What do you think?
Rate this book
The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero
David is one of the most celebrated characters in the Bible. We know him as the brave young man who defeated Goliath, the first king of a united Israel, the composer of the beloved Psalms, and, for Christians, the messianic forerunner to Jesus. And yet for all the glory we attribute to David's legend, the historical reality is both fascinating and disturbing.
In The Historical David, Joel Baden reveals that, in David's case, the Bible is political spin, "the goal of which is to absolve David of any potential guilt and to show him in a positive light." Through deep textual analysis, Baden reveals how the historical David has been painstakingly and successfully diminished, replaced by the portrait of a glorious king we are now familiar with.
To question David's legend opens up a debate about what it means to be a descendant of David--be it nationally, ethnically, or religiously. In The Historical David, Baden confronts this challenge, bringing the historical David vibrantly to life, and ultimately revealing that the flesh-and-blood man was far more complex and interesting than the mythical king.
In The Historical David, Joel Baden reveals that, in David's case, the Bible is political spin, "the goal of which is to absolve David of any potential guilt and to show him in a positive light." Through deep textual analysis, Baden reveals how the historical David has been painstakingly and successfully diminished, replaced by the portrait of a glorious king we are now familiar with.
To question David's legend opens up a debate about what it means to be a descendant of David--be it nationally, ethnically, or religiously. In The Historical David, Baden confronts this challenge, bringing the historical David vibrantly to life, and ultimately revealing that the flesh-and-blood man was far more complex and interesting than the mythical king.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published September 15, 2013
189 people are currently reading
643 people want to read
About the author
Joel S. Baden
16 books14 followersJoel S. Baden is professor of Hebrew Bible at Yale Divinity School. He is the coauthor, with Candida R. Moss, of Bible Nation: The United States of Hobby Lobby and Reconceiving Infertility: Biblical Perspectives on Procreation and Childlessness (both Princeton). He lives in New Haven, Connecticut.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 61 reviews
March 19, 2014
As demonstrated across continents and cultures, history is written by the winners, so, why should David's story be different? The title leaves no question as to where author Joel Baden stands on this. He disects every Old Testament reference to David and comes up with a new interpretation with Davidic narratives as myth builders designed to make David a hero and legitimize his reign. In doing this, this book fully challenges the story of David.
For starters, Baden notes that while the Bible tells us David slew Goliath, in an earlier Old Testament chapter the same giant was slain by another.
If David did kill the numbers of Phillistine cited (1/3 the population), why are there no locations of these battles given? Why is there is no recorded city destroyed or saved? David's Isreal did not stretch to the Sea, could David have been a client of the Philistines?
Baden shows how David is portrayed as always good with Saul irrationally harrassing him. Is all this just spin, written as an apology for the non-royal former bandit who usurped the throne of Saul and the reigns that flowed from that?
David's family life is far from ideal. Was his first wife, Ahinoam, Saul's Ahinoam? Second wife Abigail may have been necessary for his conquest. When he killed her husband and took his lands, did this widow freely offer him provisions? and herself? Did Bathsheba whom he famously stole and made a widow, bear him a son, or was Solomon the son of her rightful husband, Uriah?
David's sons, like Saul's sons and others who are threats to the throne, either disappear from history or have untimely deaths. These and the murders of other key people, are attributed to others, often Joab who is never punished for murdering those presumable close to David. Are David's famous, anguished cries over Absalom, whose death he most likely ordered, merely for public consumption?
For all of this and more, Baden gives a new interpretation.
The story of David is the story of the fledgling Isreal. Baden shows how the separate tribes sought only protection and not a government which David, after uniting terriory, gave them. He shows how David used religious symbolism to solidify his reign government, something very new at the time.
This is a readable work of scholarship and it will be appreciated by those with an open mind.
For starters, Baden notes that while the Bible tells us David slew Goliath, in an earlier Old Testament chapter the same giant was slain by another.
If David did kill the numbers of Phillistine cited (1/3 the population), why are there no locations of these battles given? Why is there is no recorded city destroyed or saved? David's Isreal did not stretch to the Sea, could David have been a client of the Philistines?
Baden shows how David is portrayed as always good with Saul irrationally harrassing him. Is all this just spin, written as an apology for the non-royal former bandit who usurped the throne of Saul and the reigns that flowed from that?
David's family life is far from ideal. Was his first wife, Ahinoam, Saul's Ahinoam? Second wife Abigail may have been necessary for his conquest. When he killed her husband and took his lands, did this widow freely offer him provisions? and herself? Did Bathsheba whom he famously stole and made a widow, bear him a son, or was Solomon the son of her rightful husband, Uriah?
David's sons, like Saul's sons and others who are threats to the throne, either disappear from history or have untimely deaths. These and the murders of other key people, are attributed to others, often Joab who is never punished for murdering those presumable close to David. Are David's famous, anguished cries over Absalom, whose death he most likely ordered, merely for public consumption?
For all of this and more, Baden gives a new interpretation.
The story of David is the story of the fledgling Isreal. Baden shows how the separate tribes sought only protection and not a government which David, after uniting terriory, gave them. He shows how David used religious symbolism to solidify his reign government, something very new at the time.
This is a readable work of scholarship and it will be appreciated by those with an open mind.
March 17, 2016
In The Historical David, Yale Divinity School professor Joel Baden does for David what New Testament scholars have done for Jesus of Nazareth: he takes a historian's critical approach to the biblical texts (mainly 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, and 1 and 2 Chronicles) and attempts to strip away the legends and propaganda surrounding the story of David in order to reveal what the historical David himself--the man and not the myth--was like. The result is a fascinating and, at times, shocking portrait David.
Baden begins by asserting that David was an actual historical figure and not merely a legend (like, say, Hercules or Noah or Robin Hood). His arguments for the historicity of David are fairly straightforward and non-controversial, and I find myself in complete agreement with him here: it is almost certain that David did exist.
Anyone who has a basic familiarity with the Hebrew Bible and the history of biblical criticism (especially that of the German critics of the late 19th century) will find much in this book that is familiar: for example, it is clear that David did not kill Goliath; even the Bible itself tells us that it was Elhanan who killed Goliath (2 Samuel 21:19--be sure, however, that you are using a good translation like the NASB and not the KJV, which intentionally alters the text). However, this book is easily accessible to the layperson, and Baden, though an academic scholar, writes for a general audience in a conversational style.
The David who emerges from Baden's analysis is not the lyre-playing, psalm-writing, godly man of Jewish and Christian lore. He is a conniving, murdering, Machiavellian soldier and, eventually, king, who plots against his own king, Saul, and defects to the Philistines, the key power in Palestine and the primary nemesis of Israel and Judah. During his time of defection to the Philistines, David gathers a band of outlaws and terrorizes the Judean towns and cities like an organized crime boss. He is not invited to be king of Judah by the Judean elders (as the Bible asserts) but forces them to submit to his will and makes himself their king while remaining a vassal of the Philistines, and eventually, through murder (killing Saul's son, Ishbaal, and Saul's general, Abner) and intrigue, David takes the crown of the northern kingdom of Israel as well.
