Chaos Crowned: King David’s Troubling Rise to the Throne

When the Israelites ask Samuel to appoint a king over them, they emphasize their desire for a ruler to provide justice and military leadership:

^{שׁמואל א ח:כ} וְהָיִינוּ גַם אֲנַחְנוּ כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם וּשְׁפָטָנוּ מַלְכֵּנוּ וְיָצָא לְפָנֵינוּ וְנִלְחַם אֶת מִלְחֲמֹתֵנוּ.

^{1 Sam 8:20} “Let us be like all the other nations: Let our king judge us and go out at our head and fight our battles.”^[1]

Saul is the first king chosen by YHWH, but his failure to heed YHWH results in YHWH rejecting him in favor of David (1 Sam 15–16).^[2] Early in the account of David’s rise to kingship (1 Sam 16:14–2 Sam 5),^[3] he becomes a commander in Saul’s army:

^{שׁמואל א יח:יג} וַיְסִרֵהוּ שָׁאוּל מֵעִמּוֹ וַיְשִׂמֵהוּ לוֹ שַׂר אָלֶף וַיֵּצֵא וַיָּבֹא לִפְנֵי הָעָם.

^{1 Sam 18:13} So Saul removed him from his presence and appointed him chief of a thousand, go out and come in ahead of the nation.

David’s military prowess earns him the love of the people:

^{שׁמואל א יח:טז} וְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל וִיהוּדָה אֹהֵב אֶת דָּוִד כִּי הוּא יוֹצֵא וָבָא לִפְנֵיהֶם.

^{1 Sam 18:16} All Israel and Judah loved David, for he would go out and come in at their head.

He is already fulfilling the military aspect of the king’s role. As the narrative of David’s rise to power continues, it often presents David in a positive light, especially in comparison to Saul, but it also hints that monarchy under David will not be an improvement.^[4]

People Doing “What is Right in Their Eyes”

When Saul is informed of his daughter Michal’s love for David, Saul’s approval sounds positive:

‏^{שׁמואל א יח:כ} וַתֶּאֱהַב מִיכַל בַּת שָׁאוּל אֶת דָּוִד וַיַּגִּדוּ לְשָׁאוּל וַיִּשַׁר הַדָּבָר בְּעֵינָיו.

^{1 Sam 18:20} Now Michal daughter of Saul had fallen in love with David; and when this was reported to Saul, the matter was right in his eyes.

What is “right” for Saul, however, is the opportunity his daughter’s romance provides to defeat his rival for the throne by dooming David at the hands of the Philistines:

‏^{שׁמואל א יח:כא} וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶתְּנֶנָּה לּוֹ וּתְהִי לוֹ לְמוֹקֵשׁ וּתְהִי בוֹ יַד פְּלִשְׁתִּים וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל אֶל דָּוִד בִּשְׁתַּיִם תִּתְחַתֵּן בִּי הַיּוֹם.

^{1 Sam 18:21} Saul thought: “I will give her to him, and she can serve as a snare for him, so that the Philistines may kill him.” So Saul said to David, “You can become my son-in-law even now through the second one.”

In the very same narrative, David’s perspective on being offered Saul’s daughter’s hand in marriage is likewise described as right in his eyes, but his pleasure is less about marrying Michal than about joining the royal family:^[5]

^{שׁמואל א יח:כו} וַיַּגִּדוּ עֲבָדָיו לְדָוִד אֶת הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיִּשַׁר הַדָּבָר בְּעֵינֵי דָוִד לְהִתְחַתֵּן בַּמֶּלֶךְ....

^{1 Sam 18:26a} His courtiers told this to David, and the matter was right in the eyes of David to marry into the king’s family.

That “right,” which requires David to pay a bride-price of 100 Philistine foreskins (v. 25), is destabilizing for the kingdom, as it leads to David gaining even greater popularity, and Saul thus fears him even more.

While the narrative reinforces David’s military prowess, it also hints at the chaos that comes from everyone doing “right in their own eyes,” echoing the final verse of the book of Judges:

^{שׁפטים כא:כה} בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם אֵין מֶלֶךְ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ הַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינָיו יַעֲשֶׂה.

