1. Chronicles:
We would obtain a very different idea of the personal character of David if we drew our conclusions from the books of Samuel and Kings or from the books of Chronicles. There is no doubt whatever that the former books are much truer to fact, and any estimate or appreciation of David or of any of the other characters described must be based upon them. The Chronicler, on the other hand, is biased by the religious ideas of his own time and is prejudiced in favor of some of those whose biographies he writes and against others. He accordingly suppresses the dark passages of David's life, e.g. the murder of Uriah (1Ch 20:1-8), or sets them in a favorable light, e.g. by laying the blame of the census upon Satan (1Ch 21:1). David's success, especially as against Saul's misfortune, is greatly exaggerated in 1Ch 12:2,22. Ceremonial functions are greatly elaborated (chapter 16; compare 2Sa 6:1-23). The various orders of priests and singers in the second temple have their origin traced back to David (2Sa 16:4 ff,37 ff; 1Ch 23:1-32 through 1Ch 27:1-34), and the temple of Solomon itself is to all intents and purposes built by him (chapters 22; 28). At the same time there may be much material in the shape of names and isolated statements not found in the older books, which so long as they are not tinged with the Chronicler's pragmatism or "tendency," may possibly be authentic records preserved within the circle of the priestly caste, e.g. we are told that Saul's skull was fastened in the temple of Dagon (1Ch 10:10). There is no doubt that the true names of Ish-bosheth, Mephibosheth and Eliada (2Sa 2:8; 4:4; 5:16) were Ish-baal (Esh-baal), Merib-baal and Beeliada (1Ch 8:33; 9:39; 8:34; 9:40; 14:7); that the old name of Jerusalem was Jebus (1Ch 11:4-5; compare Jg 19:10-11); perhaps a son of David called Nogah has to be added to 2Sa 5:15 from 1Ch 3:7; 14:6; in 2Sa 8:8 and 2Sa 21:18, for Betah and Gob read Tebah (Tibhath) and Gezer (1Ch 18:8; Ge 22:24; 1Ch 20:4). The incident recounted in 2Sa 23:9 ff happened at Pasdammim (1Ch 11:13). Shammah the Harodite was the son of Elika (2Sa 23:25; compare 1Ch 11:27), and other names in this list have to be corrected after the readings of the Chronicler. Three (not seven) years of famine was the alternative offered to David (2Sa 24:13; compare 1Ch 21:12).
2. Psalms:
If we could believe that the Book of Psalms was in whole or in part the work of David, it would throw a flood of light upon the religious side of his nature. Indeed, we should know as much about his religious life as can well be known about anyone. Unfortunately the date and authorship of the Psalms are questions regarding which the most divergent opinions are held. In the early Christian centuries all the Psalms were ascribed to David and, where necessary, explained as prophecies. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of the Book of Psalms simply as "David" (Heb 4:7). The Greek text, however, of that book ascribes only some 87 of the poems to David, and the Hebrew only 73. Some of these are not David's, and in the whole book there is only one which professes from its contents to be his, namely, Ps 18:1-50 (= 2Sa 22:1-51). The occasion on which a psalm was composed is stated only in the case of thirteen psalms, all of which are ascribed to David. Each of these is referred to some incident recorded in the books of Samuel, although sometimes the citation is erroneous (see PSALMS). The Septuagint supplies occasions to two or three more psalms; but all such statements are merely the conjectures of readers and scribes and are of no historical value.
3. Complex Character:
To form a correct opinion of anyone is much more difficult than to state the facts of his life; to form an opinion which will be generally accepted is impossible. Of David's character the most opposite estimates have been formed. On one hand he is extolled as a saint, and yet few men have committed worse crimes. The character of David must remain, like that of everyone, an insoluble enigma. A person is to be judged by his motives rather than by his actions, and one's true motives are unknown even to oneself (Jer 17:9). There are several sides of David's nature in regard to which there cannot be two opinions.
