This is by far the longest chapter in the book. It takes the archaeological picture and returns to the biblical material, as analyzed critically in Chapter 2. Putting names and details to the generalities, it shows how the move to centralized sites fits with the biblical picture of Saul, the expansion of the highland polity into the surrounding areas fits with the biblical picture of David, and the building program plus investment in copper mining fits with that of Solomon. The chapter delves into many specifics such as the evidence from Khirbet Qeiyafa, David’s competition with Ish-Boshet, and the list of Solomon’s officials. It uses both minute archaeological information and specific details from the biblical descriptions to present a thorough reconstruction of the sociopolitical developments of the tenth century, and of the kingdoms of Saul, David and Solomon.

Based on all the specifics teased out in Chapter 15, this chapter takes a wide view. While the narrative arc focuses on the general contours of the biblical account and the chapter retells the narrative of the United Monarchy from beginning to end, it is the archaeological and historical reality that is the driving explanatory force. Thus many aspects of the biblical account (especially those that relate to the relationship between Saul and David) are presented very differently than the traditional model, as we retell the biblical story as we think it really happened.

Is the biblical story about Israel’s “United Monarchy” history, fiction, or somewhere in between? This chapter reviews the scholarly discourse about the texts and introduces critical Bible study. Since the inception of critical scholarship, Bible scholars have noted that the narrative contains tensions and even contradictions that demonstrate the impossibility of accepting the details of the biblical narrative as an accurate reporting of events. Nevertheless, researchers long distinguished between the core narrative arc of the Saul and David stories, which was relatively consistent between the sources, and the many contradictions, alternative details, and smaller points, which were understood as attempts at polemic and apologetics, pushing one agenda or another, or simply rhetorical flourish. This meant that while many of the details in these accounts cannot be taken at face value as historical, the same critical reading of the text led biblical scholars to believe – until recently – in the historicity of the bigger picture. The reasons why this consensus has changed are primarily due to broader, “archaeological” considerations that are discussed in Chapter 3.

The chapter discusses empires from a broader historical and anthropological perspective, defining the topic and revealing several false assumptions that led the entire discussion of the United Monarchy astray. The chapter shows that while scholars were often using the Roman or even the British empire as a model when assessing the United Monarchy, most empires had a different form, rising very quickly – often evolving not from “states” but from simpler forms of sociopolitical organization, in what is sometimes referred to a stateless empires – and then dissolving just as quickly, often a generation or two after their foundation. Both the very rapid growth of such empires and their rapid disintegration means that although such empires were common, they did not exist long enough to have material manifestations resembling Assyria or Rome. As examples, the chapter looks at the empires founded by Shaka and Genghis Khan as models of empires that seem to serve as better antecedents to the United Monarchy. The chapter concludes that the reconstruction of the United Monarchy presented in the book is very much in line with what is known historically and anthropologically about empires.

Before beginning the critical, scientific inquiry into the history of Saul, David, and Solomon in the rest of the book, this chapter offers a simple run-through of the main elements of the biblical story itself. It begins with the biblical depiction of the time of the Judges, before there were kings in Israel, and then tells the story of Saul, leading to the rise of the monarchy. It outlines the biblical depiction of his reign as Israel’s first king, along with his later interactions with David, who became his successor. It briefly lays out how David took the throne and expanded the kingdom, and the troubles he experienced within the royal family, including the battles of succession first with Absalom then between Solomon and Adonijah. Finally, the chapter lays out the story of Solomon’s glorious rule, and then his death and the division of his kingdom in the time of his son Rehoboam.

When the Israelite leadership ask for a king like all the other nations, it introduces a new sequence of powerful characters into the storyline.

Although kings are often central to the extant literary (and other textual) evidence from Mesopotamia, the wider Near East and the eastern Mediterranean, the texts themselves were usually authored by others, such as poets, priests, prophets or scholars. If mortal kings typically claimed to rule thanks to divine support, these latter characters similarly tended to base their authority on their ability to articulate and enact the divine will. Inevitably perhaps, the stage was set for narratives of conflict between kings and other intermediaries of the divine. This chapter shows that the ancient sources again exhibit a consistent pattern: it is always the king who initiates the conflict, often in a military context. The king is not necessarily impious, but shows casual disregard for the divine will, despite the information offered by a reliable intermediary. This is invariably depicted as an act of folly. The negative consequences soon become apparent, but they are usually borne primarily by the people whom the king was supposed to lead. The first attestations are found in Sumerian sources from early Mesopotamia. The other main bodies of evidence are the Hebrew Bible and the early Greek epics of Homer and Hesiod.

This chapter proposes an assessment of the biblical figure of David as presented by Theodore Prodromos in some of his Historical Poems. David was often considered in Byzantine culture as the first and most important example of a Christian poet. The poet of the Psalms is depicted by Prodromos both as a source of inspiration for the persona loquens and as a role model for the emperor. This twofold representation is crucial to shed light on some of the poetic strategies used by Prodromos when dealing with Psalmic material in poems addressed to emperors. The chapter includes a close-reading of Prodromos’ Historical Poem 17, where a military victory of John II Komnenos is celebrated. In this long text, Prodromos systematically borrows verses from the text of the Psalms and adapts them in order to fit the occasional character of the poem. The analysis of the biblical hypotext as a literary source presented in the chapter provides new insight into the role that the biblical heritage could play within Byzantine authors’ canonical reference system.

Chapter 5 moves the focus to David and the tension and conflict between Saul and David, an aspect of which is Saul’s failure to apprehend and kill David, and David’s declining to capture and kill Saul. The chapter closes with Saul’s consulting a medium and then dying in battle.

Chapter 7 covers David’s moral downfall and the disastrous implications for his family, including the rape of Tamar and the rebellion of Absalom. The closing pages of 2 Samuel look back and raise further questions about who David was and the kind of God who was involved with him.

Chapter 6 relates how David establishes his position as Saul’s successor and has considerable achievements as king, acquiring a capital, planning a temple, and receiving God’s promise of a dynasty to succeed him.

Chapter 4 focuses on the dynamics whereby God rejects Saul as king, including the pressures on Saul, the mistakes he makes, the way David emerges on the scene as Saul’s potential replacement, and the relationships and dynamics in the royal family.

The commentary on 2 Samuel 5:4–24:25/1 Kings 2:11 focuses on the reign of King David ben Jesse over Israel, including his choice of Jerusalem as his capital; the eternal Davidic covenant; his affair with Bath Sheba; and the revolt of his son Abshalom.

The commentary on 1 Samuel 13–31 focuses on the rule of King Saul ben Kish, his failures of leadership, and his rivalry with David ben Jesse.

While the image of David’s military prowess was ubiquitous, the figure of David as penitent also provided a model for Louis’s kingship. This chapter explores a number of musical settings of centonized psalm texts composed for the singers of the chambre in the difficult circumstances surrounding his early reign that engage with the idea of a penitent king, a king responding to adversity through an intensification of personal devotion. As part of this process, Psalm 19, Exaudiat te Dominus came into particular focus, being appended to the celebration of Mass at the chapelle royale from the 1580s, and gradually becoming part of the wider liturgy of the French church. But although this psalm would later become associated with the chapelle royale of Louis XIV, it is clear that from the very earliest times it was heard as a prayer for the king in times of adversity or when he was under military threat.