David rules Israel and Judah through fear and force with no love from his subjects. The biblical accounts of his "empire" are nothing more than propaganda and exaggerations: David never conquers the Philistines or any of the surrounding nations other than the Ammonites, and he establishes no empire. He rules a tiny kingdom in the shadow of the two great powers of the Levant: Egypt and Assyria--though in the time of David, these kingdoms are in decline. His capital city, Jerusalem, is a tiny city, barely a few square kilometers, which he treacherously captures from the local Jebusites who, prior to David, had lived in peaceful harmony with their Judean neighbors. David, like almost all Judeans and Israelites, does participate in the rituals of the cult of Yahweh, but he is by no means devoutly religious.
The most startling revelation in the book is Baden's assertion that Solomon was not David's son at all but was, in fact, the son of Uriah the Hittite and Bathsheba, who David took as a wife, so Baden argues, only after she was already pregnant with Uriah's child. I won't go into Baden's arguments in this review as it is rather complicated, but I will say that, surprisingly enough granted my initial utter disbelief at this idea, I found his argument actually quite credible. The argument is speculative, but it is a reasonable speculation backed up by some key facts and highly probable assumptions.
The Historical David is an engaging, challenging, fascinating book that I would recommend to anyone with an interest in the life of David, in the Hebrew Bible, or in the history of ancient Israel.
Baden begins by asserting that David was an actual historical figure and not merely a legend (like, say, Hercules or Noah or Robin Hood). His arguments for the historicity of David are fairly straightforward and non-controversial, and I find myself in complete agreement with him here: it is almost certain that David did exist.
Anyone who has a basic familiarity with the Hebrew Bible and the history of biblical criticism (especially that of the German critics of the late 19th century) will find much in this book that is familiar: for example, it is clear that David did not kill Goliath; even the Bible itself tells us that it was Elhanan who killed Goliath (2 Samuel 21:19--be sure, however, that you are using a good translation like the NASB and not the KJV, which intentionally alters the text). However, this book is easily accessible to the layperson, and Baden, though an academic scholar, writes for a general audience in a conversational style.
The David who emerges from Baden's analysis is not the lyre-playing, psalm-writing, godly man of Jewish and Christian lore. He is a conniving, murdering, Machiavellian soldier and, eventually, king, who plots against his own king, Saul, and defects to the Philistines, the key power in Palestine and the primary nemesis of Israel and Judah. During his time of defection to the Philistines, David gathers a band of outlaws and terrorizes the Judean towns and cities like an organized crime boss. He is not invited to be king of Judah by the Judean elders (as the Bible asserts) but forces them to submit to his will and makes himself their king while remaining a vassal of the Philistines, and eventually, through murder (killing Saul's son, Ishbaal, and Saul's general, Abner) and intrigue, David takes the crown of the northern kingdom of Israel as well.
David rules Israel and Judah through fear and force with no love from his subjects. The biblical accounts of his "empire" are nothing more than propaganda and exaggerations: David never conquers the Philistines or any of the surrounding nations other than the Ammonites, and he establishes no empire. He rules a tiny kingdom in the shadow of the two great powers of the Levant: Egypt and Assyria--though in the time of David, these kingdoms are in decline. His capital city, Jerusalem, is a tiny city, barely a few square kilometers, which he treacherously captures from the local Jebusites who, prior to David, had lived in peaceful harmony with their Judean neighbors. David, like almost all Judeans and Israelites, does participate in the rituals of the cult of Yahweh, but he is by no means devoutly religious.
The most startling revelation in the book is Baden's assertion that Solomon was not David's son at all but was, in fact, the son of Uriah the Hittite and Bathsheba, who David took as a wife, so Baden argues, only after she was already pregnant with Uriah's child. I won't go into Baden's arguments in this review as it is rather complicated, but I will say that, surprisingly enough granted my initial utter disbelief at this idea, I found his argument actually quite credible. The argument is speculative, but it is a reasonable speculation backed up by some key facts and highly probable assumptions.
The Historical David is an engaging, challenging, fascinating book that I would recommend to anyone with an interest in the life of David, in the Hebrew Bible, or in the history of ancient Israel.
June 18, 2018
I found Baden's work both impressive and disturbing. Although I've always known that King David had to have been a ruthless person to achieve what he achieved, the very human cost of that and even whether it was worth it is now front and center for me. The fact, if true, that the biblical editors in fact deliberately revised history to clear his name is reprehensible. While I can understand the perceived need to do so, it is still not justified. Get the beauty and value of books like Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Book of Job, all remain. And even that text that we have to struggle with is valuable for the struggle as he says we would be immature if we did not find those actions reprehensible today.
April 19, 2014
This book is the unfortunate result of an academic trying to write a popular market book on a controversial topic. I suppose the hope was for another surprise best seller like
The Book of J
. What we get instead is an author who knows far more about the topic than he feels he can communicate to a general audience, but that extra information is just what is needed to bring the reader around to his view on the historical David. This book fails because it reads like an opinion piece instead of the report on the state of the field of Davidic Studies that it actually is.
None of the individual assertions, none of the starting premises of the deconstructions of the Books of Samuel or Chronicles are difficult for the reader to accept on their own. Yes, David was a crafty and somewhat amoral opportunist whose personal ambition resulted in the founding of the nation of Israel. We do not need to read the Bible too closely to come away with that impression anyway. Yes, Joab is rather obviously a scapegoat for David's less tasteful actions. Yes, his period of exile and later rise in power suggests strongly that he was an agent of the Philistines before he struck out on his own. Yes, David had the bad habit of grabbing other men's wives. Most of all, it is all too obvious to the reader of the chapters of David's career that the biblical authors protest too long and too hard for David's sanctity against the evidence that one should be suspicious of their motives.
Where Baden runs into trouble is when he builds a more complete and logical chain off of those initial observations and narrates a complete counter story to that presented in the Bible and links each step together with the previous with qualifiers like "we can be sure that", "as we saw in [the previous story where I questioned the source], we cannot trust the source", and similar phrases that essentially all come down to "because this doesn't make sense in the logic of the story I am telling, it probably went down this way". To a casual reader these are all warning signs that he is inserting opinion for Biblical fact.
In essence this book fails because Baden speaks with the voice of an academic, which is a persuasive voice that presents a constellation of generally accepted assertions and combines them into a new premise. What the casual reader does not understand is that none of the assertions about David's life that Baden makes in this book are in the least controversial among his peers. What this book presents is the accumulated scholarship by hundreds of experts on the actual career of David and the founding of Israel. As proof, look at the list of footnotes in the back and the reviews of this books printed on the cover. This is what we believe we know of David.
The sad part is that this flawed presentation of David is so much more believable and a recognizable story of nation building than the indecisive and all but suicidally merciful David of the Bible. What we get is a King Richard the Third to replace our Hamlet, and like Richard III his righteous yet usurping successor founded a glorious golden age. I cannot claim that I learned much from this book since I was already familiar with the literature from which he writes, but Baden does get points for pulling all of these pieces together into a coherent biography of a vital life.