4. Physical Courage:
Perhaps the feature of his character which stands out most prominently in his earlier years, at any rate, is his boundless physical courage. He never shirked danger (1Sa 17:28,34 ff) and delighted in hairbreadth escapes in 1Sa 26:6. Like most Semites he was fond of gambling and liked to take risks (1Sa 18:26; compare 1Sa 23:9; 30:7), even when modesty would have led him to decline them (1Sa 17:32; compare Jg 8:20). A native indifference to the shedding of blood grew into a liking for it, giving rise to acts of gross cruelty (1Sa 27:9; 2Sa 8:2; 16:7, etc.). He had need, indeed, to be a brave man, considering the character of the men whom he ruled (1Sa 22:2). Yet he could rule them by gentleness as well as by force (1Sa 30:23). All classes had unbounded confidence in his personal courage and soldierly qualities (2Sa 18:3), and were themselves driven to restrain his military ardor (2Sa 21:17).
5. Moral Courage:
Whether David possessed moral courage to an equal degree is another matter. Had he done so he would hardly have permitted the execution of seven sons of Saul (2Sa 21:1 ff), and that, too, at the cost of breaking his plighted word (1Sa 24:21); he would not have stood in awe of the sons of his sister Zeruiah (2Sa 3:39), and would have punished Joab instead of weakly invoking an imprecation on his head (2Sa 3:29), however much he might have felt the loss of his services. But in many matters his natural sense of justice was blunted by the superstitions of the age in which he lived.
6. Prudence:
But David was even more prudent than courageous. He is so described by the person who recommended him (somewhat eulogistically) to Saul (1Sa 16:18). Prudence or wisdom was indeed what his biographer most remarks in him (1Sa 18:5,30), and situated as he was he could not have too much of it. It shows itself in the fact that he consistently made as many friends and as few enemies as was possible. His wonderful foresight is shown in such acts as his conciliating the Judean chiefs with gifts taken from his spoil (1Sa 30:26 ff), in his commendation of the men of Ja-besh-gilead (2Sa 2:5-7), and in his reception of Abner (2Sa 3:20). Yet it must be confessed that this constant looking forward to the future takes away from the spontaneity of his virtue. His gratitude is often a keen sense of favors to come. His kindness to Merib-baal did him no harm and some advantage (2Sa 9:1-13; 19:24 ff), and his clemency to Shimei helped to win him the tribe of Benjamin (2Sa 19:16 ff). Even in his earliest youth he seems to have preferred to attain his ends by roundabout ways. The means by which he obtained introduction or reintroduction to Saul (1Sa 17:26 ff) afford some justification for the opinon which his oldest brother held of him (1Sa 17:28). Perhaps nothing proves the genius of David better than his choice of Jebus as the capital of the country--which it still continues to be after a lapse of three thousand years.
7. Strategy:
Yet it must be confessed that David's prudence often degenerates into cunning. With true oriental subtlety he believed firmly in keeping one's secret to oneself at all costs (1Sa 21:2). The manner in which he got himself out of Gath after this first visit there (1Sa 21:13) and the fact that he hoodwinked Achish during sixteen months (1Sa 27:1-12; 28:1; 29:1-11) may excite our admiration but not our respect. The Oriental, however, delights in a display of cunning and makes use of it without shame (2Sa 15:34), just as the European does in secret. There is something curiously modern in the diplomacy which David employed to ensure his own return in due state (2Sa 19:11 ff). We must remember, however, that David lived among persons hardly one of whom he could trust. Joab accuses Abner of deceit, while he himself was faithful to none except David (2Sa 3:25). Ziba accuses Merib-baal of treachery, and Merib-baal accuses Ziba of falsehood, and David cannot tell which is speaking the truth (2Sa 16:1 ff; 2Sa 19:24 ff). David himself is out-witted by Joab, though with a friendly purpose (2Sa 14:1 ff). The wonder, therefore, is, not that David was guilty of occasional obliquity, but that he remained as straightforward and simple as he was.
