DAVID, king of Judah and Israel, was the founder of the Judaean dynasty at Jerusalem. The exact date of his reign is un certain. It used to be reckoned from Io55–Io15 B.c., but is now generally fixed at about ioio-97o B.C. Our principal source for his history is I Sam. xvi.–I Kings ii. Its very extent shows how deep was the impression he made upon the mind of his people; indeed, his popularity as a national hero is one cause of the diffi culty we find in reconstructing his history. Stories of exploits and incidents in his career were repeated with delight from generation to generation. Groups of these stories were collected together, and from several such sources the history of his doings was compiled. The editors have pieced their material so well together, however, that it is impossible for us to separate it with accuracy into its constituent sources. But the harmonizing has not been perfectly carried out, and the inconsistencies and duplications have enabled the critics to separate more or less clearly at least two main sources. The Greek text, again, varies very considerably from the Hebrew, offering a different collection of the narratives. For de tailed discussion of these problems the commentaries on Samuel, and SAMUEL (BooKs oF) should be consulted. Another history of David is to be found in Chron. xi.–xxix., which is to some extent parallel to that in Samuel but omits many of the narratives. On the other hand it contains much additional material, which is, how ever, of inferior historical value. It is much fuller on subjects which were the special concern of the editor of Chronicles, such as details of temple arrangements and lists of officers. It is particu larly interesting because of its obvious tendency to idealize the character of David, and in this respect was the late stage of a process which must have begun soon after the death of the national hero, and of which we find traces even in Samuel.
The history in Samuel opens with an account of the anointing of David by Samuel as successor to Saul, whom Yahweh had re jected from the throne of Israel (I Sam. xvi. 1-13). Samuel is instructed that the new king is to be found among the sons of Jesse, who dwells at Bethlehem, 5m. south of Jerusalem. A sacri fice is celebrated there, to which, beside Jesse and his sons, the elders of the town are invited. David, busy in tending the sheep, is apparently too young to be summoned with his older brothers. But when the oracle rejects each of the seven elder brothers Samuel asks whether there is no other son, and David is sum moned. It is made clear that he is the chosen one, and Samuel anoints him. This narrative, which is seemingly rather the con clusion of Samuel's history than the beginning of David's, raises suspicions. It will be noted that in I Sam. xvii. 13 seq. the brothers of David are three in number (v. 1 2 is harmonistic), not seven, and in I Chron. 13-15, six. It is highly improbable that the cere mony could have been performed without some news of it getting to the ears of Saul, and the later narratives seem to ignore it.
Introduction to Saul.—I Sam. xvi. 14-23 gives an account of David's introduction to the court of Saul. One of the king's attendants, when a man is sought who can play the harp to charm the moods of melancholy which have fallen upon Saul, recommends David, whom he describes not merely as a good harpist, but as "a mighty man of valour, and a man of war"—a description difficult to reconcile with the preceding narrative unless a considerable number of years be supposed to intervene. David is summoned, and his manly beauty appeals to Saul, who makes him not only court harpist but also his own armour-bearer.
The next section of the history in Samuel (xvii. i–xviii. 5) records the most famous exploit of David, his victory in single combat over the Philistine giant Goliath, and its consequences. This account, however, raises several serious difficulties. First of all there is the fact that in 2 Sam. xxi. 19 the slaying of Goliath is attributed to Elhanan, one of David's heroes. An attempt to recon cile these contradictory statements is found in I Chron. xx. 5, where the victim of Elhanan's valour is described as "Lahmi, the brother of Goliath." David's exploit is not referred to in I Sam. xxi. 10-15, or in xxix., where some reference to it would have been expected, and on these and other grounds the simpler tradi tion of 2 Samuel is usually preferred. On the other hand, it may well have been some such valiant deed that first attracted Saul's attention to David (cf. xiv. 52), and accounted for the popularity of the latter which made him an object of jealousy to Saul. Hence the narrative of I Sam. xvii., though legendary, may be the ex panded version of some historic combat in which David's oppo nent was not Goliath. Much more serious is the impossibility of reconciling the narrative with what precedes. Although according to xvi. Saul has already appointed David to be his musician and armour-bearer, now David appears as an untried shepherd lad, sent by his father with provisions for his brothers in the Israelite camp. His brothers treat him with a petulance hardly conceivable if he already stood well at court, and vv. 55-58 show that neither Saul nor his captain Abner had ever heard of David before. Some light is thrown upon this difficult problem by a study of the Greek versions, in one group of which, represented by the Vatican text, xvii. 12-31, 41, 50, and xvii. S5–xviii. 5 are missing. This shorter form of the tradition is much more intelligible, and more easy to reconcile with xvi. It will be seen at once that xvii. 32 follows xvii. I I much more naturally than does v. 12. Whether the Greek or the Hebrew text is original is a much-debated problem, but on the whole it is more likely that the additional verses in the latter are expansions, taken from another biography of David, than that the Greek is an abbreviated form of the Hebrew. In xviii. 1-4 we have the first notice of the friendship that grew up between Jonathan, Saul's son, and David. The investment of David in the apparel of Jonathan may be an alternative to the exchange of blood as a symbol of brotherhood, for the clothes of a man were regarded as in a sense part of his personality. Otto Eissfeldt, however, has argued plausibly (Theologische Blotter, Oct. 1927) that this is part of a parallel tradition according to which David was armour bearer and favourite, not of Saul, but of Jonathan, a theory which would explain some difficulties in the later narratives.
