Shirley C.

Guthrie

ShirleDAVID dā'vid [Heb. dāwīd; Gk. Dauid, Daueid, Dad, NT Dabid], The second and
greatest king of Israel, whose dynasty ruled in Judah for over four hundred years.

I. Background and Youth

A. Name
B. Genealogy
C. His Youth
D. His Anointing
E. Meets Saul
F. Defeats Goliath
G. At Saul's Court
H. Flees from the Court
I. As a Fugitive
J. As a Philistine Vassal
II. Reign
A. King in Hebron
B. Defeats the Philistines
C. Capture of Jerusalem
D. Jerusalem as Capital
E. Consolidation and Expansion
F. David and Bathsheba
G. David's Sons
H. Amnon and Absalom
I. Absalom's Rebellion
J. Absalom's Defeat and Death
K. Sheba's Revolt
L. Famine and Plague
III. Last Years
A. The Succession Question
B. David's Death
C. Duration of Reign
IV. Administration and Character
A. Administrative Measures
B. Ability and Character

I. Background and Youth.-A. Name. The name "David" would appear to be connected with the
Hebrew verbal root d-w-d, "to love." "David," then, would mean "beloved," presumably by
Yahweh. Indeed, the name may well be an abbreviated form of Heb. dōḏāwāhû (cf. 2 Ch. 20:37)
or of dōḏîyāhû (unattested). The Mari texts present a form dawidum (if the reading is correct,
which is not certain), which would probably indicate a troop commander or brigand chief; the
parallel with David's erstwhile position and activities, when based on the cave of Adullam, needs
no emphasizing.
It is quite possible that "David" was a throne name. The king's personal name, in that case, may
well have been Elhanan, who in 2 S. 21:19 is credited with killing Goliath. However, the parallel
passage in 1Ch. 20:5 credits Elhanan with the death of Goliath's brother. Both texts are corrupt,
but the phrase in 2 Samuel can plausibly be emended to read "Elhanan the son of Jesse the
Bethlehemite." A. M. Honeyman argues thus, and proposes to equate Elhanan ("God has been
gracious") with Baal-hanan ("Baal [or "the lord"] has been gracious"), the king of Edom
mentioned in Gen. 36:38f. (par. 1Ch. 1:49f.). It is tempting, to be sure, to equate Samlah of the
preceding verses with Samuel, and Shaul with Saul (the latter two names are identical in
Hebrew), while Baal-hanan's successor Hadad (1Ch. 1:50; Hadar in Gen. 36:39) is very probably
the Edomite prince who caused Solomon some trouble (1 K. 11:14). But the names of Baal-
hanan's father (Achbor) and of Shaul's city (Rehoboth by the Euphrates) seriously conflict with
Honeyman's theory.

B. Genealogy. David was the youngest of the eight sons of Jesse the Bethlehemite. Their tribe
was Judah, and the genealogy given in Ruth 4:18-22 traces their ancestry to Perez, Judah's son
by Tamar (Gen. 38). Ruth herself was David's great-grandmother; she was a Moabitess. David's
sisters Zeruiah and Abigail (1Ch. 2:16) are said to be the daughters of Nahash in 2 S. 17:25. This
permits three possibilities: Nahash was another name for Jesse; Nahash was their mother's name,
and therefore David's mother too; or Nahash died, and his widow then married Jesse and became
David's mother. The third seems the most likely; we may note that 1Ch. 2:13-16 states that Jesse
was the father of David and his brothers, but Zeruiah and Abigail are not specifically said to be
Jesse's daughters. At any rate, David's mother's name is unknown, if it was not Nahash.

C. His Youth. The young David was obviously an outstanding youth, red-haired and handsome (1
S. 16:12), and strong and courageous, to judge from his remarks to Saul (17:34ff.). He was also
endowed with musical skill (16:18). He was the shepherd of the family, and it was while
pursuing this occupation that he proved his physical prowess in dealing effectively with bears
and lions that sought to prey on the flocks.