None of the individual assertions, none of the starting premises of the deconstructions of the Books of Samuel or Chronicles are difficult for the reader to accept on their own. Yes, David was a crafty and somewhat amoral opportunist whose personal ambition resulted in the founding of the nation of Israel. We do not need to read the Bible too closely to come away with that impression anyway. Yes, Joab is rather obviously a scapegoat for David's less tasteful actions. Yes, his period of exile and later rise in power suggests strongly that he was an agent of the Philistines before he struck out on his own. Yes, David had the bad habit of grabbing other men's wives. Most of all, it is all too obvious to the reader of the chapters of David's career that the biblical authors protest too long and too hard for David's sanctity against the evidence that one should be suspicious of their motives.
Where Baden runs into trouble is when he builds a more complete and logical chain off of those initial observations and narrates a complete counter story to that presented in the Bible and links each step together with the previous with qualifiers like "we can be sure that", "as we saw in [the previous story where I questioned the source], we cannot trust the source", and similar phrases that essentially all come down to "because this doesn't make sense in the logic of the story I am telling, it probably went down this way". To a casual reader these are all warning signs that he is inserting opinion for Biblical fact.
In essence this book fails because Baden speaks with the voice of an academic, which is a persuasive voice that presents a constellation of generally accepted assertions and combines them into a new premise. What the casual reader does not understand is that none of the assertions about David's life that Baden makes in this book are in the least controversial among his peers. What this book presents is the accumulated scholarship by hundreds of experts on the actual career of David and the founding of Israel. As proof, look at the list of footnotes in the back and the reviews of this books printed on the cover. This is what we believe we know of David.
The sad part is that this flawed presentation of David is so much more believable and a recognizable story of nation building than the indecisive and all but suicidally merciful David of the Bible. What we get is a King Richard the Third to replace our Hamlet, and like Richard III his righteous yet usurping successor founded a glorious golden age. I cannot claim that I learned much from this book since I was already familiar with the literature from which he writes, but Baden does get points for pulling all of these pieces together into a coherent biography of a vital life.
May 27, 2015
I've read several books about David. My favorite so far has been the one by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman. That one used archaeological evidence to say that assuming the common Biblical dating is correct, the story could not have unfolded as it did.
Joel Baden's approach is strictly literary. If not for the academic sheepskin the prose of the book dons, I would think I was reading some tin-foil-helmetworthy conspiracy rag. Instead of using pop-mysticism, spooky language, and sensationalism, he analyzes the Books of Samuel and the beginning of I Kings as if it were a literary piece he was grading. And with the deft skills of a forensic, he calculates what parts are real, what are apologia/propaganda, and deduces what really transpired.
I finished this book with raised eyebrows. He convinced me thoroughly that Samuel and Kings are apologia. They have a clear agenda, and are not to be taken as literal history sources. But when he presents his alternatives, I find myself skeptical.
Nonetheless, this is recommended if you are looking for some alternatives to the common Biblical narrative and possibilities for alternatives.
Joel Baden's approach is strictly literary. If not for the academic sheepskin the prose of the book dons, I would think I was reading some tin-foil-helmetworthy conspiracy rag. Instead of using pop-mysticism, spooky language, and sensationalism, he analyzes the Books of Samuel and the beginning of I Kings as if it were a literary piece he was grading. And with the deft skills of a forensic, he calculates what parts are real, what are apologia/propaganda, and deduces what really transpired.
I finished this book with raised eyebrows. He convinced me thoroughly that Samuel and Kings are apologia. They have a clear agenda, and are not to be taken as literal history sources. But when he presents his alternatives, I find myself skeptical.
Nonetheless, this is recommended if you are looking for some alternatives to the common Biblical narrative and possibilities for alternatives.
November 26, 2013
***Received this copy from a goodreads giveaway***
I should start by saying that my mind was blown. I have always been skeptical of whats written in the bible but this book just drove home why not everything that is written is absolute truth.
David is the slayer of Goliath or was he? This book will have you thinking twice about this almost perfect specimen of man.
Every believer should read this book and decide for themselves, whether David was indeed a hero or a fraud.
Kudos to the author. I'll be thinking about this subject for a long time indeed.
I should start by saying that my mind was blown. I have always been skeptical of whats written in the bible but this book just drove home why not everything that is written is absolute truth.
David is the slayer of Goliath or was he? This book will have you thinking twice about this almost perfect specimen of man.
Every believer should read this book and decide for themselves, whether David was indeed a hero or a fraud.
Kudos to the author. I'll be thinking about this subject for a long time indeed.
January 31, 2019
"The details of the biblical account of David's life, even those we are familiar with, are largely subsumed by the idea of David...""An abstracted, romanticized, idealized figure, less a person of flesh and blood than a symbol of a nation's glorious past and promising future." I'd like to think that the Bible is written the way we see reality. What we perceive is not what it truly is. Therefore, what is written does not reflect what happened in reality. This is not to say that the Bible is false. Of course not, but for those who can understand and accept that it is not really a historical account, but an interpretation of the past meant for a specific audience, it can open their eyes to a whole new dimension of faith, a level untouched by the dogma it rigidly proclaims and the more they can see through it the closer and closer they get to the truth and this book attempts to do just that as it tries to unearth one of the most enduring stories from the Bible, stripping it of all the garnishes as it reveals the true story of The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero.
What is clear in the assertions of Joel S. Baden in his book is the somewhat repetitive approach of the Bible authors from the beginning of David's life to raise his image on a pedestal, which is initially done at the expense of Saul, appearing like an outright slander to make David appear more superior. From the Goliath story, to Saul's unwarranted jealousy, to his vicious intent to get rid of David with attempts to kill him several times, all these are purposely concocted to cover David's true intent.
But the question is why him? Why David?
From the earliest text written closer to David's time like Samuel and the Books of Chronicles, to the much later Books of Kings, all seem to agree in one thing: to hide the truth by elaborately adding embellishments to his story. The farther the text is written from David's time, the grander and bolder the addition to paint his glorious past. Though this literary motif has been freely utilized by the biblical authors in retelling their stories, it seems that they particularly set a very special interest in doing so with David's as he is "at the head of the lineage leading to the messiah."
"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth."--Jeremiah 23:5The arrival of the messiah foretold by the prophets is said to be the "anointed one" who will bring salvation to all of Israel and since David is the monarch attributed to the first unification of its scattered tribes and the annexing of the Jebusite city of Jerusalem as Israel's major cultic site, his inimitable link to Israel and the messiah is finally forged to posterity. All the more reason to keep his image untarnished and his story unblemished as if the biblical authors centuries before have already foreseen the significant role King David will play not just in their land of Israel but to the rest of the Western world.
But the question is still why him? Why David?
Perhaps, the answer to this question is similar to the real events that took place at that time. There is really no way of accurately knowing. Though this book tries to unravel the truth, it is still based on what can be considered limited materials even if it claims recent scholarly findings. What Baden did was just dig deeper into the multi-layered surface of the version of the Bible and make elucidated assumptions based from the skeletal framework of David's story when it is finally bared from its literary motifs. Because to aim for the literal truth at any place in time is a task inaccessible to human capacity as actual facts most especially of an ancient past are open to speculation as their authenticity would have to be based on perspectives that will forever remain unavailable and unverifiable.
