 and Prologue, note 41.

APPENDIX 1: PSALM 34

541

short statement that amplifies and/or completes the first. This is one of the standard forms Biblical poetry takes. Secondly-the psalm is constructed in the form of an alphabetical acrostic. In the Hebrew, starting with verse two (the verse after the superscription), every verse begins with a consecutive letter of the alphabet. Thus the first letter of the first word in verse two is Aleph (A), the first letter of verse three is Beth (B) and so on to the end of the Hebrew alphabet. This form is not uncommon in psalms, nor uncommon to other poetic compositions in the Bible. 8 The idea may have been that the author is saying, symbolically speaking, that he is using all the resources of the language to give expression to his subject-in this case, gratitude to God. We are now ready to "walk through" Psalm 34.

GRATITUDE AND PRAISE As we saw when we analyzed "Hannah's Prayer," which is written in psalm form, a common way to begin such a composition is to start by stating one's theme. So the psalm opens with its author's purpose: I will bless the Lord at all times; His praise is ever in my mouth. (v. 2)

Then he widens the circle, calling upon others (i.e. all who hear or read the psalm)9 to join with him in his praise. My soul shall glory in the Lord; The humble shall hear and rejoice. 0 magnify the Lord with me; And let us exalt his name together. (v. 3-4)

Why? Because I was in crisis and He saved me.

I sought the Lord, and He answered me; And delivered me from all my fears. (v. 5) The basic premise of this psalm, as of so many others, is that the personal experience of the author is not unique to him. What he or she has experienced others can experience as well. It is this conviction that underlies the tendency to generalize from the particular. Look to Him, and shine; So that your faces shall not be downcast. 10 This poor man cried, and the Lord heard; Andfrom all his troubles saved him. The angel ofthe Lord camps around those who fear Him, And delivers them. (v. 6-8)

8. Besides Psalm 34, Psalms 25, 37, Ill, 112, 119, and 145 are acrostics. Also note that Lamentations 3 is a . triple acrostic: i.e. A-A-A, B-B-B, etc. Psalm 119, mentioned above is an eight-fold acrostic.. 9. The psalms were originally designed to be heard. Indeed, they were sung, often to mustcal accompamment. Only at a much later period did they achieve wide circulation in written form. . . . 10. The verse following this one, the "Vav" (the sixth letter in the Hebrew alphabet) verse m the acrosttc, ts missing.

542

APPENDIX 1: PSALM 34

Just as I was in deep trouble, says the author, and, by crying to the Lord was saved, so can you be saved. Learn from my experience. Try it yourself. Test and see that the Lord is good; Happy is the man who takes refuge in Him. (v. 9)

The appeal is not to argument but to example and personal experience. This is the force of the phrase test and see: don't take my word for it, experience it yourself directly, in your own lives. The key is

to fear the Lord. Even the mighty and powerful (here symbolized as lions) can fall on hard times, but the Lord can and will save all who turn to Him: 0 fear the Lord, you His holy ones; 11 For those who fear Him lack nothing The young lions suffer want and hunger; But they that seek the Lord lack no good thing. (v. 10-11)

THEFEAROFTHELORD As we said, the key to God's help, to God's grace, is to fear the Lord. The term "fear" is emphasized, repeated no less than three times in as many verses. What does the psalmist mean? He is not using the term in the sense of being afraid (though this is indeed one of the meanings of the Hebrew term). The word also means "reverence," "honor," and "awe." 12 But we do not need to guess; the author now becomes didactic, and explains exactly what he means: Come, 0 sons, listen to me; !will teach you the fear ofthe Lord (v. 12)

Adopting the role of a teacher of wisdom, 13 he proposes to give the hearer (or reader) a lesson as to exactly how one "fears the Lord." Who is the man who desires life, And loves days, that he may see good? (v. 13)

This is, of course, a rhetorical question, simply used as an opening. Who is there who does not desire "days," i.e. a long life? Who does not want his days filled with good, with happiness? This is the life for which all human beings long. Now the author gives his formula for achieving the good life:

11. The author is, naturally, addressing his fellow Israelites. Holy ones refers to members of the holy nation, as the Israelites are called in Exodus 19:6, the people covenanted with God. Thus the expression really means, "Those consecrated to God". 12. See Chapter 9, notes 8 and 10. 13. "Wisdom Teachers" were a class of people in the Ancient Near East (not just in Israel) who, each within the parameters of his or her own culture, gave practical instruction as to how to make a success of one's life. The use of the term "sons" or "my son," in the sense of students or disciples, is typical to this class of teachers. What is interesting about verse 13 is that an identical sentence, word for word, has been found on an Egyptian inscription in the tomb of the 14th century BCE Pharaoh Ai at EI-Amarna. It would seem that this typical Egyptian Wisdom exhortation, translated into Hebrew, was still in circulation as a stock phrase more than three and a half centuries later, available for use by David and incorporation into his psalm.

APPENDIX I: PSALM 34

543

Keep your tongue from evil, And your lips from speaking guile. Turn away from evil, and do good; Seek peace, and pursue it. (v. 14-15) Refrain from lies and tell the truth. Don't deceive your fellow man. Lead a moral life. Above all, avoid strife. Seek peace and actively pursue peace. 14 This is his formula. Implicit in this approach is the bedrock assumption that good begets good even as evil engenders more evil. If you live a good life as defined above, then you can turn to God and reasonably expect his help. Conversely, evil breeds disaster. If this is your way, don't expect anything from God but his active displeasure. The eyes ofthe Lord are toward the righteous, And His ears to their cry. The face ofthe Lord is against evildoers, To cut offtheir memory from the earth. (v. 16-17) Shakespeare places the following words in the mouth of Marc Antony: "The evil that men do lives after them, The good is oft interred with their bones ... " 15 Our author claims exactly the opposite; the good men do causes their names to live on after them, while the evil men do causes them to be quickly forgotten. But being righteous is not painless. We know this and the author, from bitter experience, knows this too. Many are the misfortunes of the righteous (v. 20) has the sound of hard-won wisdom. Against this harsh experience he pits his faith-faith born from having come through a very bad patch. When the righteous cry the Lord hears, And from all their troubles He delivers them. The Lord is near to the broken hearted, He saves the crushed in spirit. (v. 18-19) This points in the same direction as Hannah's declaration: Talk no more so very proudly, Let not arrogance come out ofyour mouth. For the Lord is a God of knowledge, And by Him actions are weighed (I Samue/2:3) Humility and broken pride are the hallmarks of the righteous godly man in the Biblical point of view. Pride and arrogance are the root of all evil.

14. Peace here means not only the absence of war and strife, but also an inner peace, an inner wholeness. The Hebrew word for peace, Shalom, comes from the root shalem that means "whole." Thus the Bible sees a person in harmony with himself and his God as a whole person, a person at peace. Conversely, a person lacking peace is a person divided against himself, at war with himself. It is this inner harmony, this peace, which is one of the most crucial goals of human life. 15. Julius Caesar, Act III.

544

APPENDIX I: PSALM 34

Many are the misfortunes ofthe righteous, Yet from all of them the Lord delivers him. He keeps all his bones; Not one ofthem is broken. (v. 20-21) This sweeping generalization, born though it is of personal experience, is fundamentally a declaration of trust in God. Only one who has been through the dark night and has endured to see the dawn can, in all sincerity, say something like this. And now the triumphant conclusion: Evil shall slay the wicked; And they that hate the righteous will be held guilty. The Lord redeems the soul ofhis servants, And none of them that take refuge in Him will be condemned 16 (v. 22-23) This is a psalm of faith, written by one who has been through very hard times, for others in like straits. Over the past three millennia it has given countless people the courage and fortitude to overcome despair and see them through the most difficult of times. If we wish to seriously entertain the possibility that the superscription is reliable, that this psalm was indeed written by David on the occasion of his narrow escape from Gath, then this opens a further avenue of speculation. One begins to wonder to what extent is David preaching to others, and to what extent is he preaching to himself. Was David in effect composing for himself a spiritual program and a template for his future life? If we are willing to entertain this possibility, then it will be interesting to measure David's future life against these standards: Keep your tongue from evil, And your lips from speaking guile. Turn away from evil, and do good; Seek peace, and pursue it. Regardless of authorship, they are standards that can be used to measure the caliber of anyone's life.

16. The acrostic ends with verse 22. Verse 23 is an extra verse, added as a summary, as is the case of Psalm 25. Strangely, like Psalm 25, the concluding verse begins with the letter "Peh" (P), the 17th letter of the alphabet. The reason for repeating this letter after concluding the alphabet is obscure.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51 1 The heading For the choirmaster: A Psalm of David/ When Nathan the prophet came to him after he had gone in to Bathsheba. ( 1-2)

attributes this moving psalm to David-his reaction to his confrontation with himself and his conscience provoked by Nathan's denunciation. As in Psalm 34, I can find no compelling reason to dispute this claim. 3 As a further element to take into consideration, it seems probable that from earliest times readers would recite this psalm in conjunction with the story of David and Bathsheba, inserting it immediately after David's confession. 4 For all this extended period, the psalm has been seen to reflect a critical aspect of David's character. Like a brilliant diamond David had different facets to his nature. He was, among other things, a warrior and conqueror, a sinner, a penitent and a supreme and sensitive religious poet. This psalm has, for several thousand years, been seen as one of the great expressions of this last facet of his character. As a warrior and conqueror David left no permanent imprint on humanity; as a psalmist he did. It is because David wrote psalms, giving common people the words with which to express their deepest feelings and longings, that David became so beloved to generation after generation of Jews and Christians. But even if we should entertain some doubt as to the author or the events that initiated the composition, the issue remains entirely beside the point. The significance of the psalm is its universality. It is one of the great expressions of the overpowering sense of guilt that can bear down on a human being, and of the yearning for forgiveness. For at least a hundred generations people have found in this psalm the words in which they could give voice to their feelings, express remorse for their own sins and beg for pardon. While what will follow will speak to deeply religious persons, the average modem secular individual may find concepts that will be dealt with-such as sin, transgression and repentanceforeign to the universe of discourse he or she inhabits, and not particularly relevant. Yet if we wish to have an understanding of the Biblical World it is necessary to gain some sort of insight into how the people who inhabited that world thought and felt, and what motivated them on their deepest levels. So if you should find the concepts embedded in Psalm 51 alien, or even bordering on the incredible, I I. With regard to the way the verses are numbered, see Appendix: Psalm 34, note 5. We here follow the numbering as it appears in the Hebrew Bible. In Christian Bibles verse 3 is numbered as verse I. 2. The word that we have translated as choirmaster (in the Hebrew minatzeah) means in 2 Chronicles 2: I the "overseer" of a party of laborers. When it is used in the heading of a psalm, as it often is, it means someone who is in charge of the performance of the psalm. Inasmuch as the psalms were normally sung by Levitical choirs to orchestral accompaniment (see Chapter 24), I have chosen to render it as "choirmaster" to emphasize the musical dimension. The term could just as well be rendered as "conductor," or, as is often the case, simply "leader." 3. See Chapter 13 for the reasons for taking seriously the superscriptions of those psalms that possess them. See also the introduction to the Appendix; Psalm 34. 4. See Chapter 29, note 9.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

546

would suggest following the advice of Wordsworth and Coleridge when they counseled a temporary willful suspension of disbelief as a key to gain entry into the world of poetry. All great poetry (and the psalms are great poetry) use symbolic language to take us out of our prosaic worlds and enable us to empathize with experiences and attitudes outside our normal experience. If we approach the underlying concepts and symbols that undergird this psalm in this light, then at the very least the reading can provide a portal into an exotic world of ancient experience, and one that has spoken to people ever since. Before proceeding to an analysis of the psalm itself, it is important to remember the fundamental difference in the Biblical Age between prayer in verse and prayer in prose. Prose prayer (an almost everyday occurrence to the Israelites of that era) was always explicit, a reaction to special circumstances. As such it could not be recycled. It was phrased in the language of everyday speech, usually uttered on the spur of the moment, and never repeated. 5 On the other hand, prayers written in poetic form (psalms) were always phrased in a general way and were Jacking in the precise details of the situation that impelled the composition. This was done so as to allow the reuse of the prayer by others, who could read their own specific situations into the general language, and thus find the forms of expression to articulate their needs. Prose prayers were extemporaneous and intended solely for one's own use. psalms were composed with the public in mind, so that others could use them. This explains the lack of specific references to the Bathsheba affair in the body of the psalm that so disturbs some critics. Had such references existed they would have disqualified the psalm for general use. It would not have been included in the Book of Psalms, and we probably would never have known of its existence. It is the appropriateness of this Psalm to the needs of so many people that has made it the model for a host of penitential prayers, and its language has become the standard language of contrition in the Jewish and Christian traditions. Several further remarks need to be made concerning the heading of the psalm:

For the choirmaster: A Psalm of David; when Nathan the prophet came to him after he had gone in to Bathsheba. (l-2) The word that we have rendered "psalm"6 (in the Hebrew Mizmor) is an unusual term. It comes from a root that means song, yet in this form-mizmor-it is never found in the Bible except in the Book of Psalms; its use is restricted to liturgy. 7 When David will be referred to as The Sweet Singer of lsraefl (2 Samuel 23:1) the reference is to his religious poetry (psalms) rather than to his secular poetry, such as his elegies. 9 The fact that the heading of the psalm addresses "the choirmaster" 10 indicates clearly that the psalm did not, nor was it ever intended to, remain the private plaint of David (or the "author" as the case may be) communing with his God. It was meant, from the first, to serve the author's personal use and that of others as well. It was handed over to "Asaph and Co." to become part of the repertoire of the Levitical guild that conducted the musical worship before the Ark. Because it entered the anthology of psalms that they performed, and that they made available for private use in the sanctuary, it was preserved to become part of the Book of Psalms that we know today.

5. See Chapter 24 for a discussion of the place of extemporaneous prayer in the life of the average Israelite. 6. The word "psalm" comes to us via Latin from the Greek, where it means, "a song sung to the accompaniment of a stringed instrument." This word was first used by LXX to render the Hebrew mizmor. 7. The term for non-religious song is shir, singers are mishorarim (from the same word), and musical instruments are k'lai shir (literally instruments of song). There are no parallel terms for religious singers or religious instruments. 8. The term used is from the same root as Mizmor and could mean "psalmist." 9. 2 Samueli:I9-27, 3:33-34.

10. See note 2 above.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

547

THE STEPS OF REPENTANCE Beyond its ever-present utility as a tool to enable inarticulate people to repent their wrongs, Psalm 51 possesses the virtue of encapsulating the entire Biblical theology of repentance. As such it has served as an instructional tool, educating successive generations as to what God desires, and what Biblical faith requires. In order to be able to follow the progression of the psalm, we will frrst summarize what the Bible has to teach about repentance. The great preacher of repentance, the prophet Hosea, appealed to the Israelites thus: Return, 0 Israel, to the Lord your God, For you have stumbled, due to your iniquity. Take with you words, And return to the Lord; Say to Him: "Forgive all iniquity, And accept that which is good. " So will we render [in place of] bulls [The offering of] our lips. (Hosea 14:2-3)

In the Bible the term for repentance is return; i.e. to tum about and retrace one's steps. One has strayed off the right path. Repentance means to turn around, go back to where you went off the path, and start again on the right road. Thus repentance involves a behavioral modification, and specific acts. It also involves a verbal component: turning to God with words, asking Him to forgive the wrong we have done and not forget the good that is in us. Just as there is no one who is all good, so is there no human who is one hundred percent evil-we are all composite creatures with much good and much bad to our accounts, and with very mixed motives.'' All this implies that repentance is more than a moment of renewal; it is a process. To Biblical men and women, to return to God involved a series of steps, each predicated on the successful completion of the one previous. These are: Recognition of wrongdoing, Confession and remorse, and Change. Step 1: One cannot repent before one is capable of realizing that one has done wrong. This involves stripping away all the rationalizations and excuses that we use to justify ourselves to ourselves. Until we can see ourselves as we really are we are trapped. Step 2: Confession. Admitting wrong to oneself often proves to be a dead end because shame prevents us from confessing to others. This includes both God and man. It takes real courage to open ourselves to possible scorn and condemnation. But public confession alone without remorse is no more than a plea bargain, an act of expediency. Only if one feels truly sorry for what one has done, or disgusted at what one has become, is the confession a valid one. Step 3: The last step is the commitment to change. One has gained nothing if one recognizes one's wrongdoing, confesses and feels sorry about it, and then slips back into the same old ways. Unless one actually retraces one's steps and starts anew one has not repented. The Rabbis put the matter this way: if picking up a slimy reptile contaminates one, there is no gain in washing and bathing if one emerges from the bath still gripping the noxious creature. Repentance demands as its conclusion the abandonment of the old and the adoption of a new and better way. If possible one must make amends with anyone who has been wronged. At the very least one must not repeat one's wrongs. Should one truly repent, one can count on God's forgiveness: Let the wicked forsake his way, And the iniquitous man his thought;

II. We will return to the last part of Hosea's pronouncement at the conclusion of our analysis of Psalm 51.

548

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

So let him tum back to the Lord, And He will have mercy upon him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. (Isaiah 55:7)

With this as background let us "walk through" Psalm 51.

THE CRY OF A SOUL BURDENED WITH GUILT Have mercy on me, 0 God, As befits Your steadfast love: 12 In keeping with Your abundant compassion Erase my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly of my iniquity, And purify me of my sin. 13 (3-4)

The psalm opens with a profound recognition of wrongdoing-indeed it is difficult to see why anyone who did not admit to himself that he had gone wrong would ever turn to this psalm. The author begins by throwing himself on God's mercy, begging Him to wipe out his transgressions. The implied image is that of a book or scroll, in which are recorded all of a person's deeds. This dramatic picture makes concrete the conviction that God will judge the individual in accord with the bottom line, the sum total of good and evil recorded. The author begs God to erase his transgressions so as to alter the total in his favor. The powerful image of a heavenly ledger, 14 incorporating the twin concepts that all our deeds have consequences-that nothing is lost in our universe-and that we bear responsibility for these consequences, has reverberated in later Judaism and in the annals of her daughter religions, Christianity and Islam. Two examples suffice. In the Unetane Tokef prayer, part of the Jewish High Holy Day liturgy, we find the following: In truth You are Judge and Prosecutor and Witness, You write, seal, count and measure. You remember things forgotten. You open the Book of Remembrance and read therefrom, and behold, the seal of every man's hand is set thereto. 15 That is, a complete record of a person's deeds and thoughts, recorded in his or her own handwriting, is available for God's evaluation and judgment. In the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam we find: 12. Hesed in the Hebrew. See Chapter 24, note 18. 13. The three terms for wrongdoing used in these verses (sin, iniquity, and transgression) often seem to be synonyms, used primarily for effect and stylistic variation. This is a false impression; these three terms used for human wrongdoing have separate and distinct meanings. a) Sin (in Hebrew het) literally means "missing the mark" (as in shooting at a target with bow and arrow). It refers to wrongdoing due to error, ignorance or carelessness. b) Iniquity (in Hebrew avon) literally means "crookedness;" it refers to committing a conscious act "with malice aforethought"-doing something one knows from the start to be wrong. c) Transgression (in Hebrew pesha) literally means "rebellion;" it refers to persisting in an extended conscious course of wrongdoing. It is significant that in the psalm the sequence is from the most serious (transgression-persistence in wrongdoing) to the least serious (sinunintentional acts of evil). 14. The image would seem much older than the psalm. The author takes it for granted that the concept is well known to the population of his time. He does not need to spell it out; he simply alludes to it and leaves it to the hearer to flesh out the picture. 15. The Unetane Tokef prayer is attributed to the II th century Rabbi Amnon of Mayence, Germany, as recorded by Kalonymus ben Meshullam.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

549

The Moving Finger writes; and having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

This digression is intended simply to demonstrate the extent to which a dramatic picture can make real to the average person abstract and sophisticated concepts, and the degree to which these images can develop a life of their own and influence later generations in diverse ages and climes. Many Biblical phrases and images have had such a destiny. To return to our psalm, besides begging God to erase the record of his transgression-his premeditated and persistent evil acts-which are the most serious counts against him, 16 the author entreats God to forgive even his lesser wrongs, his iniquities and sins. Here he uses the images of washing away dirt, and smelting out embedded impurities. 17 Behind this plea lies the conviction that while God owes us nothing and that we cannot force God's hand by our actions, yet because God cares for His creatures He will, out of His love for us, forgive those who are truly repentant and will give them a new chance. Having broken through the barrier of denial, and admitting to himself the enormity of the wrong he has committed, the sinner is now capable of confession, the second stage of repentance. For I acknowledge my transgressions, And my sin is ever before me. (5)

The vefl ever-present sense of guilt makes the acknowledgement of his long persisted-in wrong imperative. 1 Against You, You only, have I sinned, And done that which is evil in Your sight; So You are justified in Your sentence, And right in Your judgment. (6)

This might sound strange coming from David; what about Uriah? Wasn't it he who was betrayed and murdered? In the Biblical view, what was done to Uriah was a crime. What made it into a sin against God was that Uriah, like all human beings, was created in the image of God. Killing someone created in God's image is a sin against God. That is why, according to the Bible, any act harming

16. See note 13 above. 17. The term purify is a technical term from the metal refining process. It means to heat an ore until the pure metal liquefies and can be poured off, leaving the impurities (the dross) behind. Just as the term wash implies water, purify implies intense heat. That is why the term purify so often is used in the context of suffering as a means of reformation. See also Chapter 37, especially note 52. 18. This thought, the pressure that a sense of guilt can bring to bear on a person, irresistibly leading to confession, is spelled out in fuller detail in Psalm 32 (also attributed to David, and assigned by some scholars to this same period-the aftermath of the Bathsheba affair): When I kept quiet, my bones wore away From my groaning all day long. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; My strength dried up as in a summer drought, Selah. I acknowledged my sin to You, And did not hide my iniquity; I said: "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord", And You did forgive the guilt of my sin. Selah. (Psalm 32:3-5)

550

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

one's fellow man is a sin against God, above and beyond its being a crime. 19 Acknowledging his guilt before God, the sinner also acknowledges the right of God to judge and pass sentence, and the justice of the sentence imposed. In the last analysis every sin is directed against God, for it reflects the basic tendency of the human will which accomplishes 'what is evil in God's sight' and thereby destroys the living contact with God .... sin is ultimately a religious concept rather than an ethical one .... and presents itself as the basic perverse tendency of the human will which rebels against God . . . The purpose which the recognition of sin must serve is that God is known to be God, and that he is acknowledged as suchand that means that God's right to make demands and call to account ... are proved to be incontestable and are vindicated. . . . The recognition of his sin becomes for the psalmist the means whereby he is able to know God-the absolute seriousness of his judgment and the abundance of his grace. 20

THE MITIGATING FACTORS Having made full confession, the defendant before the high bar of justice now has the right to present mitigating circumstances.