D. His Anointing. David was actually in the field with his flock when Samuel arrived, divinely
guided to find and anoint the successor to Saul as king of Israel. Jesse paraded his elder sons
before the prophet; but

Samuel was not content with any of them, and pressed Jesse, who then sent for David. Samuel
anointed David in front of his brothers, but we have no way of telling how widely publicized the
anointing was. Certainly Saul's suspicions of David were quick to arise, so perhaps he did hear of
Samuel's action. David continued as a shepherd in Bethlehem for some time after this ceremony; but
we are told that from now on he began to display charismatic qualities, that is, he was influenced by
the "Spirit of Yahweh" (1 S. 16:13), like the "judges" and Saul before him. These qualities of ecstatic
utterance and action marked him out as a divinely appointed leader.

E. Meets Saul. David's introduction to Saul and his court is said to have been in the capacity of a
musician. Saul began to be subject to fits of melancholia, and music alone seemed to help him.
David's skill with the harp was mentioned to Saul, and the king sent for him at once (1 S.
16:14ff.). David's charm, as well as his skill, soon won over the king, who made the young man
his armor bearer. But if this is the true story, what are we to make of 1 S. 17:55-58, where Saul
apparently does not know David or his antecedents? Here it seems that David was unknown to
Saul until his encounter with Goliath. However, the contradiction may be more apparent than
real. When David came to the court as a harpist, Saul could not have been very concerned about
his parentage, although Jesse's name was mentioned (16:18); but the prospect of David's
becoming a soldier of note, and the possibility that he would win the hand of the king's daughter
(cf. 17:25), might well lead Saul to inquire more closely into his family's standing. At any rate, in
the second account Saul does not ask David what his own name is. We may then accept both
accounts. On the other hand, a simple expedient is to follow the LXX B text of 1 S. 17, a shorter
version, which omits most of the material that seems to contradict the details of the previous
chapter.

F. Defeats Goliath. It seems that David's duties at court did not occupy his time fully, and he was
still able to help with his father's sheep at Bethlehem (1 S. 17:15). This state of affairs continued
until Saul engaged in warfare with the Philistines in the Vale of Elah. A huge Philistine warrior,
Goliath of Gath, challenged and defied the Israelite army, in which three of David's brothers
were fighting. Jesse now dispatched David with provisions for his soldier brothers; reaching the
camp, David soon learned what the situation was, and offered to take on Goliath's challenge. The
result needs no retelling: disdaining armor, the young man, armed with only a sling and five
stones, advanced to meet the giant warrior, and brought him down with a well-aimed stone. He
then used the giant's own sword to decapitate him, whereupon the Israelites took heart and routed
the Philistines.

It seems unnecessary to challenge the historicity of this story. If Elhanan (2 S. 21:19) is not to be
equated with David, then it is possible that his feat was credited to David at a later stage. But
without doubt David's early fame rested on some adequate foundation, and it is more likely that
the name Goliath was misapplied to some anonymous warrior defeated by David. The name
occurs twice only (vv. 4, 23) in the account of 1 S. 17, and could be a late addition to the
narrative. However, Elhanan may have killed Goliath's brother, as the parallel in Chronicles has
it (1 Ch. 20:5), in which case there is no obstacle in the way of accepting that David himself
killed Goliath. And if Elhanan was David's personal name (see above), no difficulty remains.

G. At Saul's Court. The victory thus created by David caused great joy in Israel, and David
immediately became a popular hero (1 S. 18:6f.). He returned to the court of Saul in a very
different position, honored by the king, made an army commander, and rapidly becoming a close
friend of Saul's son and heir, Jonathan. But at this point Saul began to be jealous of the young
hero. Perhaps he realized David's ambitions—and clearly David must have been ambitious, since
Samuel had anointed him. So Saul began to desire David's death, and in a fit of mad rage twice
threw a spear at him (18:10f.). He promised to give his daughter Merab as wife to David if he
would only achieve a few more military exploits; but the king's hopes that thereby David would
die in battle were doomed to disappointment. Saul broke his promise about Merab, marrying her
to another man; but he now offered David his daughter Michal, on yet another very difficult
condition. David continued to prosper nonetheless, and married Michal; and his consistent
military success merely added to his prestige and made Saul the more jealous (18:27-30).
H. Flees from the Court. Saul's hostility at last became overt, and although Jonathan managed to
restrain him for a time, he determined to kill David. To escape, David was obliged to flee from
the court, with the aid of Michal, who was able to trick the would-be assassins sent by Saul (1 S.
19:11-17). David's chief regret was his enforced separation from Jonathan, who felt strong ties of
loyalty both to his father and to his friend. The story of their parting is told in considerable detail
and with great pathos in 1 S. 20. David remained in the south of his homeland for some time, but
he was relentlessly pursued by Saul, who did not even hesitate to massacre priests who had
innocently aided the fugitive (22:9-19). After brief interludes at Naioth and Nob, David in
despair entered hostile Philistine territory. He might well have lost his life at the hands of Achish
king of Gath, but escaped yet again by resorting to another trick: this time he feigned madness
(21:10-15).