One thing is certain though, Fate has moved the figure of King David at the right place in history precisely at the most auspicious point in time, driven to do perhaps what others think is impossible and doing it by any means possible even if it appears like he literally pushed it down their throats--to unite the independent tribes of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel and Judah into one nation with Jerusalem at its helm not as their deliverer, but as their conqueror.
October 3, 2021
I was always interested in King David, quite the history behind him. However, I was a little taken back by this book, in that, the author (Joel Baden), picked him apart as a matter of textual analysis of a literary person. No possibility is given way to that what was written actually happened. After looking into Mr. Baden I noted that he is professor of Hebrew Bible at Yale Divinity School. Yale being a left leaning Ivy League university, it would be natural to accept the fact that he has little belief in the Torah (the Hebrew Bible or the Christian's Old Testament of the Bible.) This book was one of the few books where I had looked into the background of an author when I noticed something that looked a little bit off. The way in which he deciphered the the aspect of David seemed to fit in with that ideology, as though he were the conqueror of Israel and wrote the history himself. Don't get me wrong, I believe it was a good book and it drew near to me some piercing questions. And that is truly a good thing, one must be willing to challenge one's own faith and belief. I did not love the book, but it was worth the read, just to challenge my understanding of King David.
August 11, 2025
Baden offers a perspective on the biblical narrative of David that many may find controversial: that in large part it's a fictional apologetic intended to mask the real activities of the historical David. For example, the biblical authors go to great lengths to suggest that David had no part in Saul's death, but subtle clues in the text suggest the opposite.
I found Baden's arguments reasonable but lacking rigor. In many cases it feels as though the argument boils down to "the Bible says this, so we know that in fact it's the opposite". There are places where that works given the evidence presented, and there are other places where I was left unconvinced and wished he'd elaborate more.
While I do think the book's argumentation could be shored up, its conclusions are generally in line with my understanding of consensus scholarship on this issue. Accordingly, this was still a fascinating and worthwhile read, even if unconvincing at times.
I found Baden's arguments reasonable but lacking rigor. In many cases it feels as though the argument boils down to "the Bible says this, so we know that in fact it's the opposite". There are places where that works given the evidence presented, and there are other places where I was left unconvinced and wished he'd elaborate more.
While I do think the book's argumentation could be shored up, its conclusions are generally in line with my understanding of consensus scholarship on this issue. Accordingly, this was still a fascinating and worthwhile read, even if unconvincing at times.
July 21, 2024
WOWEE what a read. Very ~fun~ which may be at times work against its favor, but engrossing! I devoured this in one hyperfocused day. The portrait of David is so clear and dramatic that you’ll turn a page and say OF COURse Like that makes so much sense!
Every time I read biblical scholarship that flies in the face of conservative tradition, there is always that voice in the back of my head that argues for my grandparents - tries to poke holes so I can know how to argue back
If there was one thing I would change, I wish the author had assured his audience (which seems to include folks divine perhaps for the first time into history at odds with given dogma) that the picture he was painting of David (though MUCH more in line with history, the area and its patterns) IS ALSO a portrait of David with an agenda - that is to say narrative cohesion of character, perhaps of anti-apology
There’s a lot to cover in this book, and I can feel the vestiges of conservatism left within me panic at the speed at which all of these VERY interesting changes to the idea of these characters are delivered and I wish it were slowed down
The first chapter very quickly strikes down the image of a musical and creative David, and it does so with such a ruthlessness that you lose folks you could have walked through the book because an entire aspect of his personality is discounted so quickly (though having read the book - rightfully!)
It is a good introduction to the methodology by which one can dig out HISTORICAL fact, and by which we can tell how far apart each version of the story was written, but as these nuggets are found, the rest is thrown out so abruptly that you
tl;dr books like this are marvelous and well reasoned and well researched but fall into the trap of being written for those already inclined to believe them
Maybe it is not in the scope of these authors to handle the emotions of new readers, but when you have written essentially an anti-apology, you miss out by not slowing down for your reader’s possible emotional journey
Every time I read biblical scholarship that flies in the face of conservative tradition, there is always that voice in the back of my head that argues for my grandparents - tries to poke holes so I can know how to argue back
If there was one thing I would change, I wish the author had assured his audience (which seems to include folks divine perhaps for the first time into history at odds with given dogma) that the picture he was painting of David (though MUCH more in line with history, the area and its patterns) IS ALSO a portrait of David with an agenda - that is to say narrative cohesion of character, perhaps of anti-apology
There’s a lot to cover in this book, and I can feel the vestiges of conservatism left within me panic at the speed at which all of these VERY interesting changes to the idea of these characters are delivered and I wish it were slowed down
The first chapter very quickly strikes down the image of a musical and creative David, and it does so with such a ruthlessness that you lose folks you could have walked through the book because an entire aspect of his personality is discounted so quickly (though having read the book - rightfully!)
It is a good introduction to the methodology by which one can dig out HISTORICAL fact, and by which we can tell how far apart each version of the story was written, but as these nuggets are found, the rest is thrown out so abruptly that you
tl;dr books like this are marvelous and well reasoned and well researched but fall into the trap of being written for those already inclined to believe them
Maybe it is not in the scope of these authors to handle the emotions of new readers, but when you have written essentially an anti-apology, you miss out by not slowing down for your reader’s possible emotional journey
February 22, 2022
Fascinating book. Many of the assertions made aren't the strongest, but when you're dealing with scant sources for someone who lived 3,000 years ago you don't have the luxury of doing much else.
While I don't buy many of the author's assertions, it's a good read for anyone who wants to get a different (and probably more realistic) take on the Biblical hero.
While I don't buy many of the author's assertions, it's a good read for anyone who wants to get a different (and probably more realistic) take on the Biblical hero.
March 26, 2017
I love to read and read a lot. I particularly read a lot of books on religion and theology. I was eager to read a book on David but this is not the book for me.
The author takes a strongly liberal perspective which does not believe in any I the theology of the Bible not any of the history.
I could accept the author's perspective to a point but eventually I just got tired of it. Every time the author didn't like what the Bible said about the historical David he would disregard it as suspect or unreliable.
That doesn't work for me. I would not recommend this book.
The author takes a strongly liberal perspective which does not believe in any I the theology of the Bible not any of the history.
I could accept the author's perspective to a point but eventually I just got tired of it. Every time the author didn't like what the Bible said about the historical David he would disregard it as suspect or unreliable.
That doesn't work for me. I would not recommend this book.
August 23, 2018
enjoyable book. A good introduction to being able to read historical texts as propaganda.
July 3, 2023
This was an interesting and provocative book to read. Baden's aim here is to peel back the historical layers from the ideal image of David presented in the Biblical canon, and to uncover the historical David. Baden argues that the real David was the founder of the ideal of 'Israel' and Jerusalem cult that persists to this day, a power-grabbing military strategist, and a ruthless tyrant who united the northern tribes with Judah against their will.