^{Judg 21:25} In those days there was no king in Israel; every man acted in accordance with what was right in his own eyes.

Saul does not remedy this chaos; will David?

David Seeks Refuge with Israel’s Enemy, the Philistines

Fleeing from Saul’s attempts to kill him, David seeks refuge with Achish, the Philistine king of Gath. Fearing that Achish will reject or kill him because of David’s prior military successes (21:12–13), David projects himself as mentally unfit:^[6]

‏^{שׁמואל א כא:יד} וַיְשַׁנּוֹ אֶת טַעְמוֹ בְּעֵינֵיהֶם וַיִּתְהֹלֵל בְּיָדָם וַיְתָו [וַיְתָיו] עַל דַּלְתוֹת הַשַּׁעַר וַיּוֹרֶד רִירוֹ אֶל זְקָנוֹ.

^{1 Sam 21:14} So he concealed his good sense from them; he feigned madness for their benefit. He scratched marks on the doors of the gate and let his saliva run down his beard.

In contrast to the truly mad King Saul, David’s calculated display of lunacy may seem to present him as a superior contender to the throne. Yet David’s cunning poses a significant threat to Israel’s political integrity: He is collaborating with Israel’s most menacing enemy.^[7]

A Leader of Bandits

While under the protection of Achish, the Philistine king, David gathers followers—a band of brigands whose essential trait is an unwillingness to meet social and legal obligations:^[8]

^{שׁמואל א כב:ב} וַיִּתְקַבְּצוּ אֵלָיו כָּל אִישׁ מָצוֹק וְכָל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לוֹ נֹשֶׁא וְכָל אִישׁ מַר נֶפֶשׁ וַיְהִי עֲלֵיהֶם לְשָׂר וַיִּהְיוּ עִמּוֹ כְּאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת אִישׁ.

^{1 Sam 22:2} Everyone who was in straits and everyone who was in debt and everyone who was desperate joined him, and he became their leader; there were about four hundred men with him.

Their escape from the polis signifies a disintegration of law, trading membership in an organized political framework for banditry. David and his men randomly begin to attack non-Israelite villages:

‏^{שׁמואל א כז:ח} וַיַּעַל דָּוִד וַאֲנָשָׁיו וַיִּפְשְׁטוּ אֶל הַגְּשׁוּרִי וְהַגִּרְזִי [וְהַגִּזְרִי] וְהָעֲמָלֵקִי כִּי הֵנָּה יֹשְׁבוֹת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר מֵעוֹלָם בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּרָה וְעַד אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.

^{1 Sam 27:8} David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Gizrites, and the Amalekites—who were the inhabitants of the region of Olam, all the way to Shur and to the land of Egypt.

When Achish asks what David has been doing, however, David replies that he has been plundering Israelite territories:

‏^{שׁמואל א כז:י} וַיֹּאמֶר אָכִישׁ אַל פְּשַׁטְתֶּם הַיּוֹם וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד עַל נֶגֶב יְהוּדָה וְעַל נֶגֶב הַיַּרְחְמְאֵלִי וְאֶל נֶגֶב הַקֵּינִי.

^{1 Sam 27:10} Achish would ask, “Where did you raid today?” and David would reply, “The Negeb of Judah,” or “the Negeb of the Jerahmeelites,” or “the Negeb of the Kenites.”

To cover his deception, David establishes a משפט (mishpat), “law or custom,”^[9] that each of these foreign towns must be slaughtered in its entirety:

^{שׁמואל א כז:יא} וְאִישׁ וְאִשָּׁה לֹא יְחַיֶּה דָוִד לְהָבִיא גַת לֵאמֹר פֶּן יַגִּדוּ עָלֵינוּ לֵאמֹר כֹּה עָשָׂה דָוִד וְכֹה מִשְׁפָּטוֹ כָּל הַיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר יָשַׁב בִּשְׂדֵה פְלִשְׁתִּים.

^{1 Sam 27:11} David would leave no man or woman alive to be brought to Gath; for he thought, “They might tell about us: David did this.” Such was his law (mishpat) as long as he stayed in the territory of the Philistines.