I. As a Fugitive. Leaving Gath, David returned to Judah, and set about establishing himself in the
remote wilderness parts. Hitherto he had been a lone fugitive; now he banded together a group of
malcontents and the like, four hundred strong, with the cave of Adullam as his headquarters (1 S.
22:2). His brothers and other kin joined him; and David placed his parents in the care of the king
of Moab, in case Saul's anger should extend to them (22:3f.). A priest (Abiathar) and a prophet
(Gad) also attached themselves to David's company. The guerrillas had, of course, to find an
occupation and a livelihood, and their first effort in this direction was a raid on the Philistines,
who were attacking the town of Keilah in the lowlands of Judah (23:1-5). The success of the raid
saved Keilah, and no doubt won David some popular support, while it brought his men booty and
provisions; but at the same time it rendered him liable to Philistine attacks, without in any way
lessening Saul's hostility. So his position was, if anything, weaker as a result. Presently he had to
rely on money and provisions from wealthy Judean farmers; this was exacted as toll for his
protection (cf. 25:5-8). Presumably this payment was given reluctantly (cf. 25:9-12), but he
sought to counteract any latent hostility by marrying into two influential families (25:42f.). Thus
we see that David, unlike Saul, started the harem principle, even before he came to the throne;
but in the process he lost Michal, at least temporarily (25:44).

J. As a Philistine Vassal. David's position was precarious, then; and Saul for his part could not be
expected to tolerate such a center of disaffection, so he redoubled his efforts to exterminate the
nuisance. The result was that David had one or two narrow escapes. Twice, it seems, Saul came
close to capturing David, and twice David, in hiding, could have taken the opportunity to
assassinate his persecutor" (1 S. 24; 26). However, David had a great regard for the king's
person, and restrained his men from killing "Yahweh's anointed." In each case he had a brief
interview with Saul, who, mentally unstable as he was, expressed his shame and regret; but such
emotion was of short duration. These two accounts have a number of similarities but also a
number of wide divergences of detail, so it is not easy to decide whether or not we have here two
different accounts of the same incident.

Realizing that he could not escape Saul indefinitely, David at last decided to return to Philistia,
not now as an unaccompanied exile, but as a military captain with some six hundred men behind
him. On this occasion Achish of Gath welcomed him, happy to see the Israelite forces thus split.
David spent over a year as the vassal of Achish, with his headquarters in the frontier town of
Ziklag. From here he raided the bedouin of the Negeb, at the same time persuading his overlord
that he was in fact harassing the Israelites (27:5-12). The major battle with Israel now loomed
ahead, and Achish wanted to integrate David's force with the Philistine armies at the battle of
Gilboa. David appeared willing, but fortunately for him many of the Philistines doubted his
loyalty to them, and prevailed on Achish to send him back to the south of Philistia (ch. 29).
Returning to Ziklag, David and his men found that the Amalekites, foes of Philistines and
Israelites alike, had raided the town, burning it down, and had taken captive all the women and
children; David's two wives were among the captives. Thus it came about that while in the north
the Philistines were routing the Israelites at Mt. Gilboa, David in the south pursued the
Amalekite raiders and decimated them, recovering the captives and the spoil taken from Ziklag
(ch. 30).