Baden writes well, and the book is an enjoyable read. Some of the best parts were in the introduction and conclusion, where he walks his readers through WHAT to make of such conclusions concerning one of the most outstanding figures of the Biblical canon, of the Judeo-Christian(-Islamic) imagination; what it means to differentiate between the David of legend (a historical construction) and the David of history. In books written by academics, we rarely find the question of what to do with new and disturbing arguments addressed, leaving readers to figure it out on their own. I appreciate that Baden included a fine section speaking to readers' anxieties and attitudes.
Baden builds his entire argument on one premise--that the Biblical David story was an apology ... a specific genre of premodern writing that justifies kings in the eyes of their people. It is a political writing tool used to legitimize rulers for their contemporaries and for posterity. And this leads me to the book's major flaw.
Once he states his argument, Baden then uses it throughout the book to argue that historical reality is always the exact opposite of the Biblical story. If it says David did not desire the throne, then David must have only gained it by his ambitious and unscrupulous grab for it; if it says Saul had evil spirits in him and resisted David, this representation comes from Saul's entirely reasonable suspicion about David's ambitions; if it says David married Abigail out of love, then David murdered her husband and married her for political expediency only; if it says David shied away from murder, then David was a plotting murderer many times over; if it says Solomon was David's heir, then he was Uriah's son. Finally, if it says premodern Israel is a Davidic legacy, it is not; it is a Solomonic legacy and Solomon was not David's son. And so on. The entire job of the canon in its various stages of formation, Baden argues, was to defend a contemporary David against opposition and reconstruct a blameless and glorious past David to be proud of.
Methinks the author doth protest too much. Baden overturns the entire Biblical narrative based on this one argument. No other evidence from archaeology or history is presented. It is a case of too much argument, too little evidence. This undermines the book's value, because, without evidence to evaluate and not being a Davidic scholar myself, I could not determine where the author was relying on solid research and where he was overreaching.
A consequence of Baden's argument is flattening the complexity of David's character, which is, ironically, just what he claims the Biblical text does. If the Biblical narrative defends David all the way, Baden ends up condemning him throughout. In his hands, Davis is portrayed as a politically savvy conqueror and tyrant. Period. His David does not develop as a character, nor is the complexity inherent in his long life and exceptional reign highlighted.
Still, 'The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero' makes for good introductory reading into the main arguments of Davidic scholarship. It provides an opportunity to juxtapose historical persons and cultures with our modern constructions of them, to read the familiar with an unfamiliar and even perplexed attitude, and to allow ourselves some healthy doubt about our preconceived notions of the great psalmist, king, and uniter of Israel--David.
Baden writes well, and the book is an enjoyable read. Some of the best parts were in the introduction and conclusion, where he walks his readers through WHAT to make of such conclusions concerning one of the most outstanding figures of the Biblical canon, of the Judeo-Christian(-Islamic) imagination; what it means to differentiate between the David of legend (a historical construction) and the David of history. In books written by academics, we rarely find the question of what to do with new and disturbing arguments addressed, leaving readers to figure it out on their own. I appreciate that Baden included a fine section speaking to readers' anxieties and attitudes.
Baden builds his entire argument on one premise--that the Biblical David story was an apology ... a specific genre of premodern writing that justifies kings in the eyes of their people. It is a political writing tool used to legitimize rulers for their contemporaries and for posterity. And this leads me to the book's major flaw.
Once he states his argument, Baden then uses it throughout the book to argue that historical reality is always the exact opposite of the Biblical story. If it says David did not desire the throne, then David must have only gained it by his ambitious and unscrupulous grab for it; if it says Saul had evil spirits in him and resisted David, this representation comes from Saul's entirely reasonable suspicion about David's ambitions; if it says David married Abigail out of love, then David murdered her husband and married her for political expediency only; if it says David shied away from murder, then David was a plotting murderer many times over; if it says Solomon was David's heir, then he was Uriah's son. Finally, if it says premodern Israel is a Davidic legacy, it is not; it is a Solomonic legacy and Solomon was not David's son. And so on. The entire job of the canon in its various stages of formation, Baden argues, was to defend a contemporary David against opposition and reconstruct a blameless and glorious past David to be proud of.
Methinks the author doth protest too much. Baden overturns the entire Biblical narrative based on this one argument. No other evidence from archaeology or history is presented. It is a case of too much argument, too little evidence. This undermines the book's value, because, without evidence to evaluate and not being a Davidic scholar myself, I could not determine where the author was relying on solid research and where he was overreaching.
A consequence of Baden's argument is flattening the complexity of David's character, which is, ironically, just what he claims the Biblical text does. If the Biblical narrative defends David all the way, Baden ends up condemning him throughout. In his hands, Davis is portrayed as a politically savvy conqueror and tyrant. Period. His David does not develop as a character, nor is the complexity inherent in his long life and exceptional reign highlighted.
Still, 'The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero' makes for good introductory reading into the main arguments of Davidic scholarship. It provides an opportunity to juxtapose historical persons and cultures with our modern constructions of them, to read the familiar with an unfamiliar and even perplexed attitude, and to allow ourselves some healthy doubt about our preconceived notions of the great psalmist, king, and uniter of Israel--David.
January 28, 2025
No David and Goliath
It's very readable.
I really liked the way the author used the historical facts so that i fot ew understanding of how the OT came together.
I'm gladche focussed on David
It's very readable.
I really liked the way the author used the historical facts so that i fot ew understanding of how the OT came together.
I'm gladche focussed on David
October 12, 2013
This book hooked me from the beginning. Definitely a fun read, especially during the beginning of David’s career.
Uncovering the historical David is no small challenge—more difficult than pinpointing the historical Jesus, I believe—but Baden makes a valiant effort. His research is fraught with speculation, and he certainly has no qualms about taking a controversial stand, but who knows? He may be right more often than he is wrong. The point is that we simply cannot know; we can only put our reasoning caps on and try to make sense of the tangled story in the Bible, for that’s all we have to go on. So keep a few grains of salt handy when you open the cover on this one.
It is definitely a fascinating journey. Baden’s picture of David is not very flattering. Our favorite Biblical king comes off as a power-hungry scoundrel. This is the story of a wilderness bandit who wields rogue diplomacy, military prowess, and ruthlessness en route to subjugating a kingdom for himself, ruled from his cultic center in the conquered Jerusalem.
While David’s accomplishment was astounding—unifying the diverse villages and peoples of Judah, and then stealing the northern kingdom (Israel) out from under Saul—one struggles to imagine him a national ruler. At least not on the same terms as Solomon, the next king of Israel. Saul ruled Israel humbly from “under a tree,” then David doubled its size and built a palace and worship center around the ark of the covenant, but it was Solomon who elevated Israel into a glorious kingdom on the backs of slave laborers. This unlikely trio would build a monarchy out of an unruly wilderness that would last for four centuries.
Uncovering the historical David is no small challenge—more difficult than pinpointing the historical Jesus, I believe—but Baden makes a valiant effort. His research is fraught with speculation, and he certainly has no qualms about taking a controversial stand, but who knows? He may be right more often than he is wrong. The point is that we simply cannot know; we can only put our reasoning caps on and try to make sense of the tangled story in the Bible, for that’s all we have to go on. So keep a few grains of salt handy when you open the cover on this one.