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin did my mother conceive me. (7) The first mitigating circumstance is the plaint of the sinner: this is the way I was made. 21 The way we would phrase this nowadays is to say its all in the genes. The sinner is saying: "I did not set out to do evil. The evil-egotistical selfishness, arrogant pride, aggressiveness and so on-is part of my genetic programming. I cannot be held to be responsible for the way I was formed even before birth, even from the moment of conception." Is the author then denying all responsibility? Hardly; he has just confessed. What he is saying is that while he is guilty for not exerting sufficient self-control to reign in his natural impulses, God should take into account Who put those natural drives into him in the first place. In other words, I agree that I am at fault for letting myself get out of hand but I cannot be held responsible for not being an angel. You are responsible for that. The second mitigating circumstance cited is that human beings have a genius for lying to themselves. We call this rationalization, making ourselves look good to ourselves. The prophet Jeremiah put it this way:

The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately corrupt; Who can understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9) Thus the sinner is asking God to take into account our human propensity not to see ourselves as we really are. We need outside help to be able to be honest with ourselves. It took Nathan to enable

19. The crimes were adultery and murder, both capital crimes in Biblical law. No one seriously considered trying and executing the king. There was no authority that could do so. David was beyond human retribution, but not beyond divine justice. For his adultery and murder in the aspect of sins against God he could be called to account, and he was. This is why, incidentally, in Biblical law one cannot avoid a capital sentence by paying compensation to the injured party or his heirs as provided for by the law codes of other contemporaneous societies. Even if they accept, their excusing the criminal does not release him from the charge. The sin is against God, and while human parties can be bought off, that has no direct effect on one's relationship with God. 20. Weiser, The Psalms: A Commentary p. 403-404. 21. It is a mistake to view this verse as a condemnation of the sexual act that leads to procreation.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

551

David to face himself. The sinner is saying that without God's help he will never be able to cut through the defenses he has built to protect himself and his self-esteem from the bitter truth. You want me to honest with myself? Without Your help it is impossible. Behold, You desire truth in the inward being; Therefore teach me wisdom in my secret heart. (8)

Insisting that a person can achieve neither honesty nor salvation by himself, the author rushes forward in a torrent of pleas for God's mercy and gracious assistance. God has broken the author with the terrible realization of guilt leaving him in isolation, cut off from the Source of his being. Only God can heal him, return the joy of living to one bereft of all light, revive the strength and steadfastness of will that make purposeful living possible. Purge me with hyssop, 22 and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I will be whiter than snow. Fill me with joy and gladness; Let the bones you have broken rejoice. Hide Your face from my sins, And erase all my iniquities. Create in me a pure heart, 0 God; Renew a steadfast spirit within me. (9-12)

The worst punishment the author can conceive, worse even than being cut off from his community-is that of being alienated from God. For God to reject him is to be cut off from everything that makes life worth living. It is to be left in a kind of spiritual solitary confinement. Returning to his metaphor of being purged with hyssop, his prayer that he be released from spiritual isolation, the author's pleas come to their climax: Cast me not out from Your presence; And take not Your holy spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of your salvation; Sustain me with a willing spirit. ( 13-14)23

22. The branch of a leafy bush used in the rite of purifying a person afflicted with leprosy so that person can leave quarantine. The phrase is used figuratively to express the plea that God cleanse one of guilt so that one can end his/her sense of isolation and return to a sense of closeness with his/her Creator. 23. If we accept the assertion that David is the author of this psalm, then we cannot overlook the probability that this crisis revived the memory of Saul, and what became of him when the spirit of the Lord departed from him (see Chapter 10). No wonder he yearns with all his heart for God's helping hand to sustain him, and to support him in his future bouts with temptation.

552

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 5 I

THE PLEDGE To support his plea for forgiveness and redemption the petitioner now pledges a total change in his behavior; he will henceforth be a living example of upright and Godly living. His example will be such as to bring other sinners to righteousness. I will teach transgressors Your ways; And sinners shall return to You. Deliver me from blood-guilt, 0 God, God of my salvation; And my tongue shall sing aloud of Your righteousness. 0 Lord, open my lips, And my mouth shall declare Your praise. ( 15-17)

Bloodguilt is not only incurred through the act of shedding human blood. The Biblical command you shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor (Leviticus 19: 16) implies that acts of omission, failing to take action to prevent threatened danger to one's fellow, is equally culpable. 24 Thus the psalmist is not simply saying that wiping the slate clean, being forgiven for the blood he personally has spilled, will unleash a torrent of thanksgiving and praise. He is also making a pledge to become a personal example to transgressors (persons hardened in evil) as well as sinners (inadvertent wrongdoers, the backsliding righteous), proclaiming God's ways and calling them to repentance. Those who take heed and return to God he will have saved. And those who don't-he will have done his best and will not be held responsible for the results of his fellow's evil ways. Above and beyond his own forgiveness and redemption, he pours forth his thankfulness to God for those he will be able to redeem, as well as having been cleared of responsibility for those who, despite his best efforts, he has failed to save. This pledge has become the example for those who, over the centuries, have found in this psalm the answer to some of their deepest spiritual needs.

24. John Goldingay has noted that the only other place in the Bible where the terms "deliverance" and "blood" are closely associated is in the Book of Ezekiel:

Son of man, I have appointed you a watchman for the House of Israel; whenever you hear a word from My mouth you shall give them warning from Me. If I say to the wicked: "You shall surely die," and you give him no warning, nor speak to him to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life-that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way-he shall die in his iniquity; but you will have saved your life. (Ezekiel3: 17-19; 33:7-9 is virtually identical). The prophet, referring to his vocation of watchman over Israel, in fulfilling his obligation to warn the wicked man to turn from his way. Thus he avoids the possibility of the wicked man's blood being required at his (the watchman's) hand; of acquiring bloodguilt. "A concern with deliverance from bloodguilt in these passages in Ezekiel, then, is connected with fulfilling an obligation to pass on God's call to repentance and his offer of grace. Failure to deliver this testimony may lead to the death of the sinner, and the responsibility for this death belongs to the neglectful 'watchman' .... It is in this sense that he (the psalmist) prays: 'deliver me from incurring bloodguilt.' He prays to be kept from being answerable for the death of other sinners by failing to challenge and invite them to return to God." (Goldingay, "Psalm 51:16a", p. 389-390)

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

553

THE SACRIFICES OF GOD By this time there must be some readers who are asking themselves, where does sacrifice fit into this? From the very beginning of the book we have emphasized that in Biblical times the main form that religion took was in sacrifice and its attendant rituals, and that the very purpose of sacrifice was to bring the worshiper close to God. 25 Was there no offering designed for the sinner to expiate his sin? And indeed there was, the hatat (usually translated as "sin offering"). But the hatat was designed solely to bring pardon for sin (that is, inadvertent wrongdoing), and was no substitute for repentance but rather an offering that supplemented it. Its purpose was to remove guilt. The very fact that the sin was inadvertent, and that the sinner feels guilt and brings an offering, means that he has undergone inner purification. 26 But for premeditated wrong, deeds committed with malice aforethought (iniquity, transgression) there is no sacrificial offering. One cannot atone for conscious wrong through ritual. The laws of the Torah did not permit Israelites to expiate intentional or premeditated offenses by means of sacrifice. 27 This was the law. However, as in most cases, the average person saw things differently. There was a widely held conviction that one could gain forgiveness for all wrongs simply by performing the ritual act of bringing an offering without any connection to remorse or repentance. The sacrifice was supposed to do the work of the heart. The prophets determinedly and persistently attacked this misconception. One of the most famous of these, Isaiah I: 10-17 has already been quoted?8 Other prophets were equally vociferous in their denunciations. 29 And this brings us back to the conclusion of the passage from Hosea with which we began our analysis of repentance:

Take with you words, And return to the Lord; Say to Him: "Forgive all iniquity, And accept that which is good. " So will we render [in place of] bulls [The offering of] our lips. (Hosea 14:3) What the prophet is saying is that God wants remorse, confession and resolve to change, not sacrifices (bulls). These are what constitute true repentance. It is this theme, the rejection of the mistaken view that sacrificing animals can gain God's forgiveness in favor of the conviction that true repentance is the way to God's mercy that forms the climax of our psalm.

For you do not desire a sacrifice, Were I to bring a burnt offering You would not be pleased. (18)

25. See Prologue, note 9. 26. "The inadvertent sinner needs forgiveness not because of his act per se ... his act is forgiven because of the offender's inadvertence and remorse-but because ofthe consequences of his act." (Milgrom, The Anchor Bible: Leviticus, p. 256) All our acts have a ripple effect that impinges on our surroundings. Wrongdoing undermines and pollutes society in general. It is to gain forgiveness for the social effects of one's wrongdoings that one brings a public offering, not for the sin itself. For this repentance is sufficient. 27. Levine, The JPS Torah Commentary: Leviticus, p. 3. 28. See "The Burden of Prophecy" in Chapter 2. This misconception, that ritual-formalized acts-can substitute for the "service of the heart" persists to this day. Isaiah attacks attendance at religious worship services and the observance of Sabbaths and Holy Days as much as he does sacrifices-all acts that do not proceed from the heart are equally abhorrent to God. 29. See Amos 2:6-8, Jeremiah 7:21-26, Hosea 8: ll-13 among others.

554

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

Then what does God want. Words? Confession? The author goes beyond the expression of remorse to what lies behind it, returning to a theme raised in Psalm 34. The Lord is near to the brokenhearted, He saves the crushed in spirit. (Psalm 34: 19)

The nearness and compassion of God for those crushed and broken by circumstances becomes transformed in our psalm into the human condition desired by the Lord; broken pride, the arrogance that has been reduced to humility becomes the ideal offering that a compassionate deity cannot refuse. Those who break their pride, admit past failings and are truly remorseful, will always be acceptable to God. 30 The sacrifices of Gotf1 are a broken spirit; A broken and a contrite heart, 0 God, You will not despise. (19)

THE SOCIAL POSTSCRIPT With these words the psalm concludes. The final two verses that conclude the psalm as we know it today form no part of it. Indeed, in both word and spirit they contradict the main thesis of the psalm. Most commentators agree that these verses are a postscript, tacked on to the psalm many years after its composition. But why should anyone want to tack on anything to this magnificent outpouring of contrition? We must remember the opening line of the psalm: For the choirmaster: A Psalm of David

This psalm was part of the repertoire of psalms performed by the Levitical guild in David's shrine, which became Solomon's Temple. The people who sang this psalm were religious professionals, part of the "religious establishment," committed to the forms of organized religion. This does not mean that they thought sacrifice and the Temple ends in themselves. Of course there may have been some who indeed harbored such primitive religious beliefs. But in the main I think we can be certain that they too were aware that rituals are merely means to an end-that of the communicant at one with his Creator. But I think that there were some who became increasingly uneasy with the radical one-sidedness of the psalm. The solitary soul alone with its Creator has always been seen in Israel as only one side of the coin, extreme and dangerously unbalanced. Except for brief periods most human beings cannot exist alone, but in the company of others. Humans are inherently social creatures, and not to take the social dimension into account would leave 30. If we are correct in our assumption of the Davidic authorship of this psalm, then this statement of the place of the "service of the heart" in the hierarchy of religious priorities antedates the pronouncements of the classic prophets by several centuries, though we find the same basic idea proclaimed by Samuel a generation before David; Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, As in obedience to the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to hearken than the fat of lambs. (l Samue/15:22) See Chapter 9. The conviction that faith and obedience to the moral imperative of God's will is the absolute priority of religion goes back to earliest origins of the Faith of Israel. 31. While the sense of this phrase, "the sacrifice that is acceptable to God," is in the singular, the Hebrew is in the plural. As the phrase has become part of the English language, we have rendered it literally as it was in the classic King James Bible (A V) translation.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

555

the picture dangerously unbalanced. So may have run the thinking of the person who decided to tack on a postscript, calling attention to both the national and spiritual center of Israel, and to formal organized religion. What he may have been saying was, once you have repented, once you have come to terms with God and been granted His pardon, remember that you have to return to day-to-day existence. The new life you have pledged to live is among your people; your connection with God, for the most part, will be through the traditional forms sanctified by centuries. Don't try to turn your back on your people and its traditional forms and live as a recluse. This is not the path pleasing to God. So he concluded the psalm with a prayer. The purpose of this prayer, as I see it, was to remind the penitent that a coin has two sides, and to help balance the overall picture with a prayer for the public welfare. This prayer can certainly serve this purpose for us. May it please You to do good to Zion; Build the walls of Jerusalem Then will You desire righteous sacrifices, Burnt and whole offerings; Then shall they offer bulls on Your altar. 32 (20-21)

And now, having analyzed the psalm verse by verse, it is time to view it as a whole.

PSALM 51 1.

For the choirmaster: A Psalm of David;

2.

When Nathan the prophet came to him after he had gone in to Bathsheba.

3.

Have mercy on me, 0 God, As befits Your steadfast love; In keeping with Your abundant compassion Erase my transgressions.

4.

Wash me thoroughly of my iniquity, And purify me of my sin.

5.

For I acknowledge my transgressions, And my sin is ever before me.

6.

Against You, You only, have I sinned, And done that which is evil in Your sight; So You are justified in Your sentence, And right in Your judgment.

7.

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin did my mother conceive me.

32. If those scholars who date this postscript to the Babylonian exile-an era when both Jerusalem and Temple Jay in ruins-are correct, then this prayer becomes one of national restoration and is especially poignant. In that age, when the individual Israelite lacked support of the nation-state and the sanctified forms of religion and was thrown almost totally on his or her own, the need to redress the balance of the psalm may have been felt to be especially acute.

APPENDIX 2: PSALM 51

556

8.

Behold, You desire truth in the inward being; Therefore teach me wisdom in my secret heart.

9.

Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.

10.

Fill me with33 joy and gladness; Let the bones You have broken rejoice.

11.

Hide Your face from my sins, And erase all my iniquities.

12.

Create in me a pure heart, 0 God; Renew a steadfast spirit within me.

13.

Cast me not out from Your presence; And take not Your holy spirit from me.

14.

Restore to me the joy of Your salvation; Sustain me with a willing spirit.

15.

I will teach transgressors Your ways, And sinners shall return to You.

16.

Deliver me from bloodguilt, 0 God, God of my salvation; And my tongue shall sing aloud of Your righteousness.

17.

0 Lord, open my lips, And my mouth shall declare Your praise.

18.

For you do not desire a sacrifice, Were I to bring a burnt-offering You would not be pleased.

19.

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; A broken and contrite heart, 0 God, You will not despise.

* * * 20.

May it please You to do good to Zion; Build the walls of Jerusalem.

21.

Then will You desire righteous sacrifice, Burnt and whole offerings; Then shall they offer bulls on Your altar.

33. Reading with Syr.; MT reads Make me hear.

APPENDIX3

WHO'S WHO IN THE BOOK OF SAMUEL (INCLUDING SOME WHO HAVE NO PART IN SAMUEL BUT ARE NONETHELESS MENTIONED IN TIDS BOOK) Above and beyond the human actors there is One Who dominates, overtly and covertly, the entire Book of Samuel, and indeed the entire Bible: known alternatively as God, the Lord, the Lord of hosts Who sits upon the cherubim, the Eternal of Israel, Creator of the universe and all in it, Redeemer of Israel and Judge of mankind etc. His role in the Book of Samuel is that of the Director of the entire drama as well as the Critic of how all the actors play their parts. Aaron: Older brother of Moses, ftrst High Priest in Israel and founder of the priesthood. Abi-albon the Arbathite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite order of "The Thirty." Abiathar: Priest; son of Ahimelech and great-great grandson of Eli; companion and personal chaplain to David from his outlaw days; ultimately High Priest in Jerusalem. Abiel: Father of Kish and Ner, grandfather of Saul. Abiezer from Anatoth: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Abigail of Carmel: Wife of Nahal, one of the richest men in Judah; later David's third wife and mother of his son Chiliab (or Daniel). Abigail, daughter of Nahash: Older half-sister of David; mother of Amassa. Abijah: Second son of Samuel; a corrupt judge in Beersheba. Abimelech: Son of the Judge Gideon (Jerubbaal). While attempting to impose his rule upon Israel he was killed by a woman who dropped a millstone on his head. Abinadab: Prince; second son of Saul, killed by the Philistines at the Battle of Gilboa. Abinadab (son of Jesse): Second of Jesse's eight sons, brother of David. Abinadab: Israelite farmer in whose dwelling the Ark of the Covenant was stored for over half a century; roughly from 1050- 990 BCE. Abishag the Shunamite: A beautiful girl chosen to nurse King David in his declining years. Abishai: Son of David's sister Zeruiah and younger brother of Joab. A brilliant military commander he loyally served his uncle David. Abita/: Sixth wife of David, mother of prince Shephatiah. Abner: Commander in Chief of the Israelite army during the rule of his ftrst cousin, Saul, and of Saul's successor, /sh-bosheth. Assassinated by Joab in Hebron c. 1000 BCE. Absalom: Prince; son of David and princess Maacah of Geshur; second in order of birth among David's surviving sons; the murderer of his older half-brother Amnon. Instigator of a coup d'etat against David, he was killed in the battle of the Forest of Ephraim. Achish: King (or more properly "Seren") of the Philistine city of Gath. When David fled from Saul he took service with Achish as a mercenary. Adriel the Maholathite: Husband of princess Merab, oldest daughter of Saul. Adonijah: Prince; son of David and Haggith; third in order of birth among David's surviving sons. Killed by Benaiah on Solomon's orders shortly after Solomon became king.