II. Reign.-A. King in Hebron. The defeat and death of Saul and Jonathan was a real disaster for
Israel, as David himself fully realized. His elegy (2 S. 1:19-27) not only indicates his real sorrow
at Jonathan's death, but also his awareness that Israel once again lay helpless before the
Philistines, who indeed seem to have controlled the whole country west of the Jordan afresh. One
of Saul's sons, Eshbaal (or Ishbosheth), set up a kingdom of sorts in Transjordan with the support
of Abner, hitherto Saul's commander in chief (2 S. 2:8f.). But W of the Jordan there remained
only one Israelite with any power or influence, and that was David. He had skillfully avoided
offending his fellow tribesmen, and he was now, at Hebron, acclaimed king over Judah (2:3f.,
11). There can scarcely be any doubt that this step was taken with Philistine cognizance;
probably David at first pretended to be the vassal of Achish still. No doubt it suited the
Philistines well at this stage to support a rival to the house of Saul. But as it happened, the
situation changed entirely two years later. Eshbaal had not the influence or ability of his father,
and indeed he made little or no effort to do battle with the Philistines. His sole measure of power
really lay in the hands of Abner. Northern Israel W of the Jordan meanwhile chafed under the
domination of the enemy, whereas in Judah David had what amounted to a free hand. Eshbaal's
rule lasted a mere two years; by then Abner had deserted him on the pretext that Eshbaal had
insulted him, and came over to David's side with a considerable following. This was the end of
Eshbaal's influence, and he was shortly afterward assassinated by two of his officers. David now
had no rival, and all Israel acclaimed him king at Hebron (5:1-3). He acted very circumspectly,
seeking throughout to cause no offense to Saul's supporters. He demanded the return of his wife
Michal, Saul's daughter (3:12-15), to strengthen his links with the dead king's house; and he
persuaded Israel that he was innocent of Eshbaal's blood, by executing the latter's assassins.
Earlier, David had further strengthened his position by new advantageous marriages (3:2-5).

Site of the City of David, the earliest stages of Jerusalem located on two ridges S of the present Old City. David made the city his
capital to unite the potentially separative northern and southern tribes that had chosen him king. (A. C. Myers)

B. Defeats the Philistines. The Philistines suddenly found that their erstwhile vassal was now
king of a united Israel. They could not tolerate this situation, and they opened hostilities (2 S.
5:17). But David's experienced standing army was altogether stronger than Saul's hurriedly
assembled tribal levies had been, and twice in quick succession the Philistine inroads were
repulsed (5:19-25); these defeats meant that the Philistines lost permanently their hold on the hill
country. But David was not content to leave the matter there; he later switched from defense to
attack, and eventually took Gath and rendered the whole of Philistia tributary. Of these
campaigns we have no details, so it is impossible to say how or when these victories were won.
The facts are certain however (cf. 2 S. 8:11f.; 1Ch. 18:1). Before long, David's personal
bodyguard was largely drawn from Philistine ranks (2 S. 15:18).

C. Capture of Jerusalem. David's capital was Hebron for seven years in all. During this period he
dealt effectively with the Philistine threat, but it is probable that his capture of Jerusalem
preceded his attacks on Philistia itself. Indeed, it is quite likely that the attack on Jerusalem was
his first aggressive action. Until David's reign, numerous cities in Palestine remained in
Canaanite hands, and many of them were in alliance with the Philistines. David was determined
to put an end to this state of affairs and he now moved on Jerusalem, a city of great strategic
importance, which was almost impregnable. It was held by a Canaanite people, the Jebusites.
The details of its capture are difficult to follow, since the text of 2 S. 5:6-9 is corrupt, while 1Ch.
11:4-8 helps little. If we can take a detail of each uncorroborated by the other passage, it seems
that Joab (1Ch. 11:6), David's commander in chief, led a party of troops up a water shaft (2 S.
5:8). It is clear, at any rate, that the inhabitants were taken by surprise in some way.

D. Jerusalem as Capital. David refortified the city, and made it his own property (2 S. 5:9). Its
advantages as a capital were several. It was very important militarily. Also, it was for the
Israelites a neutral city, i.e., not in Judah or in any other tribe's territory; thus it served to alleviate
some of the jealousies that so readily sprang up between north and south. David saw, too, that
Saul had been foolish to neglect the cultus; and he set about making Jerusalem the most
important sanctuary in Israel by fetching the long-neglected ark of the covenant and installing it
with great pomp and ceremony in a shrine at Jerusalem (2 S. 6). It was left to Solomon to erect a
permanent building to house the ark, but the initial steps were certainly David's.