It is definitely a fascinating journey. Baden’s picture of David is not very flattering. Our favorite Biblical king comes off as a power-hungry scoundrel. This is the story of a wilderness bandit who wields rogue diplomacy, military prowess, and ruthlessness en route to subjugating a kingdom for himself, ruled from his cultic center in the conquered Jerusalem.
While David’s accomplishment was astounding—unifying the diverse villages and peoples of Judah, and then stealing the northern kingdom (Israel) out from under Saul—one struggles to imagine him a national ruler. At least not on the same terms as Solomon, the next king of Israel. Saul ruled Israel humbly from “under a tree,” then David doubled its size and built a palace and worship center around the ark of the covenant, but it was Solomon who elevated Israel into a glorious kingdom on the backs of slave laborers. This unlikely trio would build a monarchy out of an unruly wilderness that would last for four centuries.
September 1, 2020
Joel Baden is eager to debunk the biblical story (or stories) about David. He suggests that the story as told in 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 Kings is not history but apology, a defense of David and his actions. In his "corrected" story, David was directly responsible for the death of Nabal (thereby becoming a tribal chieftan) and (maybe) less directly responsible for the death of Saul and his family. David wanted to make sure Absalom was killed (despite his alleged moaning after his son's death). And, most significantly, that Solomon was the son of Uriah and the timing of Uriah's death (and story of the birth and death of a first son of David and Bathsheba after Uriah's death and before the birth of Solomon) was adjusted/created to avoid suspicion that Solomon was not David's son. His arguments for this revisioning reminded me of the book The Passover Plot in making a somewhat plausible argument for a minor adjustment and then using that as a supporting fact for the next adjustment and so on. Eventually we are far away from the story as told in the bible and balancing on shaky scaffolding. At the end I felt no closer to knowing what was true and what was speculation. I'm sure Baden was convinced by his arguments (and many Goodread reviewers were, too). I'm less sure about his alternate facts. Sigh.
January 16, 2016
SECOND READING
JAN 2016
I read this book as part of a group study of Samuel 1 & 2.
The group was reading text and adding their own commentary. I was reading Baden's work in addition to the group project.
I suddenly realized how absurd the theories are. He starts with one theory, and then builds additional theories that all depend on the first theory, which is shaky.
Not only is it a conspiracy theory. The whole thing falls apart by demolishing theory A.
It was still a fun read. I still enjoyed the method and approach, but came away with a completely different understanding.
June 2015
I enjoy Baden's work. It's my second book of his that I read and found his approach fascinating.
The book picks apart the life of David as depicted in Samuel A and B. The approach is almost simplistic. If there's an apology, it's a cover up and expect the exact opposite to have happened.
Although there's no way to know if Baden's interpretation is correct, it opened my mind to the possibilities to what actually might have been.
After completely demolishing the picture of a kind and gentle Dovid Melech Yisrael- he writes a powerful closing statement about moral relativism, historical context, and how far we've evolved as a people.
JAN 2016
I read this book as part of a group study of Samuel 1 & 2.
The group was reading text and adding their own commentary. I was reading Baden's work in addition to the group project.
I suddenly realized how absurd the theories are. He starts with one theory, and then builds additional theories that all depend on the first theory, which is shaky.
Not only is it a conspiracy theory. The whole thing falls apart by demolishing theory A.
It was still a fun read. I still enjoyed the method and approach, but came away with a completely different understanding.
June 2015
I enjoy Baden's work. It's my second book of his that I read and found his approach fascinating.
The book picks apart the life of David as depicted in Samuel A and B. The approach is almost simplistic. If there's an apology, it's a cover up and expect the exact opposite to have happened.
Although there's no way to know if Baden's interpretation is correct, it opened my mind to the possibilities to what actually might have been.
After completely demolishing the picture of a kind and gentle Dovid Melech Yisrael- he writes a powerful closing statement about moral relativism, historical context, and how far we've evolved as a people.
August 3, 2020
Good book, respected author, doesn't dumb down the material to mass appeal. I think he overreaches in some places, for example he argues that nearly every choice made by David had an ulterior motive to those implied in the texts. Baden points out he inconsistencies stemming from multiple sources and lays bare a version of David certainly closer to the historical person than popular memory, but i think he sometimes made conclusions to further his narrative where it would have been more responsible to consider several possibilities or leave open ended. I believe he did this make a straightforward biography, for instance in anything David did, that seems illogical, he looks for the logical motive of David white washed by the biblical authors, excluding the possibility that David was being illogical at times as all people are. He also argues that all the incidents that help progress David in the Bible that were recorded as the act of someone else or the will of God, were actually orchestrated by David, again sometimes things just happen.
June 11, 2021
If you're a Bible literalist, just keep walking. You will hate this book.
If you're not, this is an interesting take on the life of David. Do be aware that it is informed speculation. There is archaeological evidence that King David existed, but that's pretty much it. No details exist outside of the Bible, so Baden goes through primarily the books of Samuel and uses his knowledge of Jewish history and the culture of the day to tease out which events probably did happen basically as portrayed, which were probably pure fiction, and which were heavily spin doctored.
Other authors have done the same thing and come to different conclusions on some parts of David's life. There are some places where you might go "ih, that's kind of a reach", and others where the logic is a bit circular. But overall I think it's a good read.
If you're not, this is an interesting take on the life of David. Do be aware that it is informed speculation. There is archaeological evidence that King David existed, but that's pretty much it. No details exist outside of the Bible, so Baden goes through primarily the books of Samuel and uses his knowledge of Jewish history and the culture of the day to tease out which events probably did happen basically as portrayed, which were probably pure fiction, and which were heavily spin doctored.
Other authors have done the same thing and come to different conclusions on some parts of David's life. There are some places where you might go "ih, that's kind of a reach", and others where the logic is a bit circular. But overall I think it's a good read.
February 14, 2014
This book is ridiculous. Operating out of an overcharged "hermeneutic of suspicion", the author tears down every part of the Biblical story of David, viewing the whole thing as a cover up to save the reputation of a murderous thug. David was far from a saint, and the story itself shows enormous flaws in his character. He did in fact have many people killed and acted always out of self-interest. But Baden carries this to such extremes that he claims most of the story is simply made up, including his insistence that Solomon wasn't even David's son. It was only entertaining to see what crazy twist he would take next. I'm glad I went to Yale and studied Old Testament under Bart Childs. It's hard to imagine what kind of sermons Baden's students will produce.
February 21, 2021
Terrible
If this is what counts at scholarship at Yale, then it's definitely brought the prestige of that place down. The authorize seems to believe that anything the Bible says is the opposite what actually happens. His proof - nothing but his word. He then comes to with with widely dumb theories to what actually happened, but again has no proof.
Which is terrible scholarship. While it is true the Bible is not reliable to what happened historically (it's not a history book after all) this doesn't mean that the opposite is true. We need facts, and unfortunately there is little archeology finds that substantiates either the Bible or these dumb counter theories.
Had I been in his class, I would demanded a refund
If this is what counts at scholarship at Yale, then it's definitely brought the prestige of that place down. The authorize seems to believe that anything the Bible says is the opposite what actually happens. His proof - nothing but his word. He then comes to with with widely dumb theories to what actually happened, but again has no proof.