558

APPENDIX 3: WHO'S WHO IN SAMUEL

Adoram (or more usually Adoniram): Member of David's cabinet in charge of the corvee or forced labor battalions, he served King Solomon in the same capacity. Stoned to death in Shechem c. 920. Agag: King of the Amalekites; defeated by Saul and executed by Samuel in Gil gal. Ahiam, son of Sharar: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Ahijah: Priest; great-grandson of Eli and chaplain to Saul's army. Ahimaaz: Priest; son of Zndok. Ahimelech: Son of Ahitub, brother of Ahijah, Saul's army chaplain, and great-grandson of Eli. Chief priest of the sanctuary of Nob, he was killed by Doeg the Edomite, at Saul's order, for aiding David. Ahimelech the Hittite: A foreign soldier of fortune that joined David in his outlaw days. Ahinoam: the daughter of Ahimaz, wife of Saul, mother of Jonathan, Abinadab, Malchi-shua, /shbosheth, Merab and Michal. Ahinoam of Jezreel: Second wife of David, mother of his oldest son, prince Amnon. Ahio: Son of Abinadab, brother to Uzzah. Ahithophel: Brilliant and highly respected advisor to David; father of Eliam and grandfather of Bathsheba. Key figure in Absalom's coup d'etat against David, he committed suicide when he realized that the revolt would fail. Amassa: Nephew of David; product of a union between David's half-sister Abigail and one Ithra the /shmaelite. Served as general during his cousin Absalom's attempt to seize the throne, later Commander in Chief of David's army. Murdered by Joab at Gibeon. Ammiel: A great landholder in the Gilead. His son, Machir provided refuge for Mephibosheth. Amnon: Prince, son of David and Ahinoam of Jezreel. The oldest of David's sons he was heir apparent to the throne; murdered by his half-brother Absalom in revenge for the rape of Absalom's sister, Tamar. Amos: First of the Classical (or literary) prophets, active during the 8th century BCE. Though a native of the Kingdom of Judah his prophetic career took place in the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Araunah: Jebusite owner of a threshing floor north of Jerusalem, which became the site of Solomon's Temple. Armoni: Son of Saul and Rizpah; impaled by the Gibeonites at Gibeah. Asahel: Son of Zeruiah, David's sister, younger brother of Joab and Abishai. Killed by Abner in the aftermath of the Battle of Gibeon. Baanah: Benjamite battalion commander in Saul's army. He and his brother Rechab assassinated King /sh-bosheth in Mahanaim c. 1000 BCE. Bani the Gadite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Barak: Son of Avinoam; Deborah's general who defeated the Canaanite general Sisera at the Battle ofMt. Tabor. Barzillai: A resident of Rogelim and one of the greatest landowners in the Gilead; provided vital assistance to David and his followers during Absalom's rebellion. Bathsheba: Daughter of Eliam, granddaughter of Ahitophel, wife of Uriah the Hittite. Following David's liaison with her and the subsequent murder of her husband, she became David's wife; the mother of King Solomon. Benaiah, son of Jehoiada: Commander of David's corps of foreign mercenaries and of the king's personal bodyguard. Caleb: Companion with Joshua in the spying out of the land of Canaan; awarded Hebron and its region as his family's possession after the Conquest of Canaan. Chiliab: Prince; son of David and Abigail of Carmel (in Chronicles his name is listed as Daniel). Chimham: Probably the son of Barzillai; given a life pension by David at the request of Barzillai. Daniel: Prince; alternate name of the son of David and Abigail of Carmel. See Chiliab.

WHO'S WHO IN THE BOOK OF SAMUEL

559

David: (c. 1032-962 BCE). Youngest son of Jesse of Bethlehem; warrior, liberator of his people from Philistine domination, statesman, empire-builder, King of Judah, King of Israel and conqueror of Jerusalem. By the third decade of his reign he was overlord of all the Ancient Near East between Egypt and the Euphrates River. An extremely complex and multi-talented individual of genius, he was a remarkable musician, a superb poet and a deeply devout religious figure. Some of his religious poetry survives in the Book of Psalms, some in the Book of Samuel. Deborah: Prophet and Judge in Israel several generations before Eli; the initiator of a successful war of liberation against the Canaanite kingdom of Hazor. Her ode of triumph, known as the "Song of Deborah" is one of the greatest works of early Israelite poetry. Doeg the Edomite: Chief Herdsman of King Saul. He served as Saul's hatchet man, massacring the priests of Nob. Egla: Seventh wife of David, mother of prince Ithream. Eleazar, son of Dodo: Israelite warrior; member of the super-elite order of "The Three." Elhanan, son of Dodo: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Elhanan, son of lair: Israelite warrior, killer of Lahmi, brother of Goliath. Eli: High Priest in Shiloh and Judge of Israel in the frrst half of the 11th century BCE; father of Hophni and Phinehas, grandfather of Ichabod. Eliab: Oldest of Jesse's eight sons, brother of David. Eliaba ofShaalbon: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Eliada: Prince; son of David. Eliam: Son of Ahithophel. A high-ranking officer in David's army and a member of the elite ''Thirty," he was the father of Bathsheba. Elika the Harodite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Eliphelet: Prince; son of David. Eliphelet, son of Ahasbai: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Elishama: Prince; son of David. Elishua: Prince; son of David. Elkanah: Prosperous farmer; husband of Hannah and Peninnah, father of Samuel. Eshbaal: The original name of Saul's youngest son. See Ish-bosheth. Gad: Prophet, companion and advisor to David during his outlaw days and in the early years of his reign. Gareb the Ithrite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Gideon: Judge of Israel, who liberated Israel from an invasion of Midianites, Amalekites and "people of the East." Offered the crown of Israel, he refused it on principle. Goliath of Gath: Philistine champion killed by David in single combat, the act that launched David on his half-century career. Hadadezer, son of Rehob: King of Zobah and overlord of all the Aramean kingdoms; defeated by David at the Battle of Helam. Haggith: Fifth wife of David, mother of prince Adonijah. Hannah: wife of Elkanah and mother of Samuel. One of the outstanding religious figures in Scripture she is the author of the psalm known as "Hannah's prayer." Hanun: Son of Nahash, king of Ammon. Helez the Paltite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Heleb, son of Baanah of Netophah: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Hezrai of Carmel: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Hiddai ofNahale-gaash: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Hiram: King of the Phoenician commercial powerhouse Tyre and ally of David. Hophni: Priest, son of Eli. Killed by the Philistines at the Battle of Eben-ezer c. 1050 BCE. Hosea: 8th century BCE prophet who championed a theology of care and loving-kindness. Hushai the Archite: Trusted advisor to King David. /bhar: Prince; son of David born in Jerusalem.

560

APPENDIX 3: WHO'S WHO IN SAMUEL

/chabod: Son of Phinehas, grandson of Eli. /gal, son of Nathan of Zobah: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Ira, son of lkkesh of Tekoa: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Ira the lthrite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Ira the Jairite: A member of David's cabinet during his last years. Isaiah ben Amoz: Prophet active in 8th century BCE Jerusalem. Jshbi-benob: Philistine warrior killed by Abishai. Jsh-bosheth: King. Youngest son of King Saul; assassinated by two of his army commanders, Rechab and Baanah. lthra the Jshmaelite: father of Amassa. Jttai the Gittite: Philistine commander of mercenary soldiers in the service of David. Jttai, son of Ribai of Gibeah: Israelite warrior; member of he elite "Thirty." Jacob: (Also named Israel). The last of the three Patriarchs and the founder of the people of Israel, who are named after him. Japhia: Prince; son of David. !ashen the Gizonite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Jedidiah: (beloved of the Lord); alternate name given by Nathan to Solomon. Jehoshaphat, son of Ahilud: Secretary of State (Mazkir) in David's cabinet. Jephthah: Judge from the Gilead who led Israel to victory over the Ammonites. Jeremiah: Prophet active late 7th--early 6th century BCE Jerusalem. Jerubbaal: Original name of Gideon, Judge of Israel. Jerubbesheth: corruption of Jerubbaal. See Gideon. Jesse: Judean rancher, resident in Bethlehem. Father of David. Joab: Son of David's older sister, Zeruiah; brilliant military leader; unswervingly loyal to his uncle, he served David from his outlaw years, rising to the rank of Commander in Chief of Israel's armies; killed by Benaiah on King Solomon's orders shortly after David's death c 966 BCE. Joel: Oldest son of Samuel; a corrupt judge in Beersheba. Jonadab: Son of David's brother Shammah (or Shimeah); a "fixer." Jonathan: Crown prince and heir apparent to the throne of his father Saul; brilliant and charismatic military commander and devoted life-long friend of David; father of prince Mephibosheth. Killed at the Battle of Gilboa (c. I 003 BCE). Jonathan, son of Abiathar: Priest in Jerusalem. Joram: Prince; son of King Toi of Hamath. He headed the delegation that negotiated the treaty of alliance between Hamath and Israel. Josheb-basshebeth: Chief of David's super-elite warrior honor group ''The Three." Joshua of Beth-shemesh: The owner of the field outside of Beth-shemesh where the cart bearing the Ark of the Covenant back from Philistia halted. Joshua, the son of Nun: Aide-de-camp and personal servant of Moses. Upon the death of Moses he led the tribes of Israel in the Conquest of Canaan. Kish: Established landowner domiciled in Gibeah of Benjamin. Father of Saul. Lahmi: Philistine warrior, brother of Goliath. Killed by Elhanan son of lair. Machir: One of the greatest landholders of the Gilead. Mephibosheth lodged with him from the age of five, when he was orphaned. During Absalom's rebellion he provided vital assistance to David and his followers. Maharai of Netophah: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Malchishua: Prince; third son of Saul, killed by the Philistines at the Battle of Gilboa. Maoch: Father of Achish, Philistine King of Gath. Mebunai the Hushathite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Mephibaal: Original name of a son of Saul and his concubine Rizpah. See Mephibosheth.

WHO'S WHO IN THE BOOK OF SAMUEL

561

Mephibosheth: 1) Prince of the House of Saul; son of Jonathan. His original name was Merib-baal. Crippled at the age of five, he spent years in rural obscurity before being recalled to the capital and having his family estates restored. He ended his life a pensioner of King David. 2) Son of Saul and his concubine Rizpah. His original name was Mephibaal. Killed by the Gibeonites and impaled at Gibeah. Merab: Princess, oldest daughter of Saul married to Adriel the Maholathite. Merib-baal: The original name of Jonathan's son. See Mephibosheth. Mica: Son of Mephibosheth. Michal: Princess, second daughter of Saul and the first wife of David. Separated from her husband and forced into marriage with Paltiel, son of Laish, she and David were eventually reunited. They had no children. Moses: Prophet, lawgiver and liberator of the Israelites from Egyptian bondage; the most important single personage in all Israelite history. Nahal: Wealthy Judean rancher from the clan of Caleb; first husband of Abigail. Naharai the Beerothite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty" and Joab's arms bearer. Nahash: King of Ammon. His defeat by Saul at the siege of Jabesh-gilead was the dramatic opening of Saul's royal career. Nahash: King of Ammon prior to approximately 983 BCE (possibly the same as Nahash above, possibly his son by the same name); he entered into an alliance with the Aramean confederacy, headed by Hadadezer, directed against Israel. Nathan: Prince; ninth son of David. Nathan: Prophet of the Lord, "prophet-in-residence" and courtier during the latter part of David's reign; bearer of God's judgment on David's adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah; father to Azariah and Zabud who served in Solomon's government. Nepheg: Prince; son of David. Ner: Brother of Kish, uncle of Saul and father of Abner. Obed-edom: Owner of the house in the Judean highlands where the Ark of the Covenant was warehoused for three months before the final stage of its journey to Jerusalem. Paarai the Arbite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Paltiel son of Laish: Husband of princess Michal during David's years as an outlaw; she was forcibly removed from him by Abner as part of a deal with David. Peninnah: wife of Elkanah and co-wife of Hannah. Phinehas: Corrupt priest, son of Eli; killed by the Philistines at the Battle of Eben-ezer. Rechab: Benjamite battalion commander in Saul's army. He and his brother Baanah assassinated King Ish-bosheth in Mahanaim. Rei: Supporter of Solomon in the succession struggle. Rimmon: Benjamite, resident of Beeroth. The father of Rechab and Baanah, the assassins of Ishbosheth. Rizpah: Concubine of Saul (and mistress of Abner) she bore Saul two sons Armoni and Mephibosheth. She is notable as the catalyst that triggered two of the major turning points in her era. Samuel: Son of Elkanah and Hannah, and ward of Eli, as Prophet and last of the Judges, he dominated the second half of the 11th century in Israel. He instituted the monarchy, anointing and presiding over the coronation of Saul, and later anointed David as Saul's successor. Founder of the prophetic movement in Israel, his leadership decisively influenced the direction the religion of Israel would take in the centuries to come. Saph: Philistine warrior killed by Sibbecai the Hushathite. Saul: First king of Israel. Anointed by the prophet Samuel, he created the basic institutions of Israelite monarchy and the nucleus of a standing army. Initially successful in breaking the Philistine hegemony over the Israelite highlands and overcoming many surrounding enemies, his break

562

APPENDIX 3: WHO'S WHO IN SAMUEL

with Samuel and increasing mental instability led to an increasingly dysfunctional rule. His tragic career ended in the total defeat of the Israelite armies and his death, along with three of his sons, at the Battle of Gilboa c. ll 03 BCE. Seraiah: David's personal secretary (Sofer) and Secretary to the Cabinet. Shamma, son of Age: Israelite warrior; member of the super-elite ''Three." Shammah (or Shimeah): Third of Jesse's eight sons, brother of David and father of Jonadab and Jonathan. Shammah the Hararite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Shammah the Harodite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite ''Thirty." Shammua: Prince; seventh son of David. Sheba, son of Bichri: A Benjamite who raised a rebellion against David. Shephatiah: Prince; son of David and Abita/. Born in Hebron. Shimeah: Alternate spelling of Shammah, older brother of David. Shimei: Supporter of Solomon in the succession struggle. Shimei, the son of Gera: A Benjamite of the same clan as Saul (Matri). Loyal to the memory of Saul and his House, he considered David a bloody usurper. Shobab: Prince; eighth son of David. Shobach: Aramean general, Hadadezer' s commander of the united Aramean armies. Defeated and killed by David at the Battle of Helam. Shobi, the son of Nahash: David's governor of the vassal kingdom of Ammon. He is the brother of King Hanun who was deposed and/or killed by David at the conclusion of the Ammonite war. Sibbecai the Hushathite: Member of the elite ''Thirty." Killer of the Philistine warrior Saph. Sisera: Canaanite general of the kingdom of Hazor. His defeat at the hands of general Barak and the prophet Deborah at the battle of Mt. Tabor marked the end of the last major center of Canaanite resistance to the Israelite settlement of the Promised Land. Solomon: King; second son of David and Bathsheba. By virtue of palace intrigue he was confirmed as his father's successor during David's lifetime. His one permanent achievement was, by building the Temple, to make permanent the process that his father David had initiated of turning Jerusalem into a holy city. Talmai: King of Geshur, father of princess Maacah who was David's fourth wife, and grandfather of Absalom and Tamar. Tamar: l. Princess; daughter of David and princess Maacah of Geshur, and sister of Absalom. 2. Daughter of Prince Absalom. Toi: King of the Hittite kingdom ofHamath. An ally of David. Uriah the Hittite: High-ranking offtcer in David's army and member of the elite ''Thirty;" husband of Bathsheba. Murdered at David's command so as to cover up his affair with Uriah's wife. Uzzah: Son of Abinadab, struck down while conveying the Ark of the Covenant from Baale-judah to Jerusalem. 'hldok: Priest; apparently originally from Hebron, he became chief priest in charge of the Mishkanthe tent-shrine in Gibeon. He and Abiathar served as co-High Priests during David's reign and had seats in David's cabinet. A backer of Solomon, he was rewarded by being given by the new king the sole position of High Priest in the new Temple. 'hllmon the Ahohite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Zechariah: Prophet active during the ftrst generation after the return from the Babylonian Exile, his ministry beginning 520 BCE. Zelek the Ammonite: Israelite warrior; member of the elite "Thirty." Zeruiah: Older sister of David, mother of Joab, Abishai and Asahel. Ziba: Originally a steward in Saul's employ, he and his 15 sons are assigned by David to manage and work the estates of Mephibosheth.

APPENDIX 4: TIMELINE

KEEPING TRACK OF WHEN IT HAPPENED All methods of assigning dates to events that occurred three thousand years ago must, of necessity, be uncertain. The dates given below are based on the presuppositions spelled out in this book, and assume the basic historicity of Samuel and the integrity of the author. The finds of archaeology, though often ambiguous, have been used wherever possible to anchor the chronology. For example there is a general consensus dating the destruction of Shiloh to about 1050 BCE. This date provides the earliest anchor to the dating system used here, one which is probably not off by more than five or ten years overall. But the real use of this list is to clarify how the events presented in Samuel relate to each other, how they fit together chronologically. At this level the sequence is possibly accurate to within two or three years. The more speculative dates are indicated by @.

EVENT

AGE OF DAVID

@1070

Birth of Samuel

1050

Battle of Eben-ezer; destruction of Shiloh

@1033

First War oflndependence

1032

Birth of David Saul crowned king of Israel Amalekite campaign; Samuel breaks with Saul David kills Goliath David flees Saul's court; start ofthe "Wilderness Period" David deserts to Gath; receives Ziklag in fief

DATE

10

@1022

16 25 28

@1020 @1016 1007 1004 1003

Battle of Gilboa: Saul dies; Ish-bosheth crowned in Mahanaim David crowned king of Judah in Hebron Civil War; Ish-bosheth assassinated

30

1002

David crowned king of Israel Philistine wars; David conquers Jerusalem

32

1000

564

APPENDIX 4: KEEPING TRACK OF WHEN IT HAPPENED

EVENT

AGE OF DAVID

DATE

David moves capital to Jerusalem Builds palace; moves Ark to Jerusalem Moabite war Wants to build House for God

38

995

46

@990 986

Aramean wars

48-49

984-3

Bathsheba affair

49

983

David pensions Mephibosheth (aged 25?) Earliest possible date for Solomon's birth

51

981

52 54

980 978

Edomite war

54

978

Return of Absalom from Exile Absalom freed from house arrest

57

59

975 973

Absalom lays foundations for rebellion

59-63

973-69

Absalom's putsch; defeat and death in Trans-Jordan Sheba's rebellion and defeat

64

968

Solomon crowned king (serves as regent until David's death)

69

963

Death of David

70

962

Rape ofTamar Murder of Amnon

APPENDIX 5: TIMELINE

D DATE

PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE EVENTS IN THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL

EVENTS IN WORLD HISTORY

1800-1600

The Patriarchal Period ?

Code of Hammurabi.

1600-1400

Israel in Egypt ?

Hyksos expelled from Egypt; New Empire begins.

1400-1300

Israel in Egypt.

Egypt rules Canaan; Amenophis IV (Akhnaten) fails in attempt to reform Egyptian religion.

1300-1190

Israel Exits Egypt; Conquest of Canaan.

The Minoan Empire collapses; the Peoples of the Sea invade Egypt and are repulsed; New Empire disintegrates; Egypt loses control of Canaan; the Trojan War.

1190-1020

Age ofthe Judges; Age of Samuel; Destruction of Shiloh

Philistines arrive in Canaan; Arameans establish states in Syria.

1022-1003

Saul king of Israel.

1002-962

David rules the kingdoms of Judah and Israel; makes Jerusalem his capital, conquers all the states between Egypt and Mesopotamia.

962-922

Age of Solomon; Temple built in Jerusalem; Davidic Empire begins to disintegrate.

Beginning of Egyptian and Assyrian resurgence.

566

APPENDIX 5: PUTIING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE

920-875

The kingdom of Israel successfully revolts against the House of David; the United Kingdoms permanently separate and the Davidic Empire collapses; Judah unsuccessfully attempts to reconquer Israel.

Egypt invades region, then collapses. Rise of Damascus as the major power in Syria; rise of Assyria.

875-740

Judah and Israel learn to live together and cooperate; continual war with Syria; Ahab, Jezebel and the struggle with Elijah over the faith of Israel. The beginning ofthe age of Classical Prphecy: Amos and Hosea.

Assyrian attempt to conquer Western Asia checked at Battle of Qarqar (853); Carthage founded as a Phoenician colony in North Africa.

740-721

Decline oflsrael and final destruction by Assyria (721 ); Judah survives as a vassal of the Assyrians. Prophets: Isaiah, Micah.

Damascus falls (732); Assyria rules all Western Asia.

721-586

Judah subject to Assyria. King Josiah implements a major religious reform (622), canonizing the Book of Deuteronomy. Judah, now subject to Babylonia, rebels. In 586 Jerusalem falls, the Temple is destroyed, and much of the surviving population is exiled to Babylon. Prophets: Nahum and Jeremiah.

Assyria conquers Egypt. With the death of Assurbanipal the Assyrian Empire begins to disintegrate: Assyria is expelled from Egypt; Babylonia rebels; Nineveh falls (612). The Assyrian Empire is divided between the Babylonians and the Medes. Solon reforms Athens' laws.