David’s first mishpat—judgment being a quality that the Israelites desired from their king—endorses the indiscriminate slaughter of men, women, and children. The ironic use of mishpat to characterize David’s actions raises doubt about whether he is the right man to rehabilitate the Israelite monarchy.^[10] Characterizing this as David’s mishpat rather than the divine mishpat of herem, which mandates eradication of the inhabitants of Canaan (Deut 20:16–18),^[11] deepens further the danger that David poses to Israel’s integrity. It highlights the fact that it is raw political ambition, rather than religious piety, that drives David’s actions.

David Becomes Achish’s Servant

David’s feigned treasonous conduct against his own people earns him Achish’s confidence. Achish thereby assumes that by turning his back on his own people, David has permanently indentured himself to him:^[12]

^{שׁמואל א כז:יב} וַיַּאֲמֵן אָכִישׁ בְּדָוִד לֵאמֹר הַבְאֵשׁ הִבְאִישׁ בְּעַמּוֹ בְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָיָה לִי לְעֶבֶד עוֹלָם.

^{1 Sam 27:12} Achish trusted David. He thought: “He has become repugnant^[13] to his own people Israel, and so he will be my vassal forever (ʿebed ʿolam).^[14]

At that time, Achish is preparing to go to war against Israel, and he tells David that he expects David to come out with him (28:1). David responds:

^{שׁמואל א כח:ב} וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל אָכִישׁ לָכֵן אַתָּה תֵדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה עַבְדֶּךָ וַיֹּאמֶר אָכִישׁ אֶל דָּוִד לָכֵן שֹׁמֵר לְרֹאשִׁי אֲשִׂימְךָ כָּל הַיָּמִים.

^{1 Sam 28:2} David answered Achish, “You surely know what your servant will do.” “In that case,” Achish replied to David, “I will appoint you my bodyguard for life.”

When the people first asked for a king, Samuel warned them that the king would have unlimited powers to subject his people to virtual serfdom:

^{שׁמואל א ח:יז} צֹאנְכֶם יַעְשֹׂר וְאַתֶּם תִּהְיוּ לוֹ לַעֲבָדִים.

^{1 Sam 8:17} He will take a tenth part of your flocks, and you will become his slaves.

The people’s subsequent insistence on having a king (v. 20) constitutes an assent to serve that king. Here, however, David subverts that expectation; instead of imposing service on others as a monarch would do, it is David who becomes a slave. What does this portend for how David will exercise his authority as king?

Right in Achish’s Eyes

Achish’s officers are concerned about David’s loyalty, and when informing David of the decision to exclude him from the campaign against Israel, Achish describes David as “right and good” in his eyes:

^{שׁמואל א כט:ו} וַיִּקְרָא אָכִישׁ אֶל דָּוִד וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו חַי יְ־הוָה כִּי יָשָׁר אַתָּה וְטוֹב בְּעֵינַי צֵאתְךָ וּבֹאֲךָ אִתִּי בַּמַּחֲנֶה כִּי לֹא מָצָאתִי בְךָ רָעָה מִיּוֹם בֹּאֲךָ אֵלַי עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וּבְעֵינֵי הַסְּרָנִים לֹא טוֹב אָתָּה.

^{1 Sam 29:6} Achish summoned David and said to him, “As YHWH lives, you are right and good in my eyes, and I would like to have you go out and come in with me (i.e. be my comrade in arms); for I have found no fault with you from the day you joined me until now. But you are not acceptable to the other lords.

The narrator has Achish using both the phrase that described chaos in Judges and the idiom used to describe military leadership by Israel’s king to express supreme confidence in David’s loyalty—that he will act against Saul and in consonance with Philistine interests.^[15] The narrative thus transforms David into a living disavowal of the virtues of kingship over anarchy.^[16]

David’s Personal War

While Saul and Israel are engaged in battle with the Philistines, David is off on the sidelines waging his own private war with the Amalekites, who had attacked David’s home town of Ziklag and kidnapped the wives and children of David and his men (1 Sam 30:1–6).^[17] Because his war is fought so blatantly oblivious to the parallel drama of Israel’s life and death struggle with the Philistines, David’s tangential battle with the Amalekites is, in effect, another negation of the military leadership that the people had expected of him and for which they had come to love him. David avoids going to war against the Israelites, but he also abandons the Israelites to their own fate against the Philistines.^[18]

As David pursues the Amalekites, 200 of his men remain behind, because they are too “faint” (פִּגְּרוּ) to continue.