Jerusalem became, then, the administrative and religious capital of Israel; here David set up court
in regal fashion, with a considerable harem (cf. 5:13), and surrounded by his personal troops. He
appointed a number of administrative officers (8:15-18). There were two leading priests at the
Jerusalem shrine, Abiathar and Zadok. The king himself took some part in the cultic ritual
(6:17ff.), and showed great interest in the worship, enriching and embellishing it in various ways,
especially musical (1Ch. 16:4ff.). The tradition that he himself composed numerous Psalms is
firmly established. Finally, he closely associated his own position with the worship of Yahweh,
so that within a generation or two the line of David and the Jerusalem temple were the two
visible signs of Yahweh's presence and favor. Judah never knew a non-Davidic king for over
four hundred years.

E. Consolidation and Expansion. No doubt the capture of Jerusalem was part of a pattern. David
could not allow the Canaanite cities to retain their independence, remaining potential centers of
disaffection. We have no details of their capture; probably there was little or no real opposition
to David. Thus consolidating his own realm, David next meant to subdue Israel's ancient foes.
Philistia was presumably the first to capitulate; Moab and Edom soon followed (2 S. 8:2, 13f.). If
10:1f. is to be believed, David had no aggressive intentions toward Ammon; but the king of
Ammon, Hanun, feared Israel's growing power, and insulted David's envoys in a very ill-advised
fashion. David could not overlook this, and warfare resulted, Hanun hastily forming alliances
with some Aramaean states to the north of Ammon. David was victorious, and finally captured
Hanun's capital, Rabbah (Rabbath Ammon, the modern Amman) (12:26ff.). It must have been
subsequent to this that David made most of Syria tributary (8:3-12); the allies of Ammon had to
be pursued and punished. David was now at the pinnacle of success, master of a considerable
empire. His victories were due largely to his own abilities, although Joab must also have been a
very able soldier. The weakness of Egypt and the Mesopotamian states during this period also
contributed to David's success.

F. David and Bathsheba. Hitherto David had shown himself ruthless in battle and as cunning as
his ancestor Jacob at times; but his loyalty to his friends and supporters had been conspicuous.
He had even spared Saul's life; and out of loyalty to the memory of Jonathan, he had given
Jonathan's son Mephibosheth an honored place at court (2 S. 9), despite the possibility that
Mephibosheth might have had designs on the throne. But David now went right beyond the pale
of morality; while the siege of Rabbah was taking place, he desired a married woman in
Jerusalem, Bathsheba, and committed adultery with her (11:2-5). When she became pregnant,
David tried to cover up his guilt by fetching her husband Uriah home from the battle. Uriah
refused to sleep with his wife, however, since he was consecrated for battle (cf. 1 S. 21:4f.); so
David found himself obliged to conceal his immoral actions by other means, and he sent Joab
instructions to engineer the death of Uriah in battle. Uriah's subsequent death, therefore, was at
the hands of the Ammonites, but David was solely responsible.

With Uriah out of the way, David permitted Bathsheba to observe the proprieties of mourning,
and then made her his wife quite openly (2 S. 11:26f.). But this gross immorality did not go
unheeded, and the prophet Nathan came to remonstrate with the king (ch. 12). By telling the
parable of the ewe lamb, he skillfully led David to condemn his own actions; David thereupon
expressed his deep repentance, but the misdeed could not be undone, and in a sense this incident
proved to be the turning point in his life. Nathan warned him that his own household would in
future know constant distress and bereavement (v. 11); and so it turned out. The first loss was the
son born of the adultery, who fell sick and died while very young.