Chapter xx., which records the covenant made by Jonathan with David and prepares the way for the story of David's kindness to Jonathan's son Merihaal. seems to be independent of the traditions in which it is embedded, and has been expanded by the additional interview between the two friends, vv. 40-42. It certainly cannot follow on xix. 18-24, the story of David's attempt to find sanctu ary with Samuel at Ramah, for it supposes David to be still at court and Jonathan to be unaware that David stands in peril. This flight of David's may possibly be fitted in after xxi. 9; xx. 1 is an ineffective attempt to remove the difficulty. Next David goes to the sanctuary at Nob, where he had been wont to consult the priestly oracle (xxv. 15), and, pretending that he is engaged on a secret expedition in Saul's behalf, obtains of Ahimelech the priest bread from the sacred table and the sword of Goliath. This narra tive may well follow xix. Io, the incident of David's escape from the spear hurled at him by Saul. The story goes on to relate the flight of David to the court of the Philistine king of Gath, Achish, where he escapes from the revenge which might otherwise have been taken upon him by feigning madness (xxi. Io-15). This anticipates xxvii., and is out of place at this point of the history; surely David would not go to the very city of Goliath flaunting the sword of the giant ! Outlaw Life.—For years after his escape David lived the life of an outlaw. He made his headquarters first at the stronghold— the traditional "cave" is a mistake—of Adullam, a Canaanite town said to have been captured by Joshua (Josh. xii. 15), probably on the western border of Judah, and about 12 miles from Bethlehem. Here he was joined by his clansmen and by others who were in a desperate position, such as those who feared to be sold into slavery for failure to pay their debts, until his band numbered 40o men. A probably secondary tradition xxii. 3 seq., relates that he placed his father and mother under the protection of the king of Moab. The following verse, which speaks of the seer Gad as in the com pany of David, is also probably a later tradition. Saul was discon certed at this new development. His hated rival had escaped his clutches, largely through the connivance of his son. An Edomite, Doeg, who had been a concealed witness of the interview at Nob between Ahimelech and David, reported what had happened there, and Saul sent for Ahimelech. In spite of Ahimelech's protest that he had acted in all good faith with Saul, the king commanded that he and all the other priests of the sanctuary should be slaughtered. His bodyguard refusing to carry out this command, he ordered the informer to act as executioner, and Doeg slew 85 priests of Nob— a suspiciously large number. All living creatures in that town were also put to death, save Abiathar, one of Ahimelech's sons, who escaped and took refuge with David.