^{שׁמואל א ל:י} וַיִּרְדֹּף דָּוִד הוּא וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת אִישׁ וַיַּעַמְדוּ מָאתַיִם אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר פִּגְּרוּ מֵעֲבֹר אֶת נַחַל הַבְּשׂוֹר.

^{1 Sam 30:10} David continued the pursuit with four hundred men; two hundred men had halted, too faint to cross the Wadi Besor.

After successfully routing the Amalekites and returning with the spoils of the victor, David returns to these men. Here, he faces his first legal challenge, as his troops refuse to share the plunder with the non-combatants:

^{שׁמואל א ל:כב} וַיַּעַן כָּל אִישׁ רָע וּבְלִיַּעַל מֵהָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר הָלְכוּ עִם דָּוִד וַיֹּאמְרוּ יַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָלְכוּ עִמִּי לֹא נִתֵּן לָהֶם מֵהַשָּׁלָל אֲשֶׁר הִצַּלְנוּ כִּי אִם אִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת בָּנָיו וְיִנְהֲגוּ וְיֵלֵכוּ.

^{1 Sam 30:22} But all the mean and churlish fellows among the men who had accompanied David spoke up, “Since they did not accompany us, we will not give them any of the spoil that we seized—except that each may take his wife and children and go.”

David’s fighters are again labeled as “mean and churlish,” but David decides in favor of equal entitlement for all his troops regardless of service in active duty, enshrining the decision as legal precedent in Israel:

‏^{שׁמואל א ל:כד} וּמִי יִשְׁמַע לָכֶם לַדָּבָר הַזֶּה כִּי כְּחֵלֶק הַיֹּרֵד בַּמִּלְחָמָה וּכְחֵלֶק הַיֹּשֵׁב עַל הַכֵּלִים יַחְדָּו יַחֲלֹקוּ. ^ל:כה וַיְהִי מֵהַיּוֹם הַהוּא וָמָעְלָה וַיְשִׂמֶהָ לְחֹק וּלְמִשְׁפָּט לְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה.

^{1 Sam 30:24} How could anyone agree with you in this matter? The share of those who remain with the baggage shall be the same as the share of those who go down to battle; they shall share alike.” ^30:25 So from that day on it was made a statute (choq) and a law (mishpat) for Israel, continuing to the present day.^[19]

David presents the law as applying to those who were ordered to remain in camp, but in the narrative, these soldiers, who were פִּגְּרוּ מִלֶּכֶת, “too faint to follow” (30:21), have effectively failed in their duty. In the context of David’s and his militia’s abstention from Israel’s war with the Philistines, the law’s reward for non-combatants is a perpetual legislative reminder of David’s failure to show up in defense of Israel.^[20] David’s only official law once again defeats the original national design for a king to fight the nation’s battles.^[21]

Metaphorical Corpses

Moreover, the description of David’s exhausted troops using the verb פגר recalls the noun from the same root letters, פֶּגֶר, “corpse,”^[22] used previously by David in a caustic taunt when he faced Goliath:

^{שׁמואל א יז:מו} הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְסַגֶּרְךָ יְ־הוָה בְּיָדִי וְהִכִּיתִךָ וַהֲסִרֹתִי אֶת רֹאשְׁךָ מֵעָלֶיךָ וְנָתַתִּי פֶּגֶר מַחֲנֵה פְלִשְׁתִּים הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה לְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּלְחַיַּת הָאָרֶץ וְיֵדְעוּ כָּל הָאָרֶץ כִּי יֵשׁ אֱלֹהִים לְיִשְׂרָאֵל.