8. Nobility:
David was, indeed, a man very much ahead of the times in which he lived. His fine elegies upon the death of Saul and Jonathan, Abner and Absalom show that his nature was untainted with malice. It was no superstitious fear but a high sense of honor which kept him back from putting out of his way his arch-enemy when he had him in his power (1Sa 24:1-22-1Sa 26:1-25). He even attempts to find an excuse for him (1Sa 26:19), while depreciating himself (1Sa 24:14; 26:20) in phrases which are more than a mere oriental metonymy (2Sa 9:8). It was the ambition of his life to be the founder of a permanent dynasty (2Sa 7:29), yet he was willing that his house should be sacrificed to save his nation from destruction (2Sa 24:17). Like most Orientals he was endowed with a refinement of feeling unknown in the West. His refusal to drink of water obtained at the cost of bloodshed has become classic (2Sa 23:17). And he seems to have been gifted with the saving sense of humor (1Sa 26:15). That he was a religious person goes without saying (2Sa 7:1-29; 8:11). He probably did not believe that outside the land of Israel Yahweh ceased to rule: the expression used in 1Sa 26:19 is not a term of dogmatic theology. Like other Hebrews David had no theology. He believed in Yahweh alone as the ruler, if not of the universe, at any rate of all the world known to him. He certainly did not believe in Chemosh or Milcom, whether in the lands of Moab and Ammon or out of them (2Sa 12:30; for "their king" read Malcam (Milcom)).
9. David in Relation to His Family:
David discharged, as most Orientals do, his duty toward his parents (1Sa 22:3). To Michal, his first wife, his love was constant (2Sa 3:13), although she did not bear him any children. In accordance with the custom of the times, as his estate improved, he took other wives and slave-girls. The favorite wife of his latter days was Bathsheba. His court made some show of splendor as contrasted with the dwellings of the peasantry and the farmer class (2Sa 19:28,35), but his palace was always small and plain, so that it could be left to the keeping of ten women when he removed from it (2Sa 15:16). David and Michal seem to have lived on terms of perfect equality (2Sa 6:20 ff). In this he contrasts somewhat with Ahab (1Ki 21:5 ff). David's chief weakness in regard to his family was his indulgence of some of his sons and favoring some above others, and want of firmness in regard to them. He could refuse them nothing (2Sa 13:27). His first favorite was his oldest son Amnon (2Sa 13:21, Septuagint). After the death of Amnon, Absalom became the favorite (2Sa 18:33), and after the death of Absalom, Adonijah (1Ki 1:6). Yet David lived for two whole years in Jerusalem along with Absalom without seeing him (2Sa 14:28), and he was succeeded not by Adonijah, but by Solomon, whose mother was the favorite wife of his later years.
10. David in Relation to His Friends:
Not only did David know the value of having many friends, but he was capable of sincere attachment. There is no reason to doubt the sincerity of his love for Jonathan, although it is not so completely cut off from all suspicion of self-interest as is that of Jonathan for him. David, indeed, had the faculty of winning the confidence and love of all sorts and conditions of people, not only of Jonathan (1Sa 18:1 ff; 1Sa 20:1-42; 23:16 ff), but of Jonathan's sister Michal (1Sa 18:20), of the whole people (1Sa 18:28 Septuagint; 2Sa 19:14), and even of his people's enemies (2Sa 17:27 ff). His friendship lasted as long as the object of it lived (2Sa 1:17 ff; 2Sa 10:1 f). In the case of his officers this was partly due to his faculty for choosing good men (2Sa 8:16 ff), so that the same persons often held the same offices during David's life (2Sa 20:23 ff). Yet the services of one of them at least were retained more by compulsion than by choice (2Sa 3:39). He seems, indeed, to have continued Joab in his post because he felt he could not do without him. Joab was devoted to David with the devotion of Caleb Balderstone to his master, and he was as utterly unscrupulous. He did not hesitate to commit any crime that would benefit David. The latter dared not perpetrate these atrocities himself, but he did not mind taking advantage of such a useful instrument, and never punished Joab for them, save with an impotent curse (2Sa 3:29). He dealt otherwise with malefactors who could be better spared (2Sa 1:14 ff; 2Sa 4:9 ff). Indeed, a suspicious juryman might find that David put both Abner and Amasa, in the way of Joab (2Sa 3:23 ff; 2Sa 19:13; 4 ff). It does not say much for David that he fell so low as to fear losing the good opinion even of Joab, this ready instrument of his worst crime (2Sa 11:25).