G. David's Sons. Bathsheba soon gave birth to another son, Solomon, who was to succeed his
father as king of Israel. But he was by no means the eldest son of David. The eldest was Amnon,
then came Chileab (of whose life we have no details recorded), Absalom, and Adonijah, all born
of different mothers (2 S. 3:2-5). These four, and two others, were born before David made
Jerusalem his capital, whereas Solomon and a number of other sons were born in Jerusalem
(5:13-16). David had not the same ability to rule his own house that he showed in the
administration of his realm; his indulgent treatment of Adonijah, at least, is explicitly mentioned
(1 K. 1:6). Moreover, there was no precedent to follow as regards the heir to the throne of Israel,
so not unnaturally these half brothers maneuvered for position, each hoping to win the throne
eventually. Amnon's claim was very strong, as the eldest; but Solomon seems to have been his
father's favorite from the first, possibly because Bathsheba was a wife of David's own choice,
whereas most of the other marriages had been political moves. Had Michal had a son, he would
have had a good claim to the throne as Saul's grandson and David's son by his first wife. But
Michal was estranged from David and never bore a child (2 S. 6:20-23).

H. Amnon and Absalom. Amnon's selfish and wanton nature stands out clearly in the story of his
raping his half sister Tamar (2 S. 13:1-19). Apparently the king did nothing whatever to punish
the miscreant, and it is no wonder that the girl's full brother Absalom determined to avenge his
humiliated sister. For two years he was content to wait his chance, and then he murdered Amnon.
Fearful of his father's reprisal, he fled from the court to spend three years in exile (13:37f.).
David missed his wayward son (14:1), however, so Joab eventually took a hand in the matter and
succeeded in persuading the king to allow Absalom to return to Jerusalem but David obstinately
refused to let the young man have a place at court (14:21-24). This was an ill-advised way to
punish Absalom, who was evidently given to harboring grudges. Again he bided his time for two
full years, and then he arrogantly used Joab to secure him a place in the palace again (14:28-33).

I. Absalom's Rebellion. David took no further action to punish or restrain Absalom, who in turn
could not forgive his father for the years of humiliation. He thus determined to oust David.
Amnon was no obstacle now, and we may well presume that Chileab was either dead by this
time or else lacking in ambition. Absalom saw that the crown could be his, and he took steps to
detract from David's popularity and to win popular support for himself. His most effective
method was to underline the faults in the existing judicial system, persuading the populace that
he himself was passionately interested in justice (2 S. 15:1-4). For four years he pursued tactics
of this sort, until he judged that the time was ripe for raising the standard of revolt. He then
resorted to yet another subterfuge to go to Hebron with a large following, and once at Hebron
proclaimed himself king (15:7-12). Evidently there was a measure of discontent with David's
regime, but it seems that on the whole it was a struggle between the popularity of father and son.

They were rather evenly balanced, although speed and surprise at first gave Absalom the
advantage. David had to flee from his capital (15:14-16), and Absalom was able to enter
Jerusalem (v. 37). But there were several friends of the king still in the city, notably Hushai, one
of David's counselors, and the two priests of the sanctuary, Zadok and Abiathar. Hushai posed as
Absalom's friend, taking care to give him poor advice, while the priests undertook to pass on to
David news of Absalom's plans. In a prolonged struggle, the decisive factor was bound to be the
loyalty of the royal troops and of Joab, David's able general; Absalom's only hope was to pursue
his father while the latter's forces were still disorganized. Absalom's wisest counselor,
Ahithophel, fully realized this, but he was overruled after the cunning Hushai had listed specious
arguments for delay (17:1-14).

