This post contains extracts from the BAR article by Ronald Hendel titled King David Loves Bathsheba – Is what the historical David did or said more important than what the Bible relates? Number formating and emphasis is mine.
Two links to related post on this site are:
For a related issue see the BAR article The Empire of David—or Not? Modern maps show David’s kingdom reaching to the Euphrates. But what does the Bible say? By Ronald S. Hende
Extracts from Hendel are as follows.
But what was King David really like? Was he the “sweet singer of Israel,” whose music drove away Saul’s personal demons? Was he the great warrior, lover, and king, the slayer of Goliath, and the conqueror of Jerusalem? Was he the prototype of the messiah, who is called the Son of David? Or was he a petty tyrant, littering his path to power with the bodies of his adversaries? The list of people who conveniently die during David’s ascent is quite large:
- Nabal, the wealthy Calebite, whose wife David marries (1 Samuel 25:38–42);
- Saul and Jonathan, the king and heir apparent, whose royal crown and insignia David conveniently acquires upon their deaths (2 Samuel 1:10);
- Ishbaal, Saul’s son and king over the northern tribes, whose decapitated head David also happens to acquire (2 Samuel 4:8);
- Abner, Ishbaal’s general, who is killed by David’s general (2 Samuel 3:27); and
- all but one of Saul’s male descendants, whom David “delivers” to their “executioners”. (2 Samuel 21:1–9). (1)
Is it possible that David’s ascent to power was an opportunistic bloodbath orchestrated by a ruthless guerilla warrior, not unlike the methods of modern Middle Eastern tyrants?
Steven McKenzie is the biographer of this other, shadier King David. In his remarkable book, King David: A Biography, McKenzie brings to bear all the analytical tools of the modern historian and shows, patiently and methodically, how most of the stories about David in 1-2 Samuel are carefully wrought apologies—what we would call political “spin”—to absolve David of responsibility for the convenient deaths of these actual or potential obstacles to his rise to power. Even after David becomes king, the spin continues. The revolt of David’s son Absalom requires delicate handling to show that David did not plot his own son’s death.
The modern study of the Bible all too often brings us to these hard choices. Are we to prefer history to story? Is what the historical person actually said or did more important than what the Bible relates? Is historical truth the only kind of truth? Some would say that great literature is truer than history, since history only relates what happened once, but literature tells us what is true always and universally.4 And so the Bible’s David—and the poet’s David—may tell us more about ourselves and the world we live in than the actual career of the historical David. History, politics, religion and literature are mingled in the tragic story of David and Bathsheba, and it is perhaps the conjunction of such different realities that makes the story so strong and still moves us today. “King David loves Bathsheba”—what tenderness and brutality come to mind in that phrase, the grandeur and frailty of the human condition.
(1) From Claude.ai
Prompt: Which of Saul’s sons David himself killed, which Saul’s general Abner killed, and which Saul’s enemies killed?
Yes. The deaths of Saul’s sons and descendants are spread across several passages, and the distinction between Saul’s sons, Jonathan’s son, and Saul’s grandsons is important.
1. Saul’s sons killed in battle
Saul had several sons, but three of them died with him at Mount Gilboa when the Philistines defeated Israel:
- Jonathan
- Abinadab (also called Ishvi in some passages)
- Malchishua
1 Samuel 31:2 (ASV): “And the Philistines followed hard upon Saul and upon his sons; and the Philistines slew Jonathan, and Abinadab, and Malchishua, the sons of Saul.”
Saul subsequently died by suicide after being wounded.
So David did not kill these three.
2. Ish-bosheth — Saul’s surviving son
After Saul’s death, Ish-bosheth, another son of Saul, became king over much of Israel, while David ruled Judah from Hebron.
This produced a civil war between the houses of Saul and David (2 Samuel 2–3).
Ish-bosheth was eventually assassinated by two of his own military officers, Baanah and Rechab.
2 Samuel 4:5–7 describes them entering Ish-bosheth’s house while he was sleeping and killing him.
They then took his head to David, apparently expecting a reward.
Instead, David had the assassins executed:
2 Samuel 4:11–12 (ASV): “how much more, when wicked men have slain a righteous man in his own house upon his bed? shall I not therefore require his blood at your hand, and take you away from the earth? And David commanded his young men, and they slew them…”
So David did not kill Ish-bosheth. In fact, the narrative portrays David as condemning his murderers.
3. Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth was spared
Jonathan had a son named Mephibosheth (also called Merib-baal).
He was crippled after his nurse dropped him while fleeing after the news of Saul and Jonathan’s deaths (2 Samuel 4:4).
Rather than killing him, David protected him and gave him a permanent place at his table:
2 Samuel 9:7 (ASV): “Fear not; for I will surely show kindness to thee for the sake of Jonathan thy father…”
This is important because Mephibosheth was a direct male descendant of Saul who could theoretically have represented the old dynasty, yet David did not kill him.
4. The seven descendants David gave to the Gibeonites
This is the episode you originally asked about.
Much later, during a famine, David consulted Yahweh and was told that the famine was connected with Saul’s bloodguilt against the Gibeonites (2 Samuel 21:1).
The Gibeonites requested seven male descendants of Saul, and David handed them over.
The seven were:
| Person | Relationship to Saul |
|---|---|
| Armoni | Son |
| Mephibosheth | Son |
| Five sons of Merab | Grandsons |
They were executed by the Gibeonites.
2 Samuel 21:8–9 (ASV) describes David giving them over to the Gibeonites, who “hanged them in the mountain before Jehovah.”
There is a major textual issue here: the Masoretic Text calls their mother Michal, but 2 Samuel 21:8 is almost certainly referring to Merab, Saul’s other daughter. Michal was David’s wife. The NRSVUE reads Merab.
5. So who actually killed Saul’s family?
The sequence looks like this:
Saul’s reign
→ Saul’s sons Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malchishua killed by Philistines
→ Saul dies by suicide
After Saul’s death
→ Ish-bosheth becomes king of northern Israel
→ Ish-bosheth assassinated by Baanah and Rechab
→ David executes Baanah and Rechab when they brought him Ish-bosheth’s head. Was that to get a reward for as proof of doing the “job”?
Later
→ David spares Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth, who was cripled.
Still later
→ David gives seven descendants of Saul to the Gibeonites
→ Gibeonites execute the seven
The interesting political question
This makes the biblical picture more complicated than simply saying “David killed Saul’s sons so that he could become king.” David is explicitly portrayed as not killing several important members of Saul’s dynasty:
- Jonathan — killed by Philistines [Davids old comrades from when he was a mercenary for them?]
- Ish-bosheth — assassinated by his own men
- Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth — spared by David
- Saul’s three other sons at Gilboa — killed by Philistines [this was likely due to Saul’s mistake IMHO]
Yet David did authorize the transfer of seven other male descendants of Saul to the Gibeonites, and those seven were executed.
From a historical-critical perspective, this raises an interesting question: whether the story of the seven descendants in 2 Samuel 21 is functioning partly as a theological explanation for the destruction of Saul’s remaining male dynasty, while simultaneously portraying David as innocent of direct responsibility.
That question becomes particularly interesting when 2 Samuel 21 is compared with the earlier stories of David’s repeated insistence that he would not personally kill Saul or seize the throne by violence.