Presently word was brought to David that the Philistines were raiding Keilah, south of Adullam ; and, despite the reluctance of his followers to undertake so desperate an enterprise, the outlaw chief, encouraged by a priestly oracle, defeated the Philistines and delivered Keilah. Probably he maintained his band by acting, at a price, as protector of the district against such marauding attempts on the part of the Philistines and Bedouins. Saul saw an oppor tunity of capturing David while he was away from the protection of his stronghold and prepared to besiege him in Keilah ; but David, warned by the oracle that the inhabitants of Keilah would deliver him up to Saul if he remained within their walls, dispersed his band, which had now grown to 600 men. David lived now the life of the hunted outlaw, wandering from stronghold to stronghold in the border country. Popular tradition tells in xxiii., xxiv., xxvi., of a visit of consolation from Jonathan, the attempt of the men of Ziph to betray David to Saul, and of David's magnanimity in spar ing Saul's life when it was in his power to kill him, the two latter incidents appearing in duplicate. The incident of David's marriage to Abigail, the wife of a rich farmer who died a few days after he had churlishly refused to pay David the levy for protection af forded him (xxv.), is important as showing how David maintained his band, and how he strengthened his position by matrimonial alliances (cf. xxv. 43)• Wearying at last of his precarious life he decided to place him self under the protection of Achish, the Philistine ruler of Gath, from whom he obtained permission to establish himself and his band at Ziklag, which probably lay to the south of Judah. Here for more than a year he maintained his troop by raids upon the Amalekites and other marauding Bedouins. According to the rather improbable story of xxvii. I o–I 2 he represented these to Achish as raids upon Judah, as though to give proof of his perma nent alienation from his own people. In any case Achish was con vinced of David's loyalty and took him and his band as part of the army which he led in an important campaign against Saul. But on the eve of battle the Philistine captains, more distrustful than their leader, persuaded Achish to order David's return to Ziklag. David reached Ziklag to find that in his absence the Amalekites had raided and burned the town, carrying off with other booty David's wives. Pursuing the marauders he inflicted upon them a signal de feat, recovering all that had been carried off and much spoil in addition. By distributing a part of his spoil among the rulers of the various towns in the south country and of the old haunts of his freebooting days he strengthened his hold upon the affections of that countryside. In the meantime the Philistine campaign against Israel had been successful, and Saul and his sons, including Jona than, lay dead upon the slopes of Mt. Gilboa. The fertile lowlands of Jezreel and the Jordan fell into the possession of the victors, and Saul's son Ishbaal, who had escaped the fate of his brothers, maintained a shadowy sovereignty in the remote city of Mahanaim, the force behind his throne being Abner, Saul's commander-in chief. The news of Israel's defeat and Saul's death is brought ( 2 Sam. i.) to Ziklag by an Amalekite, who claims—in contradiction to the account in I Sam. xxxi. 4—to have slain the wounded king, and offers to David the crown and bracelet which he had taken from the corpse. Instead of receiving the reward which he doubt less looked for the messenger is slain at the command of David, who utters the noble dirge on Saul and Jonathan, 2 Sam. i. 19-27. The compiler avowedly takes the poem from the "Book of Jashar," but there appears to be no cogent reason for denying that David is its author.
A conflict between the forces of Ishbaal, under Abner, and those of David, under Joab, which developed out of a contest between 1 2 picked men on either side, ended greatly to the advantage of David's men. In the course of the struggle Abner slew Asahel, Joab's brother, thus creating a blood-feud which had serious con sequences in the subsequent history. Abner, recognizing that the cause of Ishbaal was hopeless, took to himself one of Saul's con cubines, an infringement of Ishbaal's prerogative as Saul's suc cessor, with deliberate intent to raise a quarrel with his lord which might provide him with a pretext for transferring his allegiance to David. When Ishbaal protested Abner sent an embassy to David offering to bring the northern clans over to him. According to one story (iii. 12-16), David demanded the return of Michal to him, as an evidence of good faith, but this story is consistent neither with itself nor with its context. In any case Abner, returning from Hebron after arranging terms with David, was summoned back by Joab and treacherously slain in pursuance of the blood feud. David was indignant, and showed his indignation by accord ing burial to Abner and proclaiming a fast. Apparently Joab was both too strong and too useful for the king to punish him, so David handed over that task to his God. The position of Ishbaal, deprived of Abner's help, went from bad to worse, and he was eventually assassinated by two of his own followers. They brought his head to David, but received the same reward as the Amalekite who thought to have found favour with David by his claim to have killed Saul. Following this the northern tribes swore allegiance to David at Hebron, and he became king of the united peoples. Here we may place the two successes over the Philistines narrated in v. 17-25.