586-538

Babylonian Exile; Cyrus frees Jews (538) and permits them to return and rebuild their Temple in Jerusalem. Prophets: Ezekiel and DeuteroIsaiah.

Cyrus the Great unites the Medes and the Persians, conquers Lydia (547) and captures Babylon (539) thus creating the greatest empire the world had known. Pisistratus seizes power in Athens.

538-430

42,000 Jews return to Jerusalem, rebuild the Temple (515) andrefound the commonwealth of Judea. Ezra and Nehemiah rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, canonize the Torah and institute it as the law of the land (445). Prophets: Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. THE BIBLICAL AGE COMES TO A CLOSE

Persia conquers Egypt and the Greek states of Asia Minor, invades Greece and is defeated at Marathon and Salamis. The Greeks now started fighting among themselves (the Peloponnesian Wars between Athens and Sparta). The Age of Pericles and the Athenian Empire, Aeschylus and Sophocles.

431-404

The Great Peloponnesian War. Athens loses. Plays of Euripides and Aristophanes.

APPENDIX 5: PU'ITING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE

404-338

Continual warfare in Greece and major social change. Macedonia consolidates as a major state; Philip of Macedon conquers Greece at the battle of Chaeronea. Plato.

338-323

Philip assassinated (336); Alexander the Great conquers the Persian Empire (334323) and dies in Babylon. Aristotle.

323-200

Judea becomes part of the Ptolemaic Empire. Antiochus III (the Great) pushes the Ptolemaic Empire back to the border of Egypt; Judea becomes part of the Seleucid Empire.

The Era of the Diadochi (the successors of Alexander) who battle for the succession, and end by dividing it among the survivors of the wars. Seleucus getting Syria and Mesopotamia and Ptolemy getting Egypt. First Punic War (264-241) Rome defeats Carthage and occupies Sicily. Second Punic War (21820 I) sees total defeat of Carthage. Rome now master of the Western Mediterranean.

199-165

Decree of Antiochus IV outlaws practice of Judaism; Temple profaned Dec. 168. Revolt of Judas Maccabeus and his brothers. Temple rededicated Dec. 165.

Rome defeats Philip V (199) and Greece becomes a protectorate of Rome. At Magnesia Rome defeats Antiochus III (190) and detaches Asia Minor from the Seleucid Empire. Rome is now the sole superpower.

164-63

Judah dies and his brothers continue the struggle against the Seleucid Empire. Judea declared an independent state by Simon (143). He and his successors (the Hasmoneans) are both kings and High Priests. Independence ends with the capture of Jerusalem by Pompey (63). Judea now a vassal of Rome.

Social and civil war in Rome: the Gracchi, Marius and Sulla; Pompey defeats the pirates, Mithradates and Tigranes (66), and annexes Syria. Rome now effectively rules the entire Hellenistic world to the Euphrates.

63 BCE70CE

Herod declared king of Judea by Rome (40), rebuilds the Temple. Upon his death Rome assumes direct rule of Judea (4). The Jews revolt against Rome (66-70 CE); Jerusalem and the Temple both destroyed.

Julius Caesar defeats Pompey but is assassinated. In the resulting civil war Octavian defeats Antony, becoming the first Emperor of Rome. Persecutions of Christians begin in Rome. Nero, last of the Caesars, dies in Greece. General Vespasian declared emperor of Rome.

567

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES NOTE: Items appearing in bold type cross-reference to other items in the GLOSSARY. Items appearing in italics cross-reference to items appearing in WHO'S WHO IN THE BOOK OF SAMUEL. Abel of Beth-maacah: Fortified town at the northernmost extremity of Israel, about 110 miles north of Jerusalem and about five miles northwest of Dan. Adullam: Ancient Canaanite city located about ten miles southeast of Gath. It was destroyed in the Conquest. David made his base in the caves found in the vicinity of the ruined city during his outlaw years. Amalek: A collective noun designating all Amalekites; the Amalekite nation. Amalekites: A semi-nomadic people based in the Negeb wilderness south of Beersheba. Their vicious harassment of the Israelites, from the Exodus period onwards, resulted in their becoming the archetypal enemy of Israel. Ammonites: The inhabitants of a Semitic kingdom to the east of the Gilead, with Rabbath-ammon (the present Amman) as its capital. Anathoth: Israelite town, about four miles northeast of Jerusalem, destined to become famous as the birthplace of the prophet Jeremiah. Anoint: to designate someone as divinely sanctified by pouring perfumed oil upon his head. The person of one anointed is inviolable. Aphek: The site of Philistine mobilization prior to the battles of Eben-ezer and Gilboa; it is located at the northeast border area of Philistia, about thirty miles north of Gath and twenty-two miles west of Shiloh. Arabah, The: The Hebrew term for the Jordan Valley. This includes the depression surrounding the Dead Sea (the lowest point on the surface of the earth) and continuing south to the Gulf of Aqaba. Its extension is the Great Africa Rift. Arabia (The Arabian Desert): The desert region to the east of the Fertile Crescent. Arameans: A people who settled the regions to the northeast of Israel. Formed into numerous kingdoms (the name of the kingdom prefixed by the term "Aram"=Aramean (as Aram-zoba), the region became vassal to David following the Aramean Wars. Aramean Wars: A series of campaigns, initiated by the Aramean overlord Hadadezer, in which David triumphed and became himself overlord of an empire stretching to the Euphrates. See also Helam, Battle of. Archite: a member of the clan of Archites, part of the tribe of Benjamin. Ark of the Covenant, The: The portable chest, surmounted by two gold cherubim, containing the stone tablets on which were inscribed the Ten Commandments; Israel's most sacred object. Arnon River: A river in the Trans-Jordan flowing from east to west, and emptying into the Dead Sea; the border between the Israelite tribe of Reuben and the Kingdom of Moab to its south. Aroer: A city on the north bank of the Arnon River, in the territory of Reuben; the southernmost Israelite city in the Trans-Jordan. Ashdod: Philistine city near the Mediterranean coast. Asher: One of the Northern tribes of Israel, situated on the Mediterranean coast between the Carmel range and Phoenicia. Ashkelon: Philistine city on the Mediterranean coast. Ashtoret (pl. Ashtarot): Canaanite deity; sister and consort of Baal she was a goddess of war, sex and fertility and the chief goddess of the Canaanite pantheon. Baal: (literally "Lord", "Master") Chief god of the Canaanites, he was a fertility deity who was thought to die each summer and to be resurrected with the winter rains. Babylonian Exile: (Sometimes known as the Babylonian Captivity) The historical period following the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah (586 BCE) during which the remainder of its population was removed from the land by the victorious Babylonians and resettled in Mesopotamia. This period is deemed to end with the proclamation of Cyrus (538 BCE) allowing the Jews to return to their homeland.

570

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

Bahurim: A town to the east of Jerusalem situated on the border between Judah and Benjamin. Ban, The: See Herem. Bashan: That region of the Trans-Jordan north of the Gilead; the current Golan Heights. BCE (Abbr.): Before the Common Era. Beeroth: Israelite town of uncertain location, probably in the tribal area of Benjamin; tentatively identified with the current Nebi Samuel. Beersheba: Town close to the southern border of the tribe of Judah, approximately 45 miles southwest of Jerusalem, and traditionally marking the southern extremity of the Land of Israel; Benjamin: The tribe of Saul, occupying the area between Jerusalem and Beth-el Benjamite: member of the Tribe of Benjamin. Besor, Wadi: A deep-cut dry riverbed in the Negeb, dividing the cultivated region to its north from the wasteregion to its south. It is located about fifteen miles south of Ziklag. Bethlehem: A Judean town about five miles south of Jerusalem; revered by Christianity as the birthplace of Jesus; the birthplace of David. Beth-el: Israelite town and shrine about twelve miles north of Jerusalem; the shrine was reputed to have been founded by the Patriarch Jacob. Beth-shean: Ancient city at the crossroads of the Valley of Jezreel and the Jordan Valley, a bit over 55 miles northeast of Jerusalem; a Canaanite stronghold that came under Philistine control, and finally succumbed to Israelite hegemony under David. Beth-shemesh: Israelite town about six miles southeast of Ekron. Bezek: Israelite town a bit over forty miles north of Gibeah and about sixteen miles due west of Jabesh-gilead. Saul's mustering point prior to the battle of Jabesh-gilead. Birya: "sick-food;" the specially prepared diet fed to someone ill. Bronze Age: An Archeological term relating to the period in the Ancient Near East between approximately 3100 to 1200 BCE, the era when the main material used for tools and armaments was bronze. It was preceded by the Stone Age and followed by the Iron Age. It is usually divided into Early Bronze 3100 to 2100 BCE Middle Bronze 2100 to 1550 BCE Late Bronze 1550 to 1200 BCE Canaan: The name given by the Egyptians to the geographical region of their empire that eventually became the Land of Israel. Prior to the Israelite conquest it was inhabited by various peoples and ethnic groups, and organized into independent city-states. Canaanites: One of the largest of the ethnic groups inhabiting the Promised Land prior to the Israelite conquest of the Land. Sometimes used collectively for all the pre-Conquest peoples. Carmel: I. A site between the Wilderness of Ziph and the Wilderness of Maon, about thirty miles due south of Gibeah of Saul and about eight miles SE of Hebron. 2. A mountain range stretching SE from the Bay of Haifa. CE (Abbr.): The Common Era Cherethite: (literally "Cretans"); either a synonym for Philistines, a subdivision of the Philistines or a kindred people allied to them. They formed one of the pools from which David recruited his mercenary troops. See Pelethites. Cherubim (sing. Cherub): mythological creatures, with bodies of winged lions and human faces, common to the folklore of the Ancient Near East. Gold representations of two cherubim surmounted the Ark. See Ark of the Covenant. Chronicler, The: The term we use to designate the author of the Book of Chronicles. Chronicles, Book of: The final Book of the Hebrew Bible (in Christian Bibles it is the eleventh Book), currently divided into two Books, i.e. 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles. Written in the Persian era, it is basically a religious history of David and his dynasty. Cohen: The Hebrew term for "priest." Commonwealth, First: The historical period from the Conquest and settlement of the Land of Israel until the destruction of Judah and the exile of its surviving inhabitants in 586 BCE; a period comprising over six centuries. This period is the heart of the Biblical Age. Commonwealth, Second: The historical period beginning with the return from the Babylonian Exile, starting in 538 BCE, till the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 CE; a span of almost six centuries. The first part of this period brings the Biblical Age to a close. Concubine: a marriage partner, but one of less status than a wife.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

571

Conquest, The: The invasion and subjugation of the Land of Canaan as related in the Book of Joshua. Corvee: unpaid labor exacted by public authorities, especially for public construction. Cubit: a measure of length; originally the distance between an average man's elbow and the tip of his middle finger, later standardized to a bit under eighteen inches. Dagon: Chief deity of the Philistine pantheon. Damascus: A Syrian city on the Abana River, to the northeast of Israel and roughly 120 miles distant from Jerusalem In David's time the capital of an Aramean kingdom. Dan: Name of Tribe and of their main city; one of the northernmost cities of the Land of Israel, often used, along with Beersheba to delineate the entire length of the land. Dead Sea: Sometimes called "The Salt Sea." Over 1275 feet below sea level, this stagnant body of water is the lowest body of water on the earth's surface. The water is much more saline than sea water; fish cannot Jive in it. It is approximately fifty miles in length and ten miles wide at En-gedi. Dead Sea Documents (Q): Scrolls and Scroll fragments of various Biblical and extra-Biblical Books found in caves at Qumran near the Dead Sea. They are the oldest extant versions of Biblical Books, some dating from as early as the 3'd century BCE. Deuteronomy: The fifth Book of the Bible. The raising of Deuteronomy to authoritative status in the Josianic Reformation of 622 BCE was the beginning of the canonization process that eventually led to the Bible as we know it. Dunam: A measure of land area, roughly equivalent to a quarter of an acre, used in countries that were once part of the Ottoman Empire. Originally defined as "forty standard paces in length and breath," it was standardized in 1929 (the metric dunam) as 1,000 square meters. Eben-ezer, Battle of: The decisive defeat of the Israelite tribes at the hands of the Philistines around I 050 BCE that effectively brought the Age of the Judges to a close. Edom: A Hebrew-speaking Kingdom located on the Transjordanian plateau south of the Kingdom of Moab. Its population was known as Edomites. Edomites: See Edom. Egypt: Ancient African kingdom and great power, separated by the Sinai from the South of Judah. Ekron: Inland Philistine city, about five miles north ofGath. Elab, Valley of: A wide valley running roughly from west to east from Philistia to the area of Bethlehem; the site of the battle between David and Goliath. Elder: Usually a senior member of a community; a member of its governing body. Emek Rephaim: "the Valley of the Giants"- a large expanse of land located southwest of ancient Jerusalem; the site of David's two decisive victories over the Philistines. Endor: Village four miles south of Mt. Tabor; the site Saul's seance with the "medium of Endor." En-gedi: Oasis on the western shore of the Dead Sea. En-rogel: A spring in the Kidron Valley southeast of Jerusalem. Epbah: A measure of dry volume used for cereals (approximately 15 liters), roughly equal to a little less than half a bushel. Ephod: A distinctive, short, white linen garment worn by priests, and at times by laymen, when performing sacred duties; sometimes, by extension, it refers to the Urim and Thumim which were part of the breastplate worn over the priest's garments. See Urim and Thumim. Ephraim: I. The younger of Joseph's sons. 2. The largest of the ten northern tribes. Ephraimite: A member of the Tribe of Ephraim. Euphrates (River): One of the two mighty rivers that flow through Mesopotamia; at one point in history it marked the northern border of the Davidic Empire; the distance between Tiphsah, the closest point on the Euphrates, and Jerusalem is approximately 340 miles. Ezion-geber: port on the Gulf of Aqaba; the gate to the East. The modem city of Elath occupies its site today. Fathers of the Synagogue: The early Rabbis who in the period from about 300 BCE to 200 CE, established the forms and practices of the Judaism that succeeded the Biblical Age. The term is somewhat analogous to the Christian term: "The Church Fathers." Fear of God: a phrase meaning something akin to "common decency." Four-Room House: A term currently used in archeological circles to describe the form of construction typical of Israelite dwellings all through the First Commonwealth. Galilee: The area of Israel north of the VaHey of Jezreel; the northern region of the Land of Israel.

572

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

Gath: Inland Philistine city roughly southeast of Ashdod. Achish, ruler of Gath, employed David as a mercenary for a period of sixteen months. Gad: 1. One of the sons of the Patriarch Jacob. 2. Israelite tribe settled in the Gllead, with Reuben to its south and Manasseh to the north. Gaza: Southernmost of the Philistine cities on the Mediterranean coast. Ger: A non-Israelite who held the status of permanent resident within the land of Israel, and who enjoyed equal protection with the Israelite under the law. Geshur: Aramean kingdom to the north of the Gllead. Allied to King David through his marriage to princess Maacah, daughter of Talmi, king of Geshur. Gezer: Major Canaanite city about twelve miles north of Gath and about twenty miles northwest of Jerusalem; conquered by Egyptian forces it was presented to King Solomon as a dowry upon his marriage to an Egyptian princess. Giants, the VaHey of the: See Emek Rephaim. Gibeah (sometimes referred to as Gibeah of Benjamin or Gibeah of Saul): A town three to four miles north of Jerusalem; the hometown of Saul and the capital of the Kingdom of Israel during his reign. Gibeon: Town in the tribal area of Benjamin, originally a non-Israelite enclave (see Gibeonites). The scene of a critical battle during the civil war between the House of Saul and the House of David; later the site of a major Israelite shrine. Gibeonites: The inhabitants of Gibeon (and her three sister cities) who, by treaty with the Israelites, had their residence rights guaranteed. They remained a pagan ethnic island in the midst of Israel until dispersed by Saul. Gilboa, Battle of: The Philistine victory over the armies of Israel at which King Saul and three of his sons died. Gllboa, Mount: A mountain ridge skirting the southwestern edge of the VaHey of Jezreel: the site of the Battle of Gilboa. Gilead: The Israelite region east of the Jordan River, bounded by Moab to the south, Ammon to the east, and Geshur to the north. Gilgal: Ancient Israelite shrine in the Jordan VaHey, about sixteen miles southeast of Jerusalem and about a mile and a half northeast of Jericho. Giloh: A town in the Judean hills south of Hebron; the hometown of Ahitophel. Gittite: A person from the city of Gath. Hamath: 1. An important Syrian city about 200 miles to the north of Jerusalem. 2. A Hittite kingdom taking its name from its capital city. Razor: Large city in the Upper Galilee, a bit less than nine miles north of the Sea of Galilee and dominating the main branches of the Via Maris. Hebron: The premier city of the tribal area of Judah, located about twenty miles south of Jerusalem; the burial place of the Patriarchs. It served as David's first capital. Helam, Battle of: The decisive showdown between David and Hadadezer which gave David suzerainty over all the Aramean Kingdoms up to the Euphrates River. The site is about ninety miles NE of Jerusalem. Herem (Hebr.): Something devoted to God and hence banned for human use; the practice of devoting all spoils of war to the sanctuary or their total destruction. Hesed (Hebr.): Compassion, mercy, kindness, faithfulness, loyalty and grace are all meanings of this central term in the Biblical lexicon. It usually refers to some act of undeserved generosity. Highlands of Ephraim: The main portion of the mountain ridge that runs north-south down the center of the land of Israel; the area of settlement of the Tribe of Ephraim. High Place: synonym for shrine; shrines were usually sited on the tops of hills and mountains. Hittites: A people, originally from Anatolia, many of whom were to be found scattered around the Ancient Near East, including Canaan. Hivites: One of the ethnic groups that inhabited the land of Canaan prior to the Conquest. Hormah: A town in the Negeb, about eight miles east of Beersheba. Hozeh: Seer, clairvoyant; term used in early Israel as synonymous with prophet. At a later period its use seems to have been restricted to prophets attached to royal courts and to "professionals:" individuals who earned their living by "prophesying" for pay. Hubris: A Greek term signifying arrogant overweening pride. Ibn Ezra, Abraham: (1089-1164 CE) Medieval Jewish poet and Bible commentator.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

573

Iron Age: An Archeological term defining the era from approximately the 121h century BCE when iron (more properly steel) replaced bronze as the main metal in general use. For the Ancient Near East the Iron Age is divided into Iron I 12th and 11th centuries.BCE Iron II lOth century- 6th century BCE Isaiah, Book of: The Biblical Book containing the oracles of the prophet Isaiah, son of Amoz, (active in Jerusalem from about 740 till approximately 700 BCE); it is generally accepted that the last 26 chapters of the Book come from a different prophet (possibly of the same name) who lived approximately 150 years later. Israel, Kingdom of: The Northern Kingdom comprising ten of the tribes of Israel, in contradistinction to the Southern Kingdom, Judah; the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed by the Assyrians in 721 BCE. IsraeUtes: members of the People of Israel (synonym for the Children of Israel). Jabesh-gilead: IsraeUte town in the Gilead, on the eastern side of the Jordan River, approximately sixteen miles due east of Bezek; the site of the battle where Saul defeated the Ammonites. Jabbok River: A river with its source in the Transjordanian highlands, which flows westward emptying into the River Jordan. Jehus: The name by which Jerusalem was known during its occupation by the Jebusites. After David captured the city, the city reverted to its original name Jerusalem. Jebusites: One of the peoples dwelling in the land of Canaan (see Jebus). JerahmeeUtes: A clan of the tribe of Judah. Jericho: Ancient city, over nine thousand years old, located near the Jordan River about eight miles north of the Dead Sea; listed by the Bible as the first site captured by Joshua during the conquest of Canaan. Jezreel: IsraeUte town situated in the middle of the Valley of Jezreel; about sixty miles north of Jerusalem. Jezreel, Valley of: a flat, fertile corridor running roughly southeast from the Bay of Haifa to Beth-shean in the Jordan Valley. Jerusalem: Ancient city which David turned into his capital after its conquest. By bringing the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem he transformed it into a holy city. See Jebus. Jordan River: The main river of the land of Israel, running from the Sea of Galilee down to the Dead Sea, a distance of about seventy miles. See Arabah. Jordan Valley: See Jordan River and Arabah. Josephus Flavius (c. 38-100 CE): Jewish historian and apologist. Born into an aristocratic priestly family he was appointed a general in the Great Revolt against Rome (66-70 CE) and given command of the GaUiee. Bungling the campaign and decisively defeated, he surrendered to the Romans and spent the remainder of his life as a pensioner of the Roman Emperors whom he served with his writings. Despite their selective and propagandist nature, his major works, The Jewish War and Jewish Antiquities, form the best sources we possess for the era of the Second Commonwealth. Judah: l. The fourth son ofthe patriarch Jacob. 2. The southernmost tribe in the land of Israel. 3. Kingdom of: The Southern Kingdom ruled by David and his descendents from 1002-586 BCE. After the Babylonian Exile the kingdom was reconstituted under the name of Judea. Judges: I. The name given to the charismatic leaders of the IsraeUtes in the period prior to the establishment of the monarchy (approximately 1200-1020 BCE). 2. The Biblical Book that deals with this period. Kadesh-barnea: An oasis, rich in springs, at the southern edge of the Land of Canaan, about ninety-five miles southwest of Jerusalem. This oasis was the center of IsraeUte settlement in the wilderness, prior to the conquest of Canaan. Keilah: Fortified town about three miles south of Adulam. Keoites: A semi-nomadic tribe allied to the IsraeUtes. Ketib: The Hebrew consonantal text of the Bible. See Qere. Kidron: The name of both the valley to the east of Jerusalem, between the city and the Mount of OUves, and the name of the brook that flows down the center of the valley in the winter (often in the summer it is dry). Kimchi, Rabbi David: See Radak. King's Highway: Running east of the Jordan River across the Jordanian plateau, this was one of the two major routes connecting Egypt and Mesopotamia. See Via Maris.