11. His Success:
One reason for the high position David held in the popular estimation was no doubt his almost uninterrupted success. He was regarded as the chosen of Heaven, by friend and foe alike (1Sa 23:17). Fortune seemed to favor him. Nothing could have been more timely than the death of Saul and Jonathan, of Ishbaal and Abner, of Absalom and Amasa, and he did not raise his hand against one of them. As a guerrilla chief with his 600 bandits he could keep at bay. Saul with his 3,000 picked men (1Sa 24:2; 26:2), but he was not a great general. Most of the old judges of Israel did in one pitched battle what David effected in a campaign (1Sa 18:30; 19:8; 23:1 ff; 2Sa 5:17 ff; 2Sa 21:15 ff). Most of his conquests were won for him by Joab (1Ch 11:6; 2Sa 11:1), who willingly accorded David the credit of what he himself had done (2Sa 12:27-28; compare 2Sa 8:13; 1Ch 18:11 with the title of Ps 60:1-12). And to crown all, when he came to turn his arms east and west, he found his two most formidable opponents in these directions crippled and harmless. That he ever survived Saul he owed to a timely incursion of the Philistines (1Sa 23:24 ff), and his whole career is largely to be explained by the fact that, at the moment, the tribe of Judah as a whole was passing from insignificance to supremacy.
12. His Foreign Friends:
In the prosecution of his military achievements David employed everyone who came to his hand as an instrument without any question of nationality. This is not to impugn his patriotism. Eastern peoples are united not by the ties of country but of religion. Still it does seem strange that two of David's best friends were two enemies of his nation--Nahash, king of the sons of Ammon (1Sa 11:1; 2Sa 10:1 ff) and Achish, lord of Gath (1Sa 21:10; 27:1-12; 28:1 ff; 1Sa 29:1-11). He appears to have found the Philistines more reliable and trustworthy than the Hebrews. When he became king, his personal body-guard was composed of mercenaries of that nation--the Cherethites and Pelethites--with whom he had become acquainted when at Ziklag (1Sa 30:14; 2Sa 8:18; 20:23). It was to a native of Gath that he committed the care of the sacred ark on its passage from Kiriath-jearim to Jerusalem (2Sa 6:10-11). When the rebellion broke out under Absalom, he committed one-third of his forces to a banished soldier of the same town, who had come to him a little while before with a band of followers (2Sa 15:19 ff; 2Sa 18:2). Some of the soldiers in whom he placed the greatest confidence were Hittites (1Sa 26:6; 2Sa 11:6), and his commissariat was furnished by persons outside of Israel (2Sa 17:27; the Machir tribe were half Syrian; Gilead is the son of Machir, 1Ch 7:14). The threshing-floor of a Jebusite became the site of the temple of Solomon (2Sa 24:18 ff).
13. Nemesis:
David was a strong believer in the power of Nemesis, and that daughter of Night played a considerable part in his life. He felt a peculiar satisfaction in being undeservedly cursed by Shimei, from a conviction that poetic justice would in the end prevail (2Sa 16:12). He must have felt that the same unseen power was at work when his own oldest son was guilty of a crime such as his father had committed before him (2Sa 13:1-39 and 2Sa 11:1-27), and when the grandfather of the wife of Uriah the Hittite became the enemy whom he had most to fear (2Sa 11:3; 23:34; compare Ps 41:9; 55:12 f). And David's own last hours, instead of being spent in repose and peace following upon a strenuous and successful life, were passed in meting out vengeance to those who had incurred his displeasure as well as commending those who had done him service (1Ki 2:5 ff).
14. References in the New Testament:
Even as early as Ezekiel, David became the ruler who was to govern the restored people of Israel (34:23,14; 37:24). If there were to be a ruling house, it must be the Davidic dynasty; it did not occur to the Jews to think of any other solution (Am 9:11; Ho 3:5; Jer 30:9; Zec 12:8). That Jesus was descended from David (Mt 9:27, etc.) is proved by the fact that his enemies did not deny that he was so (Mt 22:41 ff). In the New Testament, David is regarded as the author of the Psalms (Ac 4:25; Ro 4:6; Heb 4:7). He is also one of the Old Testament saints (Heb 11:32) whose actions (unless otherwise stated) are to be imitated (Mt 12:3); but yet not to be compared with the Messiah (Ac 2:29 ff; Ac 13:36) who has power over the life to come (Re 3:7) and who is "the Root of David" (Re 5:5; 22:16).
LITERATURE.
See the commentaries on the books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Psalms, and histories of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, especially Wellhausen and Kittel. A sketch of the life and historical position of David from the modern Continental point of view will be found in G. Beer, Saul, David, Salomo, published by Mohr, Tubingen, 1906.
Thomas Hunter Weir