Which is terrible scholarship. While it is true the Bible is not reliable to what happened historically (it's not a history book after all) this doesn't mean that the opposite is true. We need facts, and unfortunately there is little archeology finds that substantiates either the Bible or these dumb counter theories.
Had I been in his class, I would demanded a refund
February 11, 2020
The book offers some valuable textual analysis but often offers contradictory assumptions in support of the author's primary conceit: that David was a fraud and Solomon wasn't his son. Instead of being a useful examination of the ancient Israelite king, scholarship gives way to the sound of an ax grinding tiresomely.
As an aside, the most important assumption the book makes is unsupported. The author assumes David did not have a hand in writing any of the Psalms and offers zero evidence for this or explanation as to why he received credit for writing so many of them.
As an aside, the most important assumption the book makes is unsupported. The author assumes David did not have a hand in writing any of the Psalms and offers zero evidence for this or explanation as to why he received credit for writing so many of them.
January 14, 2014
I found this to be a very good read although, like Lesley, I found the confident assertions a bit much. He often built complex arguments on what may have been a flawed supposition in the first place. "As we learned earlier.." Was often what he had surmised earlier
February 13, 2014
Uses Bible quotes when they agree with his theories, otherwise is dismissive. He concludes, among other things, that Solomon was not David's son. Disappointing.
April 22, 2014
Interesting how he reads the Bible in reverse.
March 28, 2023
Whoa. Though I've assigned it five stars, I don't actually recommend this book (Please ask yourself if you are truly ready for it!), nor did I particularly like it. But it deserves the highest rating, because I know that my mind has been altered by reading it, and I will never be the same.
The story of David has always read like a novel for me. The Books of Samuel are of a particular literary genre, much like Esther or Ruth, that differs from more historical accounts like Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, etc. Baden uses this tone against its authors to prove political spin. Any personal conversation that is unverifiable is immediately tossed aside as a literary device.
Whether you are familiar with David's biblical story or not, Baden skips no details, and the life of David is as intriguing as always. Baden writes fluidly, and the book will suck you in. I did take issue with how Baden presents his opinions, however. Specifically, the more the Bible insists on an intention, the less likely Baden deems it to be true, and he bases this precisely on that insistence rather than any actual evidence. Though he does present a plausible scenario, it is no more verifiable fact than the Old Testament account itself. Yet rather than sitting in "we actually do not know for sure" uncertainty, Baden lands heavily on "this is how it actually happened" declarations.
I really did come into this book with an open mind. I am ever in the process of religious deconstruction, and intellectually, I accept that the Bible was written by flawed men with self-serving intentions, often centuries after the subject events happened. (Though Baden makes a case that 1&2 Samuel were actually written during David's lifetime!) Still, I felt my resistance to Baden's theory early into the book. Although I acknowledge David's legend—the imperfect hero racked with guilt by his human flaws yet always seeking God in prayer and song—is suspect, this thorough defamation of his character obliterates the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and (rightly or wrongly) I feel personally affronted ... which probably goes to show how deeply the roots of religious indoctrination reach.
Because my hackles were up early on, I thought I would give this book three stars, but as I continued reading it, I realized I could never un-read it and never run from its implications. World-shifting books deserve five stars.
Will you see the God-favored but reluctant successor to Saul's throne as an ambitious mercenary willing to do anything to achieve kingship? Will you be convinced that the little shepherd boy who sang hymns that have survived millennia is actually a cold-blooded murderer who never sang in Saul's court? Were you ever taught that Jerusalem, the City of David, was conquered from the peaceful Jebusites, whom were wiped out by David's conquest? Will you accept that all of the sins ascribed to Joab are at least to some extent David's? Will you question the very existence of Nathan? Can you buy that during David's reign, most of Israel and Judah resented his rule?
Though I did not agree with all of Baden's conclusions, I cannot deny the need for suspicion when reading this or any Biblical account. Nor can I ignore the implications these suggestions have on my faith and on the beliefs of millions. Baden makes a strong anti-Zionist push, and really you can't walk away without feeling the weight of these things and the impact that little country boy King David—whether hero or tyrant—has had on history for thousands of years.
The story of David has always read like a novel for me. The Books of Samuel are of a particular literary genre, much like Esther or Ruth, that differs from more historical accounts like Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, etc. Baden uses this tone against its authors to prove political spin. Any personal conversation that is unverifiable is immediately tossed aside as a literary device.
Whether you are familiar with David's biblical story or not, Baden skips no details, and the life of David is as intriguing as always. Baden writes fluidly, and the book will suck you in. I did take issue with how Baden presents his opinions, however. Specifically, the more the Bible insists on an intention, the less likely Baden deems it to be true, and he bases this precisely on that insistence rather than any actual evidence. Though he does present a plausible scenario, it is no more verifiable fact than the Old Testament account itself. Yet rather than sitting in "we actually do not know for sure" uncertainty, Baden lands heavily on "this is how it actually happened" declarations.
I really did come into this book with an open mind. I am ever in the process of religious deconstruction, and intellectually, I accept that the Bible was written by flawed men with self-serving intentions, often centuries after the subject events happened. (Though Baden makes a case that 1&2 Samuel were actually written during David's lifetime!) Still, I felt my resistance to Baden's theory early into the book. Although I acknowledge David's legend—the imperfect hero racked with guilt by his human flaws yet always seeking God in prayer and song—is suspect, this thorough defamation of his character obliterates the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and (rightly or wrongly) I feel personally affronted ... which probably goes to show how deeply the roots of religious indoctrination reach.
Because my hackles were up early on, I thought I would give this book three stars, but as I continued reading it, I realized I could never un-read it and never run from its implications. World-shifting books deserve five stars.
Will you see the God-favored but reluctant successor to Saul's throne as an ambitious mercenary willing to do anything to achieve kingship? Will you be convinced that the little shepherd boy who sang hymns that have survived millennia is actually a cold-blooded murderer who never sang in Saul's court? Were you ever taught that Jerusalem, the City of David, was conquered from the peaceful Jebusites, whom were wiped out by David's conquest? Will you accept that all of the sins ascribed to Joab are at least to some extent David's? Will you question the very existence of Nathan? Can you buy that during David's reign, most of Israel and Judah resented his rule?
Though I did not agree with all of Baden's conclusions, I cannot deny the need for suspicion when reading this or any Biblical account. Nor can I ignore the implications these suggestions have on my faith and on the beliefs of millions. Baden makes a strong anti-Zionist push, and really you can't walk away without feeling the weight of these things and the impact that little country boy King David—whether hero or tyrant—has had on history for thousands of years.
December 6, 2022
This is an incredible book. Baden offers a close read of the Biblical texts that tell the story of David's life employing a hermeneutics of suspicion, a strategy of reading the biblical accounts as an Apologia for David's rise to power and kingship over Judah and Israel. The horizon for Baden's interpretation of Samuel 1 & 2, Kings and Chronicles has four guideposts: 1) does the story reveal something about David in trying to account for an event that would otherwise reflect badly upon him; 2) is the story a private account or does it reflect internal deliberations; 3) is the story structurally similar to other biblical stories; 4) is the story contradicted by other events within the David narrative.