574

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

Kinor: (pl. Kinorot); A hand-held string instrument common to the Ancient Near East, used both to accompany vocalists and as a solo instrument. Kiriath-jearim: Mountaintop town about eight miles northeast of Beth-shemesh and about an equal distance to Jerosalem at its southeast; originally part of the Gibeonite TetrapoHs. Koheleth, Book of: One of the most philosophical of the Books of the Bible. Often known by its Greek name: Ecclesiastes. Lachish: Ancient city about thirty miles southwest of Jerusalem. Destroyed by Joshua during the conquest it was rebuilt by either David or Solomon. Levite: Member of the tribe of Levi, the priestly tribe. Lo-debar: Town in the northern part of the Gllead. After the Battle of Gllboa this was the residence of Mephibosheth, son of Jonathan. LXX (Abbr. for The Septuagint): the earliest Greek translation of the Bible, made in Alexandria, Egypt, in the 3n1 and 2nd centuries BCE. Mahanaim: Chief town in the Gllead; site of lsh-bosheth 's government in exile after the Battle of Gllboa; site of David's government-in-exile during the rebellion of Absalom. Manasseh: 1. The oldest son of Joseph, son of Jacob. 2. Israelite tribe: one half settled in the central highlands to the north of Ephraim, the other settled in the Gilead and Bashan regions of the Trans-Jordan. Maon, Wilderness of: The wilderness area south and east of Maon. This area is about seven or eight miles south of the Wilderness of Ziph and about thirteen miles southeast of Hebron. Masorites: The term for those persons who, over the generations, were concerned with the precise preservation and transmission of the holy text of the Bible. The end product of the millennia-long endeavor is the current text of the Hebrew Bible, known as the Masoretic Text (MT). Medeba: An Israelite city in the Trans-Jordan, situated in the tribal area of Reuben, about ten miles east of the Dead Sea. Menorah: a lamp; specifically the gold seven-branched candelabrum that stood in the sanctuary before the Holy of Holies. This is the "Lamp of God" which the youth Samuel tended in Shiloh. Mesopotamia: the name given to the region watered by the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. The region today goes by the name Iraq. Metzudat David ("The Fortress of David"): l81h century Hebrew commentary by David Altschuler (completed by his son Jehiel Hillel). Michmas, Battle of: The decisive defeat of the Philistines by Saul that established the independence of Israel. Michmas itself is two and one quarter miles northeast of Gibeah of Benjamin. Midianites: A nomadic people whose range extended from the rim of the Arabian Desert to the Sinai Wilderness. Mishkan: The portable sanctuary that was the focus of Israelite worship during the wilderness period. Mizpah: A town a bit Jess than four miles north of Ramah, roughly halfway between Ramah and Beth-el; the site of numerous Israelite national conventions. Moab: Transjordanian kingdom often hostile to Israel; bordered on the north by the tribe of Reuben, on the south by the kingdom of Edom and on the west by the Dead Sea. Mount of Olives: The mountain ridge directly to the east of Jerusalem, and separated from the city by the Kidron Valley. Mount Seir: Name of the high Transjordanian plateau south of the Kingdom of Moab; the heartland of the kingdom of Edom. MT (Abbr.): The Masoretic Text; the standard version of the Hebrew Bible. See Masorite. Mycenaean Age: The period in history on the Greek mainland and the Aegean Islands (excluding Crete) generally corresponding to the Late Bronze Age. This distinctive culture came to an end around 1100 BCE. Naarim: In addition to its general meaning of "lads," the term has a technical meaning: elite combat troops, warriors. Nabi: (Sometimes "Navi"). The Hebrew term for "prophet". Nagid: possibly "the one who stands in front" or "the one designated" - hence "leader"; something less than a king. Naioth: A location in or next to Ramah, possibly a dwelling compound for a band of Samuel's disciples. Negeb: "The Southlands;" the southern wilderness area of the Land of Israel, roughly from Beersheba southward. In Biblical times it was only sparsely inhabited by nomadic tribes.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

575

Nob: A town located about two miles southeast of Gibeah, and about the same distance north of Jerusalem. It was here that the priestly survivors of the sack of Shiloh found refuge. Patriarchs: The name used to designate the fathers of the Jewish people- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Pelethites: Philistine mercenary troops, commanded by Beniah, who served under David. The term is possibly a corruption of "Philistine". See Cherethites. Pentapolis: A union of five cities, as the Philistine Penta polis. Philistines: A people of Aegean origin who settled in the southwest corner of Canaan. They became the main competitors of the Israelites for the possession of the land. David decisively defeated them and reduced them to vassaldom. Phoenicia: The Region northwest of the Land of Israel, populated by a commercial seafaring people. Pillared House: See Four-Room House. Pirke Avot ("The Sayings of the Fathers"): A collection of religious and philosophical epigrams of the founders of Rabbinic Judaism; pithy sayings which summarize the life philosophy of these early rabbis (see Fathers of the Synagogue). Psalm: A religious poem designed for liturgical use and for personal devotions; specifically, one of the 150 compositions included in the Biblical Book of Psalms. Psalter: The Book of Psalms. Q (Abbr. For Qumran): See Dead Sea Documents. Qere: ("read thus"); the text as it is read according to the Masorites. See Ketiv. Rabbath-ammon: Capital of the Ammonite kingdom. See Ammonite. Radak: Acronym for Rabbi David Kimchi, medieval commentator c. 1160-1235 CE. Ramah: Town in the Highlands of Ephraim; the birthplace and life-long residence of the prophet Samuel. Rashi: Acronym for Rabbi Shlomo ben Isaac (1 040-1105 CE); probably the greatest of the medieval Jewish Biblical commentators. Reuben: l. The oldest of the twelve sons of the Patriarch Jacob. 2. Israelite tribe, settled in the Trans-Jordan, bordering on the Kingdom of Moab to the south, the Dead Sea to the west, and the tribe of Gad to the north. Roeh: Literally "one who sees," hence "seer." The term used in early Israel for those who later became known as prophets. (See Nabi) Rogelim: Town in the Gilead, the home of Barzillai. Samaria: The name by which the Highlands of Ephraim came to be known after King Omri of Israel (887 -876 BCE) founded the city of Samaria as his capital. Septuagint: See LXX. Seren: Philistine term for a ruler of one of the five city-states that made up the Philistine Penta polis. Rendered in this book as Tyrant. Shekel: a unit of weight amounting to approximately 11.33 grams. Sheol: The underworld; the realm of the dead. Shepheleb: The plain in the center of the western portion of the land of Israel that runs north-south parallel to the Mediterranean coast. It lies between the coastland to the west and the hill-country to the east. Shiloh: The central shrine of pre-monarchic Israel located approximately 21 miles north of Jerusalem; destroyed by the Philistines about 1150 BCE. Shofar: a ram's horn, used in Biblical times primarily to sound a warning that danger is approaching, for military signaling in the field and as a means of rallying the public. Shunem: A town in the Valley of Jezreel, famous for the beauty of its women. Sidon: Major Phoenician port and commercial center about 25 miles north of Tyre. Succoth: Fertile valley in the Gilead, about 35 miles northeast of Jerusalem. The forward base established there by David continued to be utilized by the later kings of Israel. Superscription: That which is written above or prior to the text itself; a title or description of what is to follow, such as a superscription to a Psalm. Syr. (Abbr. for Syriac): The Peshitta; a translation of the Bible into Syriac (a late form of the Aramaic language) possibly dating as early as the 1'1 century CE. Syria: the name given to the large fertile region to the northeast of the land of Israel, roughly bounded by the Lebanon Mountains to the west, the River Euphrates to the north, and the Arabian Desert to the east. Tabernacle: See Misbkan. Talent: The basic unit of weight in the Ancient Near East (amounting to 3,000 shekels), equivalent to approximately 66 pounds.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND PLACE NAMES

576

Talmud: The 24 volume corpus of Jewish law, tradition and theology that provided the authoritative formulation of Rabbinic Judaism. T ANACH: The Hebrew Bible; an acronym designating the three divisions into which the Hebrew Bible is organized. Targ. (Abbr. for Targum): One of several translations of the Bible into Aramaic, at one time the lingua franca of the Near East. Aramaic is a sister language to Hebrew. Tekoa: A town on the fringe of the Judean desert about six miles south of Bethlehem; famous as the birthplace of the prophet Amos. Teraphim: Household images (possibly of dead ancestors) used by some Israelites for divination. Often used as a synonym for idolatry. Tetropolis: A political union of four cities, as in the Gibeonite Tetropolis, named after the leading city of the union, Gibeon. "The Three:" The most prestigious order in David's army; the top medal winners, the elite of the elite. See The

Thirty. "The Thirty:" An order in David's army comprised of the elite of the armed forces. Possibly its members served as the supreme council of the army. Thebez: A fortified Israelite city located in the tribal area of Menasseh, about sixteen miles north of Shiloh and three miles southwest of Bezek. It was during the siege of Thebez that Abimelech, son of the Judge Gideon was killed. Tikun Sofrim: (Literally "a correction of the Scribes"). A purposeful alteration or censuring of the Biblical text by the Masorites, usually replacing a phrase deemed blasphemous with a softer euphemism. A list of these "corrections" is preserved in the Talmud. Tiphsah: City on the River Euphrates, listed in 1 Kings 5:4 as the northernmost city of the Davidic-Solomonic empire. Torah: Lit. "teaching," "instruction;" used as a synonym for the word of God; more narrowly the Pentateuch, the Bible, and ultimately the entire religious tradition of Judaism. Trans-Jordan: The area east ofthe Jordan River. Tyrant: The ruler of a Philistine city-state. See Seren. Tyre: The major port city and commercial center of Phoenicia, located about 25 miles west of Dan. Ugarit: Ancient metropolis and trading hub destroyed about 1195 BCE. It was located on the Syrian coast about seven miles north of the present Latakia. Important for the vast library discovered in its ruins. (See Ugaritic) Ugaritic: The language spoken and written by the inhabitants of Ugarit is a language very similar to Biblical Hebrew, and the literature written in it has helped illuminate much that was obscure in the Bible. Ugaritic poetry in particular has proved to be one of the models upon which Biblical poetry is based. United Kingdoms: The political union created by David between the Kingdom of Judah and the Kingdom of Israel that endured through the reign of David and his son Solomon. Urim and Thumim: A mechanical device, manipulated by a priest, used during the early period of Israelite history to determine the will of God. Via Maris: The main highway connecting Egypt and Mesopotamia. Vulg. or Vol. (Abbr. for Vulgate): The translation of the Bible from Hebrew into Latin made by St. Jerome in the last quarter of the 41h century BCE. His translation of the Books of Samuel and Kings appeared in 391 CE. Wadi: The bed of a seasonal river found in arid zones. With the winter rains it becomes a raging torrent. In the summer it is a dry riverbed. Zevach: A type of sacrifice; a free-will offering of which only token parts are burned on the altar and most of the animal is consumed in a communion meal, usually within the precincts of the shrine, by the family who made the offering. Ziklag: Fortified town about fifteen miles southeast of Gaza. A border town within the territory of the Philistine city-state of Gath, it was given to David in fief as payment for his services; it remained the private holding of David's descendants, the Kings of Judah. Ziph, the Wilderness of: A barren area beginning about six miles southeast of Hebron. The distance from Adulam is about fifteen miles. Ziphites: Inhabitants of the Wilderness of Ziph. Zobah: The dominant Kingdom among the Aramean states. Located east of the Lebanon Mountains and north of Damascus, it was defeated by David along with its coalition of Aramean allies, giving David hegemony over the entire region.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackerman, James S. "Knowing Good and Evil: A Literary Analysis ofthe Court History in 2 Sam 9-10 and 1 Ki 1-2." Journal ofBiblical Literature 109 ( 1990): 41-64. Akenson, Donald Harman. Surpassing Wonder: The Invention of the Bible and the Talmuds. New York, Harcourt Brace, 1998. Akroyd, Peter R. "The Succession Narrative (so-called)." Interpretation 35 (1981): 383-396. Albright, William F. Archaeology, Historical Analogy and Early Biblical Tradition. Baton Rouge, Louisiana State University Press, 1966. _ _.Samuel and the Beginnings of the Prophetic Movement. Cincinnati, Hebrew Union College Press, 1961. _ _. Yawah and the Gods ofCanaan: A Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths. Garden City, NY, Doubleday and Co., 1968. Alt, Albrecht. "The Formation of the Israelite State in Palestine." In Essays in Old Testament History and Religion, edited by Alt, A. Garden City, Doubleday Anchor Books, 1966. Alter, Robert. The Art ofBiblical Narrative. New York, Basic Books, 1981. __. The Art ofBiblical Poetry. New York, Basic Books, 1985. __.The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of I and 2 Samuel. New York, W. W. Norton and Co., 1999. __. "Scripture, Commentary, and the Challenge oflnterpretation." The Journal of the Alumni Association of The Seminary-Teachers Institute And Graduate School of The Jewish Theological Seminary of America (September 2001). Anderson, Francis I. "Israelite Kinship Terminology and Social Structure." The Bible Translator 20 (1969): 2939. Aristotle. The Nichomachean Ethics. Various editions. Austin, James. Zen and the Brain. Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology Press, 1999. Babylonian Talmud (Hebrew and Aramaic). Translated into English under the editorship of Rabbi Dr I. Epstein. London, The Soncino Press, 1952. Tractates Abodah Zarah, Aboth (Pirke Avoth), Yoma, Zebahim. Bankier, Joanna and Deirdre Lashgari (editors). Women Poets ofthe World. New York: MacMillan, 1983. Barnstone, Aliki and Willis (editors). A Book of Women Poetry from Antiquity to Now. New York: Schocken, 1990. Bar, James. "Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament." In Ecology and Religion in History, edited by Spring, David and Eileen, New York, Harper and Row, 1974, p. 48-75. Barzini, Luigi. The Italians, (New York, Atheneum, 1964). Ben-Barak, Zafrira. "The Legal Background to the Restoration of Michal to David." In Studies in the Historical Books ofthe Old Testament, edited by Emerton, J. A. Leiden, Brill, 1979, p. 15-29. Berman, Joshua A. "God's Alliance with Man." Azure 25 (Summer 2006): 79-113. Bright, John. A History ofAncient Israel, third edition. London, SCM Press, 1980. Buccellati, Giorgio. Cities and Nations ofAncient Syria. Rome, Instituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente, 1967. Bury, John Bagnell. The Ancient Greek Historians. New York, Dover Publications, 1958. Cahill, Jane. "Jerusalem in David and Solomon's Time." Biblical Archaeology Review (November-December 2004): 20-31, 62-3 . . "Jerusalem at the Time of the United Monarchy: The Archaeological Evidence." In Jerusalem in Bible and --Archaeology: The First Temple Period, edited by Vaughn, A. C. and Killebrew, A. E. Atlanta, Society of Biblical Literature, 2003, p. 13-80.

578

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chadwick, H. M. and N. K. The Growth of Literature. Cambridge, University Press, 1986, 2 Vol. Childs, Brevard. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture. Philadelphia, Fortress and London, SCM Press, 1979. Cohen, H. Hirsch. "David and Bathsheba." Journal ofBible and Religion 33(1965): 142-148. Cross. Frank M. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1973. __ and Freedman, David N. "Kinship and Covenant in Ancient Israel." In From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel. London, John's Hopkins University Press, 1998, p. 3-21. __. Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry. Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975, 1997. Cryer, F. H. "David's Rise to Power and the Death of Abner: An Analysis of I Samuel xxvi 14-16 and its Redaction-Critical Implications." Vetus Testamentum 35 (1985): 385-94. Dahood, MichaelS. J. The Anchor Bible: Psalms, Vol. I. Garden City, NY, Doubleday, 1966. Damrosch, David. The Narrative Covenant: Transformations of Genre in the Growth of Biblical Literature. San Francisco, Harper and Row, 1987. Dever, William G. "The Identity of Early Israel: A Rejoinder to Keith W. Whitelam." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 72 (1996): 3-24. __. Recent Archeological Discoveries and Biblical Research, (London, University of Washington Press, 1990). __. What Did The Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality ofAncient Israel. Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001. Diamond, Jared. Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1999. Eslinger, Lyle M. The Kingship ofGod in Crisis. Sheffield, JSOT Press, 1985. Finkelstein, Israel. "Arabian Trade and Socio-Political Conditions in the Negev in the Twelfth-Eleventh Centuries BCE." Journal ofNear Eastern Studies 47 (1988): 241-52. __. The Archaeology of Israelite Settlement. Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Society, 1988. __ . "The Great Transformation: The 'Conquest' of the Highlands Frontiers and the Rise of the Territorial States." In The Archeology of Society in the Holy Land, edited by Levy, T. E. London, Leicester University Press, 1998, p. 349-365. Frankfort, Henri, Frankfort, H. A., Wilson, J. A., Jacobsen, T. and Irwin, W. A. The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man: An Essay on Speculative Thought in the Ancient Near East. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1946. Frankfort, Henri. Kingship and the Gods: A Study ofAncient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration ofSociety and Nature. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1978. Freedman, David N. "The Age of David and Solomon." In Divine Commitment: Selected Writings of David Noel Freedman, edited by Huddleston, John R. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997. Volume I, p. 286-313. __. "The Chronicler's Purpose." In Divine Commitment: Collected Writings of David Noel Freedman, edited by Huddleston, John R. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997. Volume I, p. 88-93. __ ."Psalm 113 and the Song of Hannah." In Pottery, Poetry, and Prophecy: Studies in Early Hebrew Poetry. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1980, p. 243-261. __. "When God Repents." In Divine Commitment: Selected Writings of David Noel Freedman. Edited by Huddleston, John R. Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997. Vol. I, p. 409-446. Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1993. Ginsberg, H. L. "A Ugaritic Parallel to 2Samuell:21." Journal ofBiblical Literature 57 (1938): 209-13. Goldingay, John. "Psalm 51 : 16a." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 ( 1978): 3 88-90. Gooding, David W. "An Approach to the Literary and Textual Problems in the David-Goliath Story." In The Story of David and Goliath: Textual and Literary Criticism. Edited by Barthelemy, D., Gooding, D. W., Lust, J. & Tov, E. Gottingen, Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1986. p. 55-86, 99-106, 114-120, 145-154. Gordon, Cyrus. "David the Dancer." In Studies in Bible and Jewish Religion: Yehezkel Kaufmann Jubilee Volume. Edited by Haran, M. Jerusalem, Magnes Press, 1960. p. 46-49. __ . Ugaritic Handbook. Rome, Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1965. Greenberg, Moshe. Biblical Prose Prayer as a Window to the Popular Religion ofAncient Israel. University of California Press, 1983. Halladay, John S. Jr. "The Kingdoms oflsrael and Judah: Political and Economic Centralization in the Iron II ab (ca. 1000-750 BCE)." In Levy, T. E. (ed.). The Archeology of Society in the Holy Land. London, Leicester University Press, 1998, p. 368-398.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

579

Hallo, William W. Origins: The Ancient Near Eastern Background of Some Modern Western Institutions. Leiden: Brill, 1996. __ . "Texts, Statues, and the Cult of the Divine King." In Congress Volume Jerusalem 1986, edited by John A. Emerton. Leiden, Brill, 1988, p. 54-66. Halpern, Baruch. David's Secret Demons: Messiah, Murderer, Traitor, King. Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001. __."Eli's Death and the Israelite Gate: A Philological-Architectural Correlation." Eretz-Israel26:52-63. __.The First Historians: The Hebrew Bible and History. Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996. __. "Text and Artifact: Two Monologues?" In The Archeology of Israel: Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Present, edited by Silberman, N. A., and Small, D. B. Sheffield, Sheffield Academia Press, 1997, p. 311-341. __. "The Uneasy Compromise: Israel Between League and Monarchy." In Traditions in Transformation: Turning Points in Biblical Faith, edited by Halpern, B. and Levenson, J. D. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1981, p. 59-96. Haran, Menachem. "Book-Scrolls in Israel in Pre-Exilic Times." Journal of Jewish Studies 33 (Oxford, 1982): 161-73. __. "Scribal Worksmanship in Biblical Times." Tarbiz 50 (1980-81): 65-87. __. Temples and Temple-Service in Ancient Israel: An Inquiry into Biblical Cult Phenomena and the Historical Setting of the Priestly School. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1985. Hauer, C. E. Jr. "The Shape ofSaulide Strategy." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 31 (1969): 153-67 Herold, J. Christopher (ed. and trans.). The Mind of Napoleon: A Selection from his Written and Spoken Words.