The king now turned his attention to the ark of Yahweh, which had remained in obscurity since its return from the Philistines in the early youth of Samuel. It was brought up from Baal of Judah, and, after having been temporarily housed with Obed-Edom owing to an untoward incident during its progress, was placed in a spe cially prepared pavilion in the citadel, amid great rejoicings. That the king should have proposed to build a temple worthy to stand beside his palace is quite natural, and ch. vii., which relates how Nathan the prophet, after first sanctioning the project, forbade it in the name of Yahweh, may, though comparatively late, be based on a historical foundation. There follows in viii. a summary of military successes achieved by David and Joab, his commander in-chief. The concluding verses show that the court had been properly organized and a bodyguard of mercenaries provided for the king. The lame Mephibosheth (-Meribaal), Jonathan's son, was admitted to the royal table as the king's pensioner, and his family estates were restored to his use.
A friendly embassy from David to the newly crowned king of Ammon was treated with insult, and a war ensued, in which the Ammonites, who succeeded in gaining considerable Aramean sup port, were completely defeated, and their chief city was captured by David after a siege. It was during this campaign that David, in order to obtain for himself the beautiful Bathsheba, caused Joab deliberately to abandon her husband, Uriah the Hittite mer cenary, to an Ammonite assault. Not only were the Syrian allies of Ammon reduced to submission, but Edom was completely sub jugated by Joab.
The closing scenes of David's life, Kings i.–ii. IT, show the old warrior enfeebled by age, and the succession to his throne the sub ject of intrigue. His eldest surviving son, Adonijah, regarded him self as the heir. Like Absalom, he was of great personal charm and a favourite with numbers of the people, his outstanding sup porters being Joab and Abiathar. Like Absalom, too, he sought to make his position secure by assuming the state suitable to the heir apparent. He made a great feast for the men of Judah, inviting the king's sons but deliberately ignoring Solomon, Bathsheba's son, the prophet Nathan, and David's "mighty men," who evidently constituted a party in favour of Solomon's succession. Bath sheba and Nathan contrived to secure from David the ratification of an old promise that Solomon should succeed to the throne, and the aged king roused himself to make arrangements for the formal proclamation of Bathsheba's son. Adonijah's followers were seized with panic, and he himself sought sanctuary by taking hold of the horns of the altar, whence he suffered himself to be removed upon a rather equivocal promise by Solomon that his life should be spared. The remainder of the story records, with some later ex pansion by a Deuteronomic editor, how David left instructions to Solomon that Joab and Shimei should be put to death, but kind ness shown to the family of Barzillai. This ungenerous treatment of Joab, to whom more than to any man he owed the success of his career, and the virtual recantation of his promise to spare Shimei strike an unpleasant note in our ears. Nor does the con sideration of the king's failing powers and of his possible fear that Solomon's position might be endangered by adversaries whom he himself had felt free to spare completely mellow its harshness. And so, after a reign of 4o years, David slept with his fathers.
David may be charged with harshness in the treatment of con quered peoples—though the true meaning of 2 Sam. xii. 31 is that he set the people of Rabbah to menial labour, not that he tortured them; but in this respect he compares favourably with his con temporaries. His delivery of Saul's descendants to be impaled was but obedience to the will of 1.7ahweh as he understood it. And on the other hand his record is marked by chivalrous treatment of his foes on several occasions. Even his outstanding faults, the murder of Uriah that he might obtain Bathsheba, and his weakness in dealing with his sons, though we need not palliate them, were less heinous a thousand years before Christ than they would be to-day. He was a sincerely religious man, a devout worshipper of Yahweh, as may be seen from his care for the Ark. Though his relationships with the prophets Gad and Nathan may have been idealized by later editors he certainly was more amenable to pro phetic guidance than was Saul. He was assuredly not the soldier saint of Chronicles, or the Psalmist of profound religious expe rience. But while it is improbable that he was the author of any of the Hebrew hymns he was undoubtedly a musician and a poet. The dancer of 2 Sam. vi. would naturally be the singer, too, and there is good reason for believing the elegy on Saul and Jonathan and the little dirge on Abner, 2 Sam. iii. seq. 33, are of David's composition. Moreover, the attribution of Psalms to David, though mistaken, is most easily understood if he was really a minstrel (cf. also Amos vi. 5).
Greatly loved in his day, deeply revered by those who came after him, David was perhaps the most winsome character in Hebrew story, lovable, because so human, even in his faults. A great war rior and a great statesman, his importance as the real constructor of the Hebrew kingdom can hardly be overestimated.