With these guideposts, Baden is able to debunk several events or legends regarding David, particularly his origin story, his fight against Goliath and authorship of the Psalms; he is also able to demythologize other events of David's story, particularly the struggle with Saul for the throne of Israel. Through this process of debunking and demythologizing, Baden create a reasonable depiction of David: his exile from Saul's army, his rise to power as a vassal and then rival of the Philistines, and his rule as a near Eastern prince who achieved the unification of Israel and Judah.
This is a challenging and fascinating read, and a great entry into understanding these foundational stories from the Bible. I have only two quibbles and one note of appreciation. First, the book cries out for a closer explanation of the tribal societies that Saul and then David wove into a nation. There is a great deal of scholarship available on nomadic tribalism and resistance to incorporation into empire. David's actions during his exile in Judah and his time as a mercenary for the Philistines would be both more understandable and compelling had fifty or so pages been dedicated to the social systems of resistance within Judah rather than treating it as a hinterland that was there for David's taking. Secondly, I found the assertion of Solomon lineage less convincing than the other stories Baden interprets and demythologizes, since it felt largely based upon the ambiguity of the meaning of Solomon's name. Though I think the assertion that Solomon ascends to the throne as a result of a military coup in which Solomon is more a pawn than an actor rings true, I don't think one needs to make the leap that Solomon was not a son of David to get there. Finally, a note of praise. Baden provides an exceptional conclusion to his understanding of the life of David. While acknowledging David's achievements, and there were many, Baden does not let David off the hook for being a ruthless and amoral actor, willing to murder family and rivals to achieve the kingship. Instead, Baden urges the reader to think critically about the disconnect between the legendary David, the writer of Psalms and anointed of God, and the historical David, a usurper, mercenary and ruthless tribal chief. Both are true in their own way; both need to be confronted to have a richer understanding of our religion, our history, and our present day. An excellent book.
With these guideposts, Baden is able to debunk several events or legends regarding David, particularly his origin story, his fight against Goliath and authorship of the Psalms; he is also able to demythologize other events of David's story, particularly the struggle with Saul for the throne of Israel. Through this process of debunking and demythologizing, Baden create a reasonable depiction of David: his exile from Saul's army, his rise to power as a vassal and then rival of the Philistines, and his rule as a near Eastern prince who achieved the unification of Israel and Judah.
This is a challenging and fascinating read, and a great entry into understanding these foundational stories from the Bible. I have only two quibbles and one note of appreciation. First, the book cries out for a closer explanation of the tribal societies that Saul and then David wove into a nation. There is a great deal of scholarship available on nomadic tribalism and resistance to incorporation into empire. David's actions during his exile in Judah and his time as a mercenary for the Philistines would be both more understandable and compelling had fifty or so pages been dedicated to the social systems of resistance within Judah rather than treating it as a hinterland that was there for David's taking. Secondly, I found the assertion of Solomon lineage less convincing than the other stories Baden interprets and demythologizes, since it felt largely based upon the ambiguity of the meaning of Solomon's name. Though I think the assertion that Solomon ascends to the throne as a result of a military coup in which Solomon is more a pawn than an actor rings true, I don't think one needs to make the leap that Solomon was not a son of David to get there. Finally, a note of praise. Baden provides an exceptional conclusion to his understanding of the life of David. While acknowledging David's achievements, and there were many, Baden does not let David off the hook for being a ruthless and amoral actor, willing to murder family and rivals to achieve the kingship. Instead, Baden urges the reader to think critically about the disconnect between the legendary David, the writer of Psalms and anointed of God, and the historical David, a usurper, mercenary and ruthless tribal chief. Both are true in their own way; both need to be confronted to have a richer understanding of our religion, our history, and our present day. An excellent book.
December 17, 2022
Was David a 'man after God's own heart' or a bloody revolutionary who sought to consolidate his reign through rebellion, murder and political manipulation? Joel Baden makes the case for the later in The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero.
Baden attempts to make sense of the David narratives as found in the Bible (mainly 1-2 Samuel and 1 Kings). After a brief discussion of the several 'Davids' in the Bible (the David of the Psalms and the prophets and Chronicles), Baden jumps in to discuss the historical narratives.
Among his conclusions: David didn't kill Goliath, married Abigail to consolidate political rule, engaged in a terroristic campaign agains the people of Judah, and wasn't Solomon's father. He gets there by reading the Biblical text closely and evaluates in light of the historical and cultural data available.
Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, reading his arguments is well worth the effort. He raises questions that readers of the Biblical text should be asking. At the very least, the reader may be able to question the development of the David traditions within the Bible.
Baden's writing is clear and free of major technical language, making it accessible for a popular audience.
I highly recommend this for anyone interested in the Bible or the Old Testament.
Grade: B+
Baden attempts to make sense of the David narratives as found in the Bible (mainly 1-2 Samuel and 1 Kings). After a brief discussion of the several 'Davids' in the Bible (the David of the Psalms and the prophets and Chronicles), Baden jumps in to discuss the historical narratives.
Among his conclusions: David didn't kill Goliath, married Abigail to consolidate political rule, engaged in a terroristic campaign agains the people of Judah, and wasn't Solomon's father. He gets there by reading the Biblical text closely and evaluates in light of the historical and cultural data available.
Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, reading his arguments is well worth the effort. He raises questions that readers of the Biblical text should be asking. At the very least, the reader may be able to question the development of the David traditions within the Bible.
Baden's writing is clear and free of major technical language, making it accessible for a popular audience.
I highly recommend this for anyone interested in the Bible or the Old Testament.
Grade: B+
July 11, 2025
This was a fun and illuminating read, with Baden peeling back the literary and propagandistic layers of the biblical books of Samuel and Chronicles to reveal the real history of David. I already knew one of the knocks against the Biblical story of David (that the Goliath story was "stolen valour") but the rest was pretty eye-opening, how much of a conniving, power-hungry, and violent person David really was. The biggest shocker to me was that . He gives his reasoning, mostly along literary lines, and it sounds pretty convincing to me.
I'm going on to re-read The King David Report by Stefan Heym now. Read it in college 20 years ago and I remember liking it very much. It seems like the fictional forerunner of this book and I really wonder how much the "real David" story was being explored in the late 1960s/early 1970s when he would have been writing his book, especially in Germany. (Baden doesn't really go into the historiography that much besides on the ancient Israelite side of things, not the modern rediscoveries. Only one of his citations seems to really belong to the right period.) Now that I know the "actual" history, it will an illuminating re-read.
I'm going on to re-read The King David Report by Stefan Heym now. Read it in college 20 years ago and I remember liking it very much. It seems like the fictional forerunner of this book and I really wonder how much the "real David" story was being explored in the late 1960s/early 1970s when he would have been writing his book, especially in Germany. (Baden doesn't really go into the historiography that much besides on the ancient Israelite side of things, not the modern rediscoveries. Only one of his citations seems to really belong to the right period.) Now that I know the "actual" history, it will an illuminating re-read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 61 reviews