New York, Columbia University Press, 1955. Herzberg, H. W. I and II Samuel: A Commentary, (Old Testament Library) Trans. J. S. Bowden. Philadelphia, Westminster, 1964. Herzog, Chaim and Gichon, Mordechai. Battles of the Bible. Jerusalem, Steimatzky, 1978. Hesse, Brian and Wapnish, Paula. "Can Pig Remains Be Used For Ethnic Diagnosis in the Ancient Near East?" In Silberman, N. A. and Small, D. B. (editors), The Archaeology of Israel: Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Present. Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1997, p. 238-270. Hoffmeier, James K. Israel in Egypt. New York, Oxford University Press, 1996. Huehnergard, John. "On the Etymology and Meaning ofthe Hebrew Nabi." Eretz-Israel26:88-93. Humphreys, W. L. "From Tragic Hero to Villain: A Study of the Figure of Saul and the Development of I Samuel." Journal for the Study ofthe Old Testament 22 (1982): 95-117. __."The Tragedy of King Saul." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 6 (1978): 18-27. Ishida, Tomoo. History and Historical Writing in Ancient Israel. Boston, Brill, 1999. Jacobs, Jane. Cities and Wealth ofNations. New York, Vintage Books, 1985. Josephus, Flavius. The Antiquities of the Jews. Translated by H. St. John Thackeray and R. Marcus, The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1958, Vol. IV-IX. Kaufmann, Yehezkel. The Religion of Israel. Translated and abridged by Moshe Greenberg. The University of Chicago Press, 1960. Kennedy, A. R. S. Samuel (The New Century Bible). New York, Henry Frowde, 1905. Kessler, Martin. "Narrative Technique in I Samuel 16:1-13." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 32 ( 1970): 543-54. Keys, Gillian. The Wages ofSin: A Reappraisal ofthe "Succession Narrative." Sheffield Academic Press, 1996. King, Philip J. "Travel, Transport, Trade." Eretz-Yisrael26: 94-105. King, Philip J. and Stager, Lawrence E. Life in Biblical Israel. (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2001). Kitchen, Kenneth Andrew. The Bible In Its World: The Bible and Archaeology Today. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2004 . . "The Exodus." The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 2, New York: Doubleday, 1992, p. 700-708. --.On the Reliability ofthe Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003. Korfman, Manfred. "The Sling as a Weapon." Scientific American 229/4 (1973): 35-41. Kuntz, J. Kenneth. "Psalm 18: A Rhetorical-Critical Analysis." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 26 (1983): 3-31. Levenson, Jon D. "1Samuel25 as Literature and as History" Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 (1978): 11-28. Levine, Baruch A. JPS Torah Commentary: Leviticus, (Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society, 1989) Levy, Thomas E. and Najjar, Mohammad. "Edom and Copper: The Emergence of Ancient Israel's Rival." Biblical Archaeology Review 32/4 (7-8/2006): 24-35, 70. Lewis, Theodore J. "The Ancestral Estate in 2Samuell4:16" Journal ofBiblical Literature 110 (1991): 597-612.

580

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lofts, Norah. "Michal." In Telling Queen Michal's Story, edited by Clines, D. J. A. and Eskenazi, T. C. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 119, (1991): 234-245. Mazar, Benjamin. "The Aramean Empire and Israel." In The Early Biblical Period: Historical Studies, edited by Ahituv, S. and Levine, B. A. Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Society, 1986, p. 151-172. __. "Geshur and Maachah." In The Early Biblical Period: Historical Studies, edited by Ahituv, S. and Levine, B. A. Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Society, 1986, p. 113-125. Mazar, Eilat. "Did I Find King David's Palace?" Biblical Archaeology Review 32/l (2006): 16-27, 70. __. Preliminary Report on the City of David Excavations 2005 at the Visitor's Center Area. Jerusalem, Shalem Press, 2007. Mccarter, P. Kyle. Anchor Bible: I Samuel. New York: Doubleday, 1980. . Anchor Bible: II Samuel. New York: Doubleday, 1984. Mckenzie, Steven L. King David: A Biography. Oxford University Press, 2000. Mcneill, William H. Plagues and Peoples. New York, Anchor Books, 1977. Meyer, K. F., (MD). "Plague." Encyclopedia Britannica, 1972, Vol. 17, p. l140b. Meyers, Carol. "David as Temple Builder." In Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross, edited by P. D. Miller, P. D. Hanson and S.D. McBride. Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1987, p. 357376 __. Discovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context. New York, Oxford University Press, 1988. __."Hannah and Her Sacrifice: Reclaiming Female Agency." In A Feminist Companion to Samuel and Kings. edited by Athalya Brenner. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994, p. 93-104. __."The Hannah Narrative in Feminist Perspective." In "Go to the Land I will Show You," edited by J. E. Coleson and V. H. Malthows, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996, p. 117-126. __. "The Hebrew Bible." In A Dictionary of Named and Unnamed Women in the Hebrew Bible, the Apocryphal!Deuterocanonical Books, and the New Testament, edited by Carol Meyers. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000, p. 4-ll. __. "Returning Home: Ruth 1: 18 and the Gendering of the Book of Ruth." In A Feminist Companion/or Ruth, edited by Athalya Brenner. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993, p. 85-114. __. "Women at the Entrance to the Tent of Meeting." In Women in Scripture: A Dictionary of Named and Unnamed Women In the Hebrew Bible, the Apocryphal! Deuterocanonical Books, and the New Testament.

Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000. __."'Women of the Neighborhood' (Ruth 4: 17): Informal Female Networks in Ancient Israel." In Ruth and Esther: A Feminist Companion to the Bible (Second Series), edited by Athalya Brenner. Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1999, p. 110-127. Milgrom, Jacob. Anchor Bible: Leviticus 1-16. New York, Doubleday, 1991. __.Anchor Bible: Leviticus 17-22. New York, Doubleday, 2000. __.Anchor Bible: Leviticus 23-2 7. New York, Doubleday, 2000. __. JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society, 1990. Millgram, Hillel I. Four Biblical Heroines and the Case for Female Authorship: An Analysis of the Women of Ruth, Esther and Genesis 38. Jefferson, NC and London, McFarland & Co., 2007. Miscall, Peter D. 1Samuel: A Literary Reading. Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1986. Naeh, Shlomo. "A New Suggestion Regarding 2Samuel XXIII 7." Vetus Testamentum 46 (1996): 260-5. Nakhai, Beth Alpert. "Why Are We Ignoring Women?" Paper delivered at the 2000 Annual Meeting of the ASOR. As quoted in Biblical Archaeology Review 32/3 (May/June 2006): 14. Nehamas, Alexander. "The Postulated Author: Critical Monism as a Regulative Ideal." Critical Inquiry 8:1 (Autumn 1981): 133-149. __."What an Author Is." The Journal ofPhilosophy 83 (1986): 685-691. __."Writer, Text, Work, Author." In Cascardi, A. J., (ed.), Literature and the Question of Philosophy. John Hopkins, 1987, p. 267-291. Newberg, Andrew, MD and D'aquill, MD. Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief New York, Ballantine Books, 2001. Noddings, Nel. Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education, second edition. Berkeley, University of California Press, 2003. Norwich, John J. Shakespeare's Kings. New York, Scribner, 1999. Ozick, Cynthia. "Hannah and Elkanah: Torah as the Matrix of Feminism." In Out ofthe Garden: Woman Writers on the Bible. Edited by Buchmann, Christina and Spiegel, Celina. New York, Faucett, 1994, p. 88-93. Plato. The Dialogues of Plato, third edition. 2 volumes. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. New York, Random House, 1937.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

581

__ The Republic, second edition. Translated by Desmond Lee. New York, Penguin Books, 1974. Podhoretz, Norman. The Prophets, New York, The Free Press, 2002. Prichard, J. B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (2nd edition). Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1955. Pyper, HughS. David as Reader: 2Samue/ I2:1-15 and the Poetics of Fatherhood. New York, Brill, 1996. Rad, Gerhard von. Old Testament Theology. Translated by D. M. G. Stalker. London, Oliver & Boyd, 1962, v. I. Rainey, Anson. "Concubine", Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. V. Jerusalem, Keter Publishing House, 1971: 862-3. Ratner, Robert. "Three Bulls or One? A Reappraisal of I Samuel 1: 24." Biblica 68 ( 1987): 98-102. Rosen, Baruch. "Subsistence Economy in Iron Age 1." In Finkelstein, I. and Na'aman, N. (editors), From Nomadism to Monarchy: Archaeological and Historical Aspects of Early Israel. Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Society, 1994, p. 339-351. Rost, Leonhard. The Succession to the throne of David. Sheffield, The Almond Press, 1982), trans. Rutter, M. D. and Gunn, D. M. from original 1926 German. Ryder, Michael L. "The Evolution of the Fleece." Scientific American, (January 1987): 100-107. Sackenfeld, Katharine D. "Loyalty and Love: The Language of Human Interconnections in the Hebrew Bible." In Backgrounds for the Bible, edited by M. P. O'Connor and D. N. Freedman. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1987, p. 215-229. Samuel, Maurice. Certain People of the Book. New York, Knopf, 1959. Sarna, Nahum M. JPS Torah Commentary: Exodus. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society, 1991. _ _. JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society, 1989. Schniedewind, William M. Society and the Promise to David: The Reception History of 2Samuel 7: I- I 7. New York, Oxford University Press, 1999. Silver, Morris. Prophets and Markets: A Political Economy of Ancient Israel. London, Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing, 1983. Simon, Uriel. "A Balanced Story: The Stem Prophet and the Kind Witch." Prooftexts 8 (1988): 159-71. _ _."Minor Characters in Biblical Narrative." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 46 (1990): 11-19. _ _. "The Poor Man's Ewe-Lamb: An Example of a Juridical Parable." Biblica 48 (1967): 207-242. _ _."Samuel's Call to Prophecy: Form Criticism with Close Reading," Prooftexts 1 (1981): 119-32. _ _."Samuel's Call: A Youth Becomes a Prophet." TAPE. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society, 1996. Smith, George Adam. The Historical Geography ofthe Holy Land. New York, A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1894. Stager, Lawrence E. "The Archeology of the Family in Ancient Israel." Bulletin ofAmerican Schools of Oriental Research 260 (1985): 1-35. _ _. "The Song of Deborah- Why Some Tribes Answered the Call and Others Did Not." Biblical Archeology Review 15.1 (1989): 50-64. Sternberg, Meir. "The Bible's Art of Persuasion: Ideology, Rhetoric, and Poetics in Saul's Fall." Hebrew Union College Annual 54 (1983), p. 45-82 . . The Poetics ofBiblical Narrative. Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1985. Thompson, J. A. "The Significance of the Verb LOVE in the David-Jonathan Narratives in I Samuel." Vetus Testamentum 24 (1974): 334-8. Tigay, Jeffrey H. JPS Torah Commentary: Deuteronomy. Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society, 1996. Tristam, H. B. The Natural History of the Bible, third edition. London, R. Clay and Sons, 1873. Vallee, Bert L. (MD). "Alcohol in the Western World." Scientific American 278:6 (June 1998): 62-67. Websters New International Dictionary Of The English Language, second edition, Unabridged. G. & C. Merriam Co., Publishers, 1954. Weiser, Artur. The Psalms: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library). Translated from the German Die Psalmen, (fifth revised edition, 1959) by Herbert Hartwell. Chatham, Kent, W. and J. Makay and Co., 1962. Wellhausen, Julius. Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel, translated from the German by Black and Menzies. New York, Meridian Books, 1957. Wenham, Gordon J. "Betulah: 'A Girl of Marriageable Age."' Vetus Testamentum 22 (1972): 326-48. Willey, Patricia K. "The Importunate Woman of Tekoa." In Fewell, D. N. (ed.), Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible. Louisville, John Knox Press, 1992, p. 99-113. Yadin, Yigael. The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, 2 Volumes. Jerusalem, International Publishing Co., Ltd., 1963. Yeivin, S. "Shlomo." Encyclopaedia Biblica Vll, Hebrew. Jerusalem 1976, column 693. Yerushalmi, Yosef H. Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory. Seattle, University of Washington Press, 1999.

582

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

HEBREW COMMENTARIES QUOTED Ibn Ezra, Abraham {b. Toledo, Spain 1089, d. Calahorra, Spain c. 1167). METZUDAT DAVID (by David Altschuler, Jaworow, Galicia, 18th century). RADAK {RAbbi DAvid Kimchi, Narbonne, France, 1160-1235). RASHI (RAbbi SHlomo ben Isaac, Troyes, France I 040-11 05).

INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES NOTE: This book contains the entire text of I and 2 Samuel, as well as I Kings 1-2. Specific verses can be located in their sequential order. All other references to Biblical verses, including those additional citations from Samuel and l Kings I -2 that are not in sequential order, are listed below. The order of the books follows that of the Hebrew Bible. Genesis 1:2 62 1:29-30 277 4:10-11 368 5:1 141 7:17 9:18-27 14:8-20 14:18-20 17:1-5 19:30-38 24:16 28:18-22 29:12-14 31:30 31:40 32:23-29 35:16-20 48:17 49:25 Exodus 3:7 4:1-5 4:14-16 4:29-31 5:8-12 7:1-2 9:1-7 12:13,23 15:21 17:8-13 17:14-16 17:16 19:5 19:6 20:13 20:22 21:14

88 134 174,395 88 160 213 300 124 127 213 385 100 281 175 255 256 99 99 260 97 100 1 100 100 50 496 501 169 140 140 151 88 542 136,368 502 136

22:20 23:8 23:9

141 112 141

Deuteronomy 2:23 4:41-43

25:8

301

5:17

25:12

300

10:17-19

25:30 28:3 30:11-16 33:17, 19 35:25 35:31 36:1 38:8

186 394 499 470 394 394 394 46 367 134 367 134 136,238 141 136 136,238 368 387 367 238 141 30

11:16-17 12:23 14:1 15:12-15 16:13-14 16:19 17:2-7 14:14-20 21:10-13 21:22-23 22:28-29 22:10 23:22,24 24:1-4 24:16 24:17-22 25:19 27:22 32:27 32:42 33:1 33:17 34:4 35:9-34

452 135 278 141 213 112 136 106 372 455 388 290 132 274 453 141 9, 140 387 115 260 119 466 119 136

499 303 46 144 102 160 317 337

Joshua 6 7:26 8:29 8:3-35 8-20 9 10:12-13 10:26-27

64 423 423 286 300 280,452 258 455

Leviticus 15:19, 24, 28 l7:Il 18:19 19:26 19:31 19:33 20:1-5 20:6 20:10 20:17 20:18 20:27 25:35-38 27:6 Numbers 1:45-47 4:15,20 4:23 10:29-32 11:24-26 14:33 20:10-12 20:14-21

INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES

584 21:37 22:17 22:19 20:7 21:21 24 24:4

375,384 136 136 286 286 286 337

Judges 1:16 3:12-14 3:12-30 4-5 5 5:7 6-8 6:1-6 9 11 11:39 15:9 16:28 17 19:22 20 20:16 20-21 21:12

144 141 332 113 169 37 113 141 286 113,350 385 486 321 117 46 83 163 87 385

1 Samuel I 2:1-10 2:10 2:17 2:22 4:9 4:10 5:6 8:11 8:14 8:19-20 10:5 10:10-13

10:11 11:8 12:6-25 13:3 13:6 14:18 14:21 14:31-35 14:44 14:47 14:50-51 15:4 15:22 15:22-23

3 3, 514 83,466,476 376 30 531 302 501 193 347 38 120,334,454 177 170 254 91 334 203 77 123 238 383 350 269 254 554 59

24:3-4 24:5 25:9-15 15:27 16:2-5 17:20 17:28 17:34-36 17:55 18:19 21:12 22:7 2:22 24:5 24:6 25:21-22 26:15 28:14

2 Samuel 1:17-27 1:18-27 1:19-27 2:1-10 2:8 2:14 3:14 3:24-25 3:33-34 3:35 5:4-5 5:13-16 5:17-25 5:21 7:6 7:8 8:1 8:2 8:16 8:17 9:4 10 11:11 12:10-12 14:11 15:8 15:18 16:5-8 17:27 19:6-8 21:8 21:15-22 21:16-22 22 22:1-23:7 22:5 22:14

478 56 277 166 183 217 212 255 7 420 225 347 316 166 489 383 531 166

3 190 546 514 137 160 173 91 546 59 225 380 129 64 262 288 192 445 444 515 333 64 415 423 268 288 417 515 91 280,420 286 160 191 3 410 83

10:27 13:13 15:51 23:1-7 23:3 23:8-24:25 23:13-17 23:21 23:34 24:11

423 268 406 190,514 140 3 192,286 160 367 192

1 Kings 1:6 1:48 2:1-9 2:8-9 3:4-27 3:14 4:4 4:6 4:18 4:24 5:27-32 6:1-38 6:11-13 7:15-8:66 8:46 11:4-11 11:16 11:26-40 11:29-40 12:1 12:20 18:21 19:2 19:8 19:11-13

404 321 91,478 432 87 378,538 409,536 444 524 335 317 313 378,538 313 365 538 337 538 528 286 112 393 59 160 515

2 Kings 14:8-14 Isaiah 1:11-17 1:21, 27 8:23 10:13 26:1 28:21 29:13 30:29 31:1 54:1 55:7 Jeremiah 1:4-7 1:17-19

292

59 518 236 394 278 287 320 325 515 389 548

53 93

INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES 7:12 7:21-26 9:22-23 10:9 14:9 15:1 17:9 22:13-16 31:15 37:3 38:1-3 47:4

67 553 47, 518 394 414 103 550f 47 99 295 295 62

Ezekiel 2:3-5 2:5 3:17-19 7:26 18:20 18:23, 30-32 24:7 25:16 33:10-11 36:16-36

43 475 552 54 453 376 278 62 376 115

Hosea 2:21-22 3:4 8:11-13 14:2-3 14:3

517 54 553 547 553

Amos 2:6-8 5:14-15 5:23 5:24 6:12-13 6:12-13 7:7-9 7:10-17 7:12 7:15 8:11-12 9:7

553 515 325 507,516 515 515 516 514 501 262 54 62

Jonah 1:14

278

Micah 3:6-7 4:3-4 4:4

54 520 99

Zechariah 4:6 Malachi 2:10 Psalms 8:4-6 12:7 14: I 15 18 18: I 18:11 18:14 18:26 18:30, 33-34 18:46 23:1-3 23:4 24 25 29 30:12 32:3-5 34 34:2 37 38 39 47 48 50 51 52 56 59 70 73-83 78:36-37 78:59-64 81 82 88 89 90:1 91:7 92 93 94 95-100 99:6 107:27 III 112

107, 447, 516

107

461 473 207 462 191,461 464 466 83 469 190,203 472 461 469 326 541 190 84 549 191, 221 320 541 326 326 326 326 326 376 191 191 191 326 326 320 67 326 326 326 411 119 170 326 326 326 326 103 394 541 541

585 113-118 113:1-2 113:7-9 115:7 118:5 119 120-134 132:8 139:12 145 145:2 145:18