J. Absalom's Defeat and Death. The pause gave David time to recoup at Mahanaim, E of the
Jordan; and when battle was at last joined the greater experience of his men told. Absalom's band
was cut to pieces, and the pretender was forced to flee. He was as much hampered by the
unfamiliar terrain as his army had been (2 S. 18:8), with the result that he was swept off his
mount and left dangling from a tree by his hair (v. 9). The king had issued strict orders that
Absalom was not to be killed, but the experienced Joab, aware that the treacherous youth would
always endanger David's position, disregarded these orders and killed the helpless rebel (v. 14).
The news of his son's death desolated the king, whose excessive grief overshadowed his men's
delight in their victory. Joab had no patience with the king's emotions, and upbraided him
severely. So at length David made his way back to the capital, victorious but grief-stricken. Joab
was primarily responsible for the sorrow as well as the victory, and David found it hard to
forgive. He was more ready to forgive Absalom's supporters. Ahithophel had committed suicide
(17:23), but Amasa, the commander of Absalom's army, was elevated to the same position in
David's army, over Joab's head.
K. Sheba's Revolt. Fresh trouble broke out almost at once. Surprisingly enough, much of
Absalom's support had come from Judah, which was now anxious to placate David in every way
possible. The king accepted the overtures handsomely, but in so doing he somewhat offended the
northern tribes, whose support had so recently turned the scales in his favor (2 S. 19:40-43). The
quarrel illustrates clearly how brittle was the union between north and south. In this partial
estrangement, a certain Benjamite named Sheba thought he saw an opportunity to wrest the
northern tribes from David's control. He himself probably represented the Saulite faction. Thus a
fresh revolt broke out (20:1f.) before David had time even to reach his capital again. The new
commander in chief, Amasa, was sent to deal with the situation; but he took too long to muster
the army, and David was forced to rely on Joab once more. Joab took the personal troops of the
king northward and soon overtook Amasa, whom he assassinated, and so resumed command of
the whole army (20:4-10). Meanwhile Sheba's supporters fell away, and the rebel leader could
not match David's troops. He took refuge in Abel of Bethmaacah, in the territory of Naphtali,
hoping to be able to withstand a siege (20:14f.); but the citizens were wise enough to dissociate
themselves from him, and they assassinated him and presented his head to Joab (vv. 16-22). With
that the revolt collapsed.

L. Famine and Plague. Two other events that troubled the nation are recorded in 2 S. 21 and 24.
These chapters do not follow in chronological order. The famine (ch. 21) must have taken place
quite early in David's reign, long before the two rebellions. After three years of famine, the king
sought to find a religious reason for the national distress and learned that bloodguilt by Saul was
the cause. Saul had on some unrecorded occasion killed some Gibeonites, who now demanded
revenge on the dead king's family. David handed over seven of Saul's sons, but took care to save
Mephibosheth, Jonathan's son.

The second disaster was a plague, and again a religious reason was sought and found. David was
to blame, it seems, for conducting a census (24:1). It is not absolutely certain where the sin lay; it
may have been connected with the taxation and forced labor which would follow the census, and
which were, of course, never popular (these same two factors eventually split the kingdom after
Solomon's death). Or perhaps the sin lay in some pride of achievement on David's part. At any
rate, the plague was brought to an end when David confessed his sin, and raised an altar and
made sacrifice (24:17-25).

III. Last Years.-A. The Succession Question. As David's reign drew to a close a fresh palace
intrigue broke out, though without rebellion this time. The eldest surviving son was Adonijah,
who determined to thwart David's purpose to make Solomon his successor. He managed to win
the allegiance of Joab and Abiathar (1 K. 1:7), and went just out of Jerusalem to hold a
coronation ceremony and feast (v. 9), taking care not to invite his rival and the opposing faction.
No doubt he hoped by his unpublicized actions and strong support to present Israel, and the aged
king, with a fait accompli. But Solomon was not inactive; as soon as his rival had left the city he
enlisted the aid of his mother to persuade David to proclaim him king. He too had strong support,
in Nathan the prophet, Zadok the priest, and Benaiah, who commanded the royal bodyguard.
David was roused from his lethargy and took steps to prevent Adonijah's coronation and to
further that of Solomon. David's support must have been decisive, and so was that of the troops
Benaiah had in readiness. Joab evidently had no ready troops with which to back up Adonijah's
cause (1 K. 1).
B. David's Death. Solomon thus became king before his father's death. David had acted very
leniently and mercifully with his own enemies, but he now counseled Solomon differently (1 K.
2:1-9). Some historians doubt the truth of this about-face, but in his age and infirmity—this was
his last recorded act—his nature may well have soured, to some extent. In any case, he may well
have wished his son to be spared the hostility and revolts he had himself faced. Solomon took his
father's advice, and had a less troubled reign than did David, who died (2:10) at the age of about
seventy.