^{1 Sam 17:46} “This very day YHWH will deliver you into my hands. I will kill you and cut off your head; and I will give the corpses of the Philistine camp to the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth. All the earth shall know that there is a God in Israel.”^[23]

In an ironic inversion of David’s original mockery of the Philistines, a substantial portion of David’s own camp has been turned into one mass “corpse.”^[24] While David has occupied himself with the legalities of dealing with these metaphorical “corpses,” signifying non-participation in combat, the physical bodies of Israelites and their royal family have been piling up in their defense against the Philistine assault.^[25]

David’s Problematic Rise Sets the Tone

The narrative of David’s rise contributes to an extended indictment of monarchy—already introduced in the account of Saul’s tenure on the throne—as a preferred system of government. It is an account so critical as to render David’s corruption while on the throne, reaching its nadir with the Bathsheba affair, a foregone conclusion.

In fact, even the Talmud imagines a scathing dialog between God and David about David’s rise:

^{בבלי סנהדרין צה.} אֲמַר לֵיהּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְדָוִד: עַד מָתַי יִהְיֶה עָוֹן זֶה טָמוּן בְּיָדְךָ? עַל יָדְךָ נֶהֶרְגָה נוֹב עִיר הַכֹּהֲנִים, וְעַל יָדְךָ נִטְרַד דּוֹאֵג הָאֲדוֹמִי, וְעַל יָדְךָ נֶהֶרְגוּ שָׁאוּל וּשְׁלֹשֶׁת בָּנָיו. רְצוֹנְךָ יִכְלֶה זַרְעֶךָ, אוֹ תִּמָּסֵר בְּיַד אוֹיֵב? אָמַר לְפָנָיו: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, מוּטָב אֶמָּסֵר בְּיַד אוֹיֵב וְלֹא יִכְלֶה זַרְעִי.

^{b. Sanh 95a} God said to David, “How long will this crime be hidden in your hand. Through you Nob, the city of Priests was massacred; through you Doeg the Edomite was banished; and through you Saul and his three sons were slain; would you rather your line end, or be delivered into the enemy’s hand?” He replied: “Sovereign of the Universe! I would rather be delivered into the enemy’s hand than that my line should end.”

Just as Saul became a living embodiment of the very anarchy he was invited to remedy, so David, Saul’s apparent legitimate successor, is subtly portrayed as anarchy personified.

David’s Taking of Abishag Parallels the Concubine of Giboah

David’s final deathbed scene at the beginning of Kings further connects his story to the chaos depicted in Judges and cements his legacy. At the pathetic end of his days, David apparently agrees to his courtiers’ proposal to abduct a young maiden to serve him:

^{מלכים א א:ב} וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ עֲבָדָיו יְבַקְשׁוּ לַאדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה וְעָמְדָה לִפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ וּתְהִי לוֹ סֹכֶנֶת וְשָׁכְבָה בְחֵיקֶךָ וְחַם לַאדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ. ^א:ג וַיְבַקְשׁוּ נַעֲרָה יָפָה בְּכֹל גְּבוּל יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּמְצְאוּ אֶת אֲבִישַׁג הַשּׁוּנַמִּית וַיָּבִאוּ אֹתָהּ לַמֶּלֶךְ.

^{1 Kgs 1:2} His courtiers said to him, “Let a young maiden be sought for my lord the king, to wait upon Your Majesty and be his attendant; and let her lie in your bosom, and my lord the king will be warm.” ^1:3 So they looked for a beautiful girl throughout the territory of Israel. They found Abishag the Shunamite and brought her to the king.

Though David is not intimate with the woman (v. 4), the act recalls the forcible abduction of young maidens from Jabesh-Gilead for propagation:^[26]

^{שׁפטים כא:יב} וַיִּמְצְאוּ מִיּוֹשְׁבֵי יָבֵישׁ גִּלְעָד אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדְעָה אִישׁ לְמִשְׁכַּב זָכָר וַיָּבִיאוּ אוֹתָם אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה שִׁלֹה אֲשֶׁר בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן.

^{Judg 21:12} They found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead 400 young maidens who had not known a man carnally and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh.

The entire historical narratives from the books of Samuel to the end of Kings can be viewed similarly. The failure of the monarchy now compels the reader to radically reread the concluding verse of Judges. The political system of monarchy that was originally conceived as a guarantor of Israelite stability is now transformed into the pessimistic appraisal—“Even though there was no king in Israel, everyone did as he pleased.”^[27]