326 320 38 242 25 541 326 67 471 541 320 319

Proverbs 31:10-31 31:18

29 539

Job 14:6

37

Ruth 1:12 2:5 2:8-9 4:13-22

7 366 192

Lamentations 2:19

83

59

Ecclesiastes 3:16 7:20 9:11 12:13

45 365 37 447

Esther 1:7-8 5:6 7:2

213 213 213

Ezra 2:4

326

Nehemiah 3:34

294

1 Chronicles 2:17 3:1 3:1-3 3:5-9 5:30-33 8:33 8:34 9:39

420 503 268 296 341 137,263 280 263

586 9:40 10:3 10:4 10:6 10:7 10:10 10:11 10:13 ll:3 ll:4 11:5 ll:6 ll:8 ll:IO 11:11 11:13-14 11:15 II: I5-I9 ll:17-18 ll:20 11:23 1I:29 II:34 12:1-22 I2:8-I5 12:23-40 12:28 13:1-4 13:6 13:8 13:9

INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES 280 244 244 244 245 246 246 246 282 291 291,293 292 294 486 486 486 487 286 487 488 488 489 489 249 4I8 286 342 303 302 302 303

13:10 14:3 14:3-7 14:12 14:14 14:16 15, 16, 25 15:2-15 15:18, 24 16:39 17:6 17:13 17:21 17:39-40 18:1 18:3 18:3-10 I8:4 18:8 18:9 18:10 18:12 18:16 I9:I 19:2 I9:8 19:18 20:1 20:2 20:4 20:5

303 296,380 296 287 288 288 327 304 304 309 314 315 324 325 288,335 333 332 333 335 249,335

335 337 341 351 35I 354 359 360,380 361 458 459

20:6 459 21:2 494 21:5 496 21:7 498 21:16 501 21:18 497 21:2 497 21:21 497 21:29 309 22:6-16 478 22:7 503 22:8 316, 330 23:1 529 23:4 341 304 26:4ff 26:29-32 341 27:1-15 343 28:I-11, 20-2I 478 28:I1-29:9 313 29:10-30 478 29:29 192, 316 40 313

2 Chronicles 2:I 2:I-IO 6:36 II :8 25:I7-24

545 313 365 288 292

GENERAL INDEX Purron,28, 50-52,77,103,112-113,317 Abel, 5, 76, 174, 439, 440, 442 Abel ofBeth-maacah, 439 Abi-albon, 489, See The Thirty Abiathar, 194-195,231,239,325,341-342,408409,417,430,444-445,524-526,528,534,536, Abiel, 95, 137 Abiezer, 489, See The Thirty Abigail of Carmel, 5, 8, 29, 173,206-213,221, 224, 230, 253, 268, 320, 365, 367, 390-391, 420,430,442,511,512,523 Abigail, sister of David, 420 Abijah, 86 Abimelech, 270, 286, 371, 539, 540 Abinadab, ofKiriath-jearim, 77, 302 son ofJesse, 156, 247 sonofSaul, 137, 160-161,244,303 Abishag, 523, 525, 533-534 Abishai, son ofZeruiah, 217-218, 266, 278, 337, 356, 381,411, 420-422,432,438-440,458,488, See Joab Abita), 268 Abner, 7, 137, 165, 182,217-218, 243, 245,254, 257,263-267, 269-271, 273-282,400, 418,439, 454,531-532,535 Absalom, 87, 109, 213,268, 329, 357, 384-386, 389-400,403-409,411, 413-418,420-427,42943~433-434,436-438,442-445,495,523-524,

529,532,535 Achish, 187f, 224-225, 227-229, 232, 234, 536, 540 Ackerman, James S., 525 Adonijah, 268, 308, 379, 384, 523-529, 533-535, 538 Adoniram, 444; also known as Adoram Adriel the Maholathite, 561 Adullam, 191-192, 194,286,458,487 cave of, 191 Agag, 145-147, 149-151 Ahiam, son of Sharar, See The Thirty Ahijah, 125,127-128,131,186,341,515,528,538 Ahimaaz, 408f, 417, 424-425, 524 Ahimelech, 186-187, 193-195,217,231,309,341 Ahinoam, ofJezreel, 5, 197,212,224,230,253,268

wife of Saul, 13 7 Ahio, 302 Ahithophel, 319, 367, 405-409, 414-418, Ahitub, 125, 186, 193-194, 341 Akroyd, Peter R., 521 Albright, William F., 30, 36, 39, 67, 85, 100, 103, 104, 30 1' 462 Alt, Albrecht, 282 Alter, Robert, 22, 172-173, 190, 205, 425 Altschuler, David, 210 Amalek, 140-142, 144-145, 150-151, 206, 227, 230, 233, 241, 335 Amalekites, 136, 140-142, 144-147, 149, 151, 156, 227,230-231,233,238,250,335,337,349 Amassa, 416,418,420,430,438-440,531,532, 535 Ammiel, 346, 420 Ammonites, 109, 111, 113, 136, 144, 312, 335, 341, 350-351, 353-354, 356, 359-361, 366, 370, 375, 380-381, 420,538 Arnnon,5,268,384,385-393,396,399,404, 523, 548 Amos, 54, 62, 103,262, 325, 394, 480, 501, 507, 514-518, 553 Anatoth, 489 Anderson, Francis, 32, 105, 523 Aphek, 61, 228-230, 236, 238-239, 249, 392 Arameans, 312, 333-335, 341, 350-351, 354,356357,359-360,406,463 Araunah,293,497,500,502-503,505 Aristotle, 41, 261 Ark, 28, 54-55, 63-67, 71-78, 81, 83, 102, 129, 300-309,311-315,317,321,324-326,329-330, 342,369,394,401,408,425-426,466,495,499, 527,534,536,546 Armoni, 454 Aroe~234,495,505

Asahel, son ofZeruiah, 266-267, 277-278,488489,532 Asaph, 191, 326, 546, Ashdod,63, 71-73,76 Asher, 264, 270 Ashkelon, 28, 63, 68, 76, 187, 258-259 Ashtoret, 82, 113, 115 Atkinson, Donald, xi

588

GENERAL INDEX

Austin, James, 8 Authorized Version, See King James Bible Baal, 82, 113, 115, 137, 263,287, 390-391, 487 Baanah, 279-281,489, 558-561 Baasha, 97 Babylon, 56, 380, 521 Babylonian Exile, 10, 225, 256, 338,480, 516, 521 Bahurim,275,410,417,431,489 Balaarn, II, 56-57, 478 Bani the Gadite, See The Thirty Bankier, Joanna, 13 Bar, James, 19, 54, Barak, 113, 274 Bamstone, Aliki and Willis, 13 Barzillai, 420, 433-434, 454, 532, 536 Barzini, Luigi, 90 Bashan,236, 570,574 Bathsheba, I, 5, 8, 173,212,314,330,365-370, 372-374,377-380,384,387,401,406,425,457, 463,477,482,493,525-527,533-534,545-546, 549,555

Beeroth, 280 Beersheba, 60, 86, 144, 232, 494, 496,499, 501, 504-505 belial, 410, 436, 465, 480 Benaiah, 341, 443, 488, 524, 526-528, 534-537 Ben-Barak, Zafrira, 301 Benjamin, 65, 87, 95, 97-99, 104, 120, 124-125, 142, 163, 192, 249, 264-5, 275, 279-280, 287, 294,409-410,442,456,496,524,536 Benjamite, 95, 98, 128,265, 275, 280, 409-411, 417,431,435-436,532,536 Berman, Joshua A., 89, 105 Beth-shemesh, 63, 75-78 Beth-el, 234, 391 Bethlehem, 99, 156, 158, 160, 172, 180, 183, 192, 254-5,267,286,299,394,487,489 Beth-shean, 238, 245, 246, 288 Bezek, 11 0, 111, 142 Boaz, 7 Bomberg, Daniel, 14 BookofSamuel, l-6,8-9, II, 13-17,21,27,33,36, 38, 42, 91, 104, 117, 160,215,225,244,246, 249,293,316,376,379,383,397,401,449, 450-451,476,482,491-492, 508-509,511-513, 521-522,525,530,540 Bright, John, 125, 142, 175, 205,288 BronzeAge,66-9, 79,144,225,268,295,297,336 Buccellati, Giorgio, 282 Bury, John Bagnell, 91, 493 Caesar, Julius, 110 Cahill, Jane, 298-299 Caleb, 207, 232, 268 Carnbyses, 375

Canaan, 9, ll, 17, 21, 36, 39,61-63,68-69,78, 102-104, 112, 115, 124, 144,207, 217, 225, 289,291,297-298,309,462-463 Canaanites, 10, 20, 39, 62, 68-69, 84, 113, 286, 496,505 Carmel, 146,206-207, 211-212,224, 230, 234, 236,253,255,390,489,511 Chadwick, H. M. and N. K., 6 Cherethite, 232, 341, See Pelethite cherubim, 63-64, 66, 468 Childs, Brevard, 451 Chiliab, 5, 268, 391, 523, See Daniel Chimham, 434 Chronicles, 21, 51, 137, 192, 244-246, 249, 282, 286-8, 291-294, 296, 302-304, 309, 313-316, 324-325, 333, 335-337, 341, 343, 360, 380, 391,420,454,459,486-489,494,497-498, 501, 503, 521 Cohen,30,46,49-50,54, 77,366 Cohen, H. H., 407 Cross, Frank M., 36, 109, 166, 190, 258, 342, 434, 464-465 Cryer, F. H., 217 cubit, 158 Cyrus, 375 Dagon, 71-73,75,81-82,246,321 Dahood, Michael J. S., 462, 464 Damascus, 236, 332, 334, 357, 359, 439 Damrosch, David, 3 Dan, 28, 60, 63, 270-271, 416, 439, 494-496,499, 501,504-505,569,571,576 Daniel, 268, 391, 523, See Chiliab David, 6, 19, 23, 27, 67, 96, 103, 112, 157,401-3, 429-434,451-454,491-506, 508, 513-514, 516, 521 and Abner, 273-279 and Absalom, 389-394, 398-400,403-407,418427 and Bathsheba, 365-372, 377-379, 525-526, 533-534 as builder, 117, 294-295 and civil war, 263-267 death of, 4, 522-532 elected king oflsrael, 281-283 as father, 383-400, 421-427, 524-525 as fugitive, 176-177, 186-187, 191-192, 197198, 202-203, 221 in Gath, 187-188, 223-230, 288 and Goliath, I, 7, 127, 161-165 and government, 340-342, 443-446, 482-483, 524-525, 527-529 in Hebron, 253-257, 267-268, 280-281 House of, 97,314-315,318,321-323 and Jerusalem, 289-296 and Jonathan, 165-166, 174, 179-184, 196,345348,454

GENERAL INDEX

589

asjudge,87,374-376,394-399,402-404 and Keilah, 194-196 and literacy, 9 and Nathan, 313-318, 373-377, 380, 525-528, 536 and Nob, 186-187, 192-194 and Philistine wars, 285-289 as poet, 189-11, 257-262, 278,461-483 as religious figure, 297-305, 307-8, 311-327, 407-412,477-481, 500-504, 538 and Rizpah, 455-457 and Saul, 165, 167-171, 174-175, 199-201,215221 and Solomon, 378, 525-532, 534-538 as warrior, 129, 151, 329-337, 343-344, 349361, 381-382, 457-459, 461-476, 485-490 and wives, 5, 171-173, 175-176,205-213,273275,295,305-307, 406-407, 437. See also Bathsheba above. as youth, 157, 160 in Ziklag, 225-228, 230-234, 249-253 Dead Sea, 15,31,31,33,39, 109,160,190,192, 196,198,206,278,331,336-337,354,356, 408,477 Deborah, 13, 27, 29, 35, 87, 113, 115, 119, 151, 520 Deuteronomy, 57, 62, 106-107, 112, 115, 119, 127, 127, 132, 135-136 140-142, 151,213, 239, 260, 274,277-278,290,308,368,372,376,387, 388,452-453,455,467,531 Dever, William G., 22, 68 Diamond, Jared, 10 DoegtheEdomite, 187,193-194,217 Dorian conquest, 9

Elijah, 59, 147, 160, 515 E1ika the Harodite, See The Thirty Eliphelet, 296, 380, 489 Elishama, 296, 380 Elishua, 296, 380 Elkanah,27-30,32-34, 183,559,561 Emek Rephaim, 286, 458, 487 Endor, 1,5,240,242 En-gedi, 286 Enheduanna, Princess, 12-13 En-rogel, 417,527 ephah,33 ephod, 34, 49, 54, 125, 128-9, 131, 187, 193-195, 231, 304-306 Ephraim, 27f, 69, 95, 129-130, 203, 236,264, 299, 390,421,432,442 Ephraimite, See Ephraim Eshbaa1, See Ish-bosheth Eslinger, Lyle M., 34 Euphrates, 332-3, 335, 338, 350, 357, 359, 361, 366,401 Ezekiel, 54, 56, 62, 115, 220, 278, 376,453, 475, 552 Ezion-geber, 336

Eben-ezer, 61, 71, 84, 102, 124, 228, 236, 250, 253,300,302,369,426 Ecclesiastes, See Koheleth Edom, 136, 187, 236, 335-338 Edomites, See Edom Eglah, 268 Egypt, 14-15, 17-20, 36, 49, 50, 61-63, 68-69, 88, 100, 104-106, 112-113, 119, 140-141, 144-145, 190,214,227,236,268,297,301,312,314, 324,337-339,349,361,483,496,515,518,540 Ekron,62-63, 72, 74, 76,84, 164,187,288,289 Elah, Valley of, 158-159 Eleazar, son of Dodo, 486 Elhanan, son of Dodo, See The Thirty Elhanan, son of Jair, 459 Eli, 27-28, 30-34, 45-46, 48-55, 57-60, 63, 65-67, 86, 100, 125, 127, 145, 157, 166, 186, 194, 213214,243,250, 253, 291, 341-342, 376,389, 426, 534-535 Eliab, 156, 160-162, 212 Eliada, 296, 380 E1iam, 366-7, 489, See The Thirty

Gad, 121,192,239,270,313,316,493,495,497, 500-501, 505 Galilee, 236, 238, 264, 268, 392 Gareb the lthrite, See The Thirty Gath, 63, 72, 74, 76, 84, 158, 161, 164, 187, 188, 191,221,223-225,227-228,234,258-259,288, 304,341,407,458-460,536-537,540,544 Gaza,63, 76,225,236,256 ger, 251,280

Fathers of the synagogue, 41 female authorship, 5-6, 8-9, 12-14, 36, 509-514, 517,519-520 Finkelstein, Israel, 66, 68-69, 144 Fleming, Ian, 72 Four-Room House, 68 Frankfort, Henri, 18-20, 124,482 Freedman, David, N., 36, 38, 149, 190, 244,258, 464,465,506

Geshu~264,268,350,385,392,398-400,405

Gezer, 68, 288, 458 Giants, the Valley of the, See Emek Rephaim Gibbon, Edward, 507 Gibeah, 28, 78, 100-101, 104, 107, 110-111, 120121, 124-125, 150, 175-176, 192, 198,216, 245,348,453-454,456,489

Gibeon, 265-266, 278, 280, 287-288, 302, 309, 325,342,378,438,536,538

590

GENERAL INDEX

Gibeonites, 238, 280, 451-456 Gichon, Mordechai, 127, 579 Gideon,87, 113,270,286,371 Gilboa, 239, 244-245, 258-260, 456 Gilead, 109, 121, 192,236,246, 263-264, 268, 346,350,353,357,418,420,495,505 Gilgal,28,85, 101-102,111-112,120-121,123125,146-147,150,235,431,434,436 Gilligan, Carol, 510-512, 519 Giloh, 406, 489 Ginsberg, H. L., 190, 258, 289 Gittite, 288, 303-304, 407, 421, 459, 572 Go1dingay, John, 552 Goliath, 1, 3, 7, 15, 127, 158, 160-167, 169, 171, 174, 179, 187, 193,212,271,287,365,458-459 Gooding, David W., 3, 15, 161-163 Gordon, Cyrus, 305, 385 Greenberg, Moshe, 31,319-321,376 Hadadezer, 332-335, 349-350, 353-354 Haggith, 268, 523, 525, 533 Halladay, John S., 117 Rallo. William W., 12-13, 105 Halpern, Baruch, 4, 21, 62, 65, 106 Hammurabi, 56, 270, 453 Hannah, 5, 6, 8, 11, 13, 25, 27-42, 45, 48, 83, 86, 127, 132, 147, 165-166, 183,213-214,319-321, 326,449-450,457,467,475-476,480,502, 504,512,514,541,543 hanun,351,353,420 Haran, Menachem, 14,454 Hauer, C. E., 123, 142, 245, 254 Razor, 113, 439 Hebron, 28, 146, 196,206-207, 234,253-257, 263265,267-268,273, 275-282, 285-286, 289-291, 296, 299, 342, 350, 380, 391, 401, 405-407, 458,487,493,497,523-524,532-533 Helam, Battle of, 359 Helaz the Paltite, See The Thirty Heleb, son ofBaanah, See The Thirty herem, 142 Herodotus, 63 Herold, J. Christopher, 39 Herzberg, H. W., 121 Herzog, Chaim, 127 hesed, 346, 516-518, 548 Hesse, Brian, 69 Hezekiah, 151, 291 Hezrai of Carmel, See The Thirty Hiddai ofNahale-gaash, See The Thirty Hiram, 294 Hittites, 217, 368, 495, 505 Hivites, 496, 505 Hoffmeier, James K., 145 Hophni, 27-28, 48, 51, 53, 63-66 Hormah, 234 Hosea, 54,517-518, 520,547,553

hozeh, 56-7, 501 hubris, 132, 499 Huehnergard, John, 49 Humphreys, W. L., 2 Hushai the Archite, 409,416-417 Ibhar, son of David, 296, 380 Ibn Ezra, 300, 572 Ichabod, 66, 125 Igal, son of Nathan of Zobah, See The Thirty Iniquity, 548 Ion, 4 Ira the Ithrite, See The Thirty Ira the Jairite, 444 Ira, son oflkkesh of Tekoa, See The Thirty Iron Age, 35, 62, 68-69, 79, 268, 294, 297, 336 Isaiah, 56, 58-59, 103, 236, 278, 287, 320, 325, 389,394,515,518,548,553 Ishbi-benob, 458 Ishbosheth, 411, 560-561, 574 Ishida, Tomoo, 87, 579 Israel as referring to the entire nation, 4, 6-10, 13, 14, 17-18,20,21,27,28,31,48,50-52, 53-57, 60, 61,63-68, 71-75, 78, 81, 8385, 87, 90, 96, 102, 103-105, 109, 111113,119,121,124,129,131-133,136, 141, 144, 146, 148-152, 155, 158, 161, 163-166, 173-175, 181, 187, 190, 192, 195, 196, 199-203,205, 209-210,218, 225,227-229,233,236,238-246,249250,252, 254, 257-259,261-264,268, 270, 294-295, 300-304, 306-307, 311, 314,318,322-326,330,332,334,339341,343,350,357,359-360,366,368369, 371, 374-376, 384, 387-388, 391393,398,405,410,415-417,424,440, 445, 449, 451-454, 456,459,461, 467, 474, 477-478,480, 482-483, 486, 493, 496-497, 499-501, 503-505, 514-515, 520,523,525-528,531-533,538,542, 546-547,552,554,555 the Children of, 83, 95, 256, 289, 479, 522 as geographic designation, 11, 30, 35, 58, 77, 82,110,169,224,302 as God's people, 97, 99, 115, 130, 140, 295 Jacob, alternative name for, 256 Kingdom of(the Northern Tribes), 36, 112, 142,254,256,264,266-267,269,273277,279,281-283,286,288-294,299, 308,315,330,339,345,349,353,357, 401-402,405-406, 413-415,418,420421,423,429-433,435-437, 442, 458, 487,492,498,505-506,516-518,524, 535,538 land of, 124, 219, 220, 251,434 post 1948 state, 344