Mameluke building housing the traditional tomb of David on the Western hill of Jerusalem. The monument, a large Crusader
sarcophagus, is located below the Coenaculum, traditional site of the Last Supper. (A. C. Myers)

C. Duration of Reign. David is thought to have become king ca. 1000 B.C. (perhaps as early as
1010). He reigned two years as king of Judah, and a further five as king of the united nation, in
Hebron; for the remainder of his reign Jerusalem was his capital. He is credited with a forty-
years' reign altogether (2 S. 5:4), and whereas this figure may well be a round number, it must be
approximately correct. W. F. Albright suggests the year 961 B.C. for Solomon's accession, but it
may have taken place ten years earlier.

IV. Administration and Character.-A. Administrative Measures. David began his reign as vassal
ruler of a small, disunited people, and ended it as the master of a considerable empire, with not a
few vassals of his own. It is self-evident that he must have made many changes in the
administration to cope with his growing, changing realm. We know little about them, apart from
his change of capital. There are two lists of his officials, however, which yield some information
(2 S. 8:15-18; 20:23-26). The only political officers, apparently, were the recorder (Heb. mazkîr)
and secretary (Heb. sôᵽêr) in the early part of his reign, and later a chief of corvée was added to
them. (Probably most of David's forced labor came from subject peoples, and not from free born
Israelites.) The king himself, of course, was head of the machinery of state; and he was also in
sole charge of the legal administration.

In the field he had two military commanders, one leading the Israelite levies (Joab, who was also
commander in chief), the other commanding the mercenary troops. But David himself often led
the armies into battle; 2 S. 18:1-4 makes it clear that he superintended operations and often went
to the battlefield in person. David also imposed his will and played no small part in religious
matters. He had a golden chance to do so when he selected Jerusalem as chief shrine, for he
could appoint what priests he wished and could even undertake some priestly functions himself
(2 S. 6:17f.), as did also his sons (8:18). The tradition that he embellished the Jerusalem cultic
ritual is by no means improbable. While the detailed information of the Chronicler (1 Ch. 15; 23-
26) is sometimes to be regarded as an idealization, since the cultus must have undergone
considerable development down to the Chronicler's time and beyond, there is no good reason to
doubt that David took a great part in the institution of the Jerusalem cultus and arrangements. He
was absolute head of the political and military machine, and had a remarkably free hand in the
administration of the religious ritual too.
B. Ability and Character. It is clear that David was well able to fulfil these functions. If he was
not wholly successful in his legal administration (to judge from 2 S. 15:2-4), he was supremely
able in the military and political spheres. He took a defeated nation and made it practically
unassailable. Admittedly, the problem of the traditional jealousies between Ephraim and Judah
was not finally solved, but so great was his own personal popularity and achievement that no real
trouble broke out till after his son's long reign had ended.

His successes were a tribute to his personal courage, and to his ability as soldier and statesman.
He could not only win battles and organize his territory efficiently, but he could win over even
those who were at first hostile to him. His tact and charm are evidenced by the devotion he
inspired in Jonathan, who could have become his jealous rival but instead was his staunchest
friend. David's loyalty to his friends is plainly shown in his generous treatment of Jonathan's son
Mephibosheth, who again could so easily have been a bitter opponent of David. Revenge was
foreign to his nature; time and again he treated former enemies leniently and even generously.
The chief flaws one can discern in his character are his deceitfulness (which was, however, a
common trait, and probably thought to be more of a virtue than a failing by his contemporaries),
his indulgence toward his sons, and of course his actions where Bathsheba was concerned. While
his adultery and murder cannot be condoned, with this glaring exception he was in every way the
ideal ruler. When we remember also his contribution to the temple, the cultus, and the Psalter, it
is no wonder that his reign was regarded as a golden age, and that Scripture consistently viewed
him as the prototype of the Messiah, who was to be "great David's greater Son."

See also KING, KINGDOM; SAMUEL, BOOKS OF; Maps VII, XXIV.

Bibliography.-Comms. on 1 and 2 Samuel; B. W. Anderson, Understanding the OT(2nd ed.

1966);BHI; NHI.

Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed., Volume One: A-D, (Chicago, IL: Howard-Severance

Company, 1915; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1979),
WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 870-876.y C. Guthrie