GENERAL INDEX the tribes of, 49, 98, 104, 146, 312, 404, 405, 439,494 Ithra the Ishmaelite, 420, 558 Ithream, son of David, 268 Ittai the Gittite, 407,420-421 Ittai, son of Ribai of Gibeah, See The Thirty Jabbok River, 267, 350, 421 Jabesh, 109-111, 123, 128, 139, 142, 192, 235, 246,257,350,456 Jabesh-gilead, 109,ll1, 123, 128, 139, 142, 235, 257,350,456 Jacob, 19, 56, 100, 112, 134, 254-256, 270, 281, 289,299,337,477 Jacobs, Jane, 340 Japhia, 296, 380 Jashen the Gizonite, See The Thirty Jehus, See Jerusalem Jebusites, 85,291-293, 297 Jedidiah, See Solomon Jehoshaphat, son of Ahilud, 560 Jephthah, 87, 113, 350 Jerahmeelites, 227, 232, 234 Jeremiah, 46-47, 53, 56-7, 62, 67, 99, 103,295, 394,414,517-518,520,534,550-51,553 Jericho, 64, 85, 299, 351 Jeroboam, 87, 111, 308, 515-516, 528, 538 Jerubbaal, See Gideon Jerusalem, 12, 15, 28, 67, 83, 85, 97, 103, 117, 120, 164-165, 186-187, 212, 254,264-5, 280, 282,285-289, 291-300, 302-305, 308-309, 311312, 316-318, 324-325, 327, 329-332, 334, 340, 342,345-6,348-349,354,357,360-361,366367, 369, 374, 380-381, 390-391, 398-402, 405412,414,417,420,424-426,429,431-434, 436-438,443,451, 473, 489, 492-493,495-498, 500-502, 505, 516, 518, 521, 524, 527-528, 532,534,536-537,555 Jesse, 155-156, 160-161, 165, 167-168, 183, 192193,207,255,420,436,477,540 Jezebel, son of, 59, 192 Jezree1, 5, 197, 212, 224,229, 230, 236, 238-239, 244,253,264,268,280,523 Joab, son ofZeruiah, 5, 27, 91,217,265-267,276279, 292, 294, 337-338,340-341, 354, 356, 360,366, 368-371, 373, 380-381, 393-395, 397400,404 418,420-427,430, 434,437-440,442445, 488-489, 493-496, 49849-9, 504-505, 524526, 528-529, 531-536 Joel, 86 Jonadab, 386,389, 391-392 Jonathan, 5, 27, 120-121, 123, 125, 127-133, 137, 147, 165-166, 174, 179-189, 193, 196-197,201, 203, 243-144, 250, 253,256-263, 280-281, 305, 345-348,383,406,408-410,417,424,432-433, 450,453-454,456,459,489,524,528,535, Joram, 335

591

Jordan, 57,81,85,101,109,111-ll2, 121, 123-124, 158,236,245,246,252-257,299,332,350, 354,357,408,411-13,417-418,421,424,431436,455-456,495-496,505,532,536 Josephus Flavius, 54-55, 82, 86, 109, 121, 277, 361, 422, 439 Josheb-basshebeth, See The Thirty Joshua ofBeth-shemesh, 76 Joshua, the son ofNun, I, 9, 28, 64, 68, 77, 83, 89, 102, 105, 140, 191, 207, 238, 258, 268, 280, 286,300,337,406,423,452,455,523 Josiah, 106, 176 Judah, 36, 63, 86, 106-107, 110, 115, 117, 121, 142, 158, 160, 164, 170, 172, 191-192, 194196,198,202-203,205,207,217,225,227,232, 234, 253-258, 262-264, 267-269, 271, 275-276, 282-283,286-295,299,302,314-315,331,335, 339,342-3,345,349,353,369,375,380,401402,405,407-410,416,418,430-431,435-436, 438,443,445,451,458,486-488,492,494, 496,498,503-506,518,521,524,527,535,538 Judges, 1, 10, 13, 35, 37, 46, 53, 63, 68, 81, 83, 87, 101, 113, 117, 119, 131, 137, 141, 144, 163, 169,270,286,311,314,321,332,350,371, 385,486,503,520 Kadesh-barnea, 140 Kaufmann, Yehezkel, 54 Keilah, 194-195, 197,221,480 Kenites, 144, 227, 232,234 Kennedy, A. R. S., 421 Kenyon,K.,293 Kessler, Martin, 156-157, 247 Ketib, 45, 378, 459, 471 Keys, Gillian, 521 Kidron, 12, 407,-408,417, 424, 536 Kierkegaard, S., 16, 144 Kimchi, See Radak king, 2, 4, 7, 12-13, 16, 19, 21, 40, 42, 45, 61, 87, 89, 91, 96, 105-107, 109-110, 113, 139, 141, 151, 155-156, 166, 169, 176, 195, 197,205, 207,215,224,229,236,256,259-260,262, 267,273,278,281-282,285,291-295,299, 304-306,321,323,329,331-332,334-335,337339,341,345,348,350,361,373,379,389, 392-393, 395-396, 402, 404, 409-410, 414, 417, 423,430-432,442,446,451,458,497,505, 518,521,523-529,533-537,540,554 King James Bible, 19, 554 King, Philip J., 50, 283 King's Highway, 236, 334, 337-338, 350 kinor, 100, 167-168, 170, 175,326,302 Kiriath-jearim, 77, 280, 302-304, 309 Kish, 95, 101, 105, 110, 137, 181,254,257,318, 347,454,456 Kitchen, Kenneth Andrew, 9-ll, 69, 190, 327 Koheleth, 37

592

GENERAL INDEX

Kuntz, J. Kenneth, 464 Lachish, 11 Lahmi, 459 Large-Stone Structure, 294 Levenson, Jon D., 207, 212 Levine, Baruch, 134-135, 553 Levite, 49, 304 Levy, Thomas E., 337 Lewis, Theodore J., 175, 396 literacy, 9-12, 35 Lo-debar, 346, 420 Loew,Judah,331,366 Lofts, Norah, 307 LXX, See Septuagint Machiavelli, Niccolo, 285, 401, 429, 533, 537-538 Machir, 346, 420 Mahanaim, 257,263-265, 267, 269, 280, 418, 420421,424,433,532,536 Maharai ofNetophah, See The Thirty Maimonides, 518 Malachi, 107, 147, 480 Malchi-shua, 137 Manasseh, 299 Maon, 198,202,206 marginalization, 8, 86, 508 marginalize, 89 Mari, 9, 12, 56 Masoretic, 14-17,30, 33,376 Masorites, 15 Mazar, Benjamin, 293-295, 298-299,323 Mazar, Eilat, 322-324, 327-328 McCarter, P. Kyle, 4, 37, 109, 158, 293, 378 McKenzie, Steven L., 205 McNeill, William H., 73 Mebunai the Hushathite, See The Thirty Medeba, 356 Meirovich, Harvey, 380 Menorah, 309 Mephibaal, 454 Mephibosheth, 280, 346-410, 420,432-433, 454 Merab, 137,171-172,420,454-455,558,561 Merib-baal, See Jonathan Memeptah, 68, 336 Mesopotamia, 13, 17, 19, 36, 62, 105, 214, 225, 236,268,338-339,359 Metzudat David, 21 0 Meyer, K. F., 73 Meyers, Carol, 7-8, 15, 27, 29, 33, 35, 46, 170, 312-313,316,440,495,499 Mica, 348 Micah, 54, 99, 520 Michal, 5, 23, 137, 172-173, 175-176, 179,212213,243,274-275,304-307,387,454,511 Michmas, 120-121, 123, 125, 127-128, 130-131, 134, 158, 229, 341

Midianites, 113, 141 Milgrom, Jacob, 33, 87, 100, 131, 134-135, 166, 278, 317, 553 Millgram, Hillel 1., 9, 508 Millo, the, 293-294 Minoan Empire, 61-62 Miscall, Peter D.,22 Mizpah, 82-85, 88, 104 Moab, 15, 19, 27-28, 49-50, 56, 100, 102-104, 112113, 115, 119, 120, 140-141, 144, 147, 151, 191,301,304-305,309,317,319,470,531 Mycenaean Age, 62 naarim, 167,207,209,281 Nabal, 206-211, 213, 224, 230, 253, 255, 268, 320, 365,383 Nabi, 49-50, 56, 96, 501, 574-575 Naeh, Shlomo, 479 Nagid, 97, 99-100, 124, 140,209,281-282, 307, 314,527 Naharai the Beerothite, See The Thirty Nahash, 109-111, 113, 246, 350-351,353, 420 Naioth, 176-177, 179, 183 Najjar, Mohammad, 337 Nakhai, Beth Alpert, 35 Naomi, 5, 59 Nathan The prophet, 296,312-316,318,321,373-376, 378,380,383-385,393-395,397,404,409, 415,451,463,482,489,493,495,501,503, 524-528,531,536,545-546,551,555 Son of David, 422 Nazarite, 30 Negeb, 7,63,225,227,230,232,234,335,336337,341,496,505 Nehamas, Alexander, 3 Nepheg,296,380 Ner, 137,217-218, 245,263, 265, 269,276-277, 279, 400, 531, 535 Nob, 186-187, 191, 193, 195, 197,221,309,316, 341 Noddings, Nel, 510-511 Norwich, John, J., 22 Obed-edom, 303-304 Ockham, William, 3 Ockham's Razor, 3 Odysseus, 11 0 Orwell, George, 87 Ozick, Cynthia, 30 Paarai the Arbite, See The Thirty pagan, 18-20, 39, 64, 77-78, 81-82, 113, 115, 124, 190, 219, 321, 325, 453, 478, 482-483,499, 503,508,538 Paltiel, 5, 275 Paran, 202

GENERAL INDEX paranoia, 170-171, 173, 193,201,216,236,406 Patriarchs, 254, 299 Peninnah, 25, 27-29 pentapolis, 61-63 Philistine, 61-63,66,69,71-72,74-78,81-84,86, 97, 100, 113, 120-125, 127-130, 158, 160-165, 167,169,173-174,187,193-195,203,225, 227-234, 236, 238-240, 245, 252-254, 263-265, 274,285-289,301-302,304,309,312-313,316, 331-332,341,343,451,459,486-487,493, 495,527 Philistines, 61-66, 71-78, 81-85, 87, 97, 100, ll3, 121, 123-125, 128-131, 133-134, 136-137, 139, 142, 158, 160-161, 164, 171-173, 175, 187-188, 194-195,197-199,203,223-225,227-229,231232,235-236,238-239,241,244-246,249,253254,256,258-259,261,264-265,275,283, 285-289, 294, 298, 302, 321, 330-331, 334-335, 338-339,343,345,349,353,401,407,411, 430,450,456,458-459,463,486-487,498 Phinehas, 27-28,48, 51-53, 63-66, 125 Phoenicia, 11, 63, 236, 255, 294 Pirke Avot, 32,187 Plato, 4, 22, 41 Podhoretz, Norman, 19 polygamy, 7, 212 Prichard, J. B., 331, 336 psalm, 19, 25, 39, 41, 67, 83-84, 103, 119, 170, 188, 190-191,203,207,221,242,319-321, 326,337,376,394,399,411,431,450,452, 461-467,469,471-473, 464 467,469,471-473, 476-477,479,498-499, 502-503, 513, 539-542, 544-549, 551-555 Psalter, 39, 190, 461, 464 Pyper, Hugh S., 383-384 Qere, 459 Qumran, 15, 31,33 Rabbath-ammon, 109, 343, 350-351, 354, 356-357, 359-361, 421 Rad, Gerhard von, 8 Radak,32, 183,217-218,246,316,331,368,443, 459,471 Rainey, Anson, 270 Ramachandran, V. S., 55 Ramah,28,32,34, 78,85-86,96,102,104,139, 150, 157, 176-177, 179,202,238 Rashi, 97, 163, 180, 184, 199,210,331,334,395, 452 Ratner, Robert, 33 Rechab, 279-281 Rei, 524 Reich, Ronny, 291 Reuben, 117, 495 Rimmon, 280-281

593

Rizpah, 5, 23,269-271,415, 450, 454-457, 491, 503, 509-510, 512 Rogelim, 420, 433 Rosen, Baruch, 69 Rost, Leonhard, 521 Ruth, 5, 7, 9, 21, 59, 192, 255, 366 Ryder, Michael L., 255 Sackenfeld, Katharine D., 346 sacrifice, 19, 27-31, 33-34, 45-46, 49, 52, 56, 5859, 75, 78, 96-97, 101-102, 132-133, 135-136, 144, 146-147, 149, 156-157, 180, 183,212, 219,242, 276, 300-301, 309, 319, 325,406, 438,453,488,491,553-556 Samaria, 11, 256, 295 Samson, 27, 63, 119, 321 Samuel As synonymous with "Book of Samuel", 1-8, 13, 15-16, 19,21-23,31,39, 158,244,246, 294,301,316-317,332,333,335,379,421, 449-450, 459, 464, 482, 492, 507, 508-509, 514,517,518,519,520,521,522,523,525, 529, 530, 531. See also Book ofSamuel. Samuel, the prophet and Amalek, 140, 149-150 anointing David, 1, 155-157, 161-162, 189,275 call of, 53-59 choosing Saul, 97-101, 104-107 conflicts with God, 145, 147-148, 156 consulted by David, 176-177,179,186-187 crowning Saul, 111-112 death of, 201-202, 238-239, 245 dedicated to God, 30-35 farewell speech, 112-115 father of prophecy, 86 ghost of, 240-242 Judge, 83, 85-88, 113, 155 as liberator, 82-85, 113 naming, 32 as nazir, 30 opposition to monarchy, 87-90, 104,403,445, 485 rejection of Saul, 123-124, 129, 145-150, 155, 167, 183, 236-237 relations between "church" and state, 86-90, 101, 115, 119-120, 135-136, 139, 150-152 and religious revolution, 96, 102-104, 131, 300, 303,308,324-325,402 sons, disappointed in, 86 as youth, 166, 309 Samuel, Maurice, 160, 205, 210-211, 442 sanctuary, 28-31, 33, 36, 46, 54-55, 66-67, I 02, 140, 165, 183, 186, 192, 201, 213-214,224, 286,301,303,309,331,342,376,398,464, 529,535,547 Saph, 458, Sargon of Akkad, 12

594

GENERAL INDEX

Sarna, Nahum M., 289, 301,309 Saul, l, 16,243-244,267,279,282-283,290,334, 341, 343, 346-348, 375, 390,409, 431, 453, 462,509,514 also among the prophets, l 00-l 02, 177 "church-state" relations, ll 5, 119-120, 150152, concubine of, 270-271, 450, 455-457, 491 and David, 7, 191-192 appoints D to command, 169, 171,458 attaches D to court, 157, 167-168 attempts at entrapment, 171-173 D spares his life, 198-201,215-221, 480, 498 plots to murder D, 171-174, 175, 177, 345 pursuit ofD, 177, 187-188, 196-197, 205, 225,244,331 death of, 223, 244-246, 249-253, 254-257, 258262,281,450 descendents impaled, 433,491 at Endor, 239-243 family of, 137, 280,420, 432-433, 454 House of, 181, 254, 269, 345-346,410-411 and Jabesh-gilead, 109-111,246, 257, 456 and Jonathan, 119-120, 129-133, 174, 179-184, 347,383 and massacre at Nob, 187, 192-194, 195-196, 309 mental illness of, 167-168, 170, 175, 177,236. See also religious fervor and paranoia and Michal, 176, 212-213,274-275, 304, 306307 mother unknown, 27 reburied, 456 religious fervor, 101-102, 110, 133-136, 177, 238,451-452 and Samuel, anointed by, 99-100, 528, 538 chosen by, 95-102, 104-107, 111-115,336 rejected by, 123-124, 145-150, 155-156, 315,482,531,551 tragedy of, 2, 19, 21, 42, 235, 318 wars with Amalek, 139-145 with Philistines, 120-131, 133, 158-166, 175,228-229,244-245 with others, 136-137, 350 Schniedewind, William M., 308, 318 Seir, 336-337 Septuagint, 15, 29, 249 Seraiah, 341,444 Seren, 63, 72, 74, 229 Shakespeare, 22, 25, 95, 98, 141, 182, 189,215, 243,245,249,273,373,384,449,543 Shamma, son of Age, See The Three Shammah, son of Jesse, 157, 160-161, 486, 489, 489

Shammua, 296, 380 Sheba, 335, 436, 438-440, 442-443, 449, 495 Shechem,264,286,291,297,299 shekel,96, 125,338,353,398,497,499 Sheo1, 38, 40, 240-241, 245, 378, 462-465, 467, 532,536 Shephatiah, son of David, 268 Shiloh, 27-31, 33, 36, 45, 48, 53, 55-56, 60, 63-67, 78,82,86, 102,125,127,183,186,201,213, 228,250,293,298,300303,308-309,319,321, 326,342,426 Shilo, Yigal, 322, 327 Shimei, 410-411,417,431-432,435,459, 524, 529,532,5360537 Shobab,296 Shobach,357,359 Shobi, 420 shofar, 121,267,304,405,423,436,443,528 shrine, 28-29, 34, 45-46, 48, 78, 96, 98, 100-102, 104,106,112,117,147,183,186,299-302, 308-309,319,325,338,342,402,431,454, 498,502,507,529,554 Shukran, Eli, 291 Shunem,239,240,523 Sibbecai the Hushathite, See The Thirty Sidon,82,495,505 Silver, Morris, 62,473 Simon, Uriel, 23, 57, 59, 242, 375 sin, 548 Sin, Shu, 13 Sin, wilderness of, 36 Sisera, 113, 144 Smith, George Adam, 203, 256, 262 Socrates, 4 Solomon, 67, 87, 106-107, 112, 117, 191,207, 256, 286, 295-296, 298-299, 309, 313, 315, 317, 321, 325-327, 330, 334-335, 338-340, 344, 365,378-380,391,402,404,409,438,443444,495,504,506,514,521,524-535,537538,554 Spender, Steven, 365 Stager, Lawrence E., 45, 115-117 Sternberg, Meir, 22,149,525 Succoth,343, 357,359-361,369,381 Sumer, 10, 12-13 Swift, Jonathan, 406 Syria, 10, 63, 217,236, 282, 297, 332, 335, 353, 359,515 Syriac, 15, 33, 145 Tabernacle, 30, 48, 67,301-302,314,394,536 talent, 353 Talmai, King, 392 Talmud, 30, 98, 377, 384, 422 Tamar, 5, 27, 268, 296, 384-393, 398-399, 404 TANACH, 321 Targum, 15,34,97, 114,170

GENERAL INDEX Temple, 12, 15, 30, 46, 48, 54-55, 67, 72, 97, 117, 244-246,288,293,298,308-309,312-313,316318,321,324-327,329,334,338,365,378, 401,454,464,495,499,503-504,536,554-555 Teraphim, 147, 175 The Thirty, 367, 459, 488-489 The Three, 486, 488-489 Thebez, 371 Thompson, J. A., 166 Thucydides, 91 Tigay, Jeffrey H., 135, 239 Tikun Sofrim, 52, 58, 376 Tiphsah, 335 Torah, 15,30, 106,131,134-135,239,278,289, 301, 309, 531, 553 tragic estimate of life, 2 transgression, 548 Trans-Jordan, 11, 81, 236, 515 Tristam, H. B., 192, 246 Tyrant,63, 72,223,229,234 Tyre,294,335,439,496, 505 Ugarit, 9, 463 Ugaritic, 39, 190, 258, 260, 385, 463 unified reading, 2-4, 157-158, 215-216, 449-451 United Kingdoms, 286,295, 298, 398, 401, 405, 429,436,443,445,451,493-495,498,514,538 Uriah, 1, 217, 316, 366-371, 373, 375-380, 383385,397,415,488-489,497,550 Urim and Thummim, 194 Uzzah, 302-304 Uzziah, 518 Vallee, Bert L., 213-214 Via Maris, 236, 299, 334, 338, 572-573 Victorian England, 8 Vulgate, 15, 99, 114, 145, 192 wadi, 63, 125, 231, 233, 336-337, 495, 505, 536

595

Wapnish, Paula, 69 Weiser, Artur, 465, 550 Wellhausen, Julius, 9 Wenham, Gordon J., 385 Whitelam, K. W., 68 Willey, Patricia K., 397 women's authorship, See female authorship. Yadin, Yigael, 265-266, 292,299, 343-344, 356357,360,367,421,444,489,494 Yeivin, S., 524 Yerushalmi, YosefH., 20 Zadok, 325, 341-342,408-409,412,417,424-425, 430,444-445,524,526-528,535-536 Zalmon the Ahohite, See The Thirty Zechariah, 326, 502, 516 Zeruiah, See Joab, Avishai and Asahel Zevach, 28 Ziba, 346,348,409-410,431-433 Ziklag, 225, 227,230-234, 241, 249-250, 252-254, 281,283,418 Ziph, Wilderness of, 196, 198, 216 Ziphites, 198, 216-217 Zobah, 136,332-335,350,353-354,356,359,489

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Hillel Millgram has lived in Jerusalem for many years. He was born in the United States, was ordained at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America and served in pulpits in the US and Canada. He now combines research and writing with teaching graduate courses in Bible. His last book, Three Biblical Heroines and the Case for Female Authorship has been highly acclaimed. The Invention of Monotheist Ethics continues his explorations into the origins and deeper meaning of Biblical narrative.