We saw as we discussed the the conquest and occupation of the land of Canaan, that the issue is clouded with uncertainty. The same can be said of the emergence of the Hebrew state. It was not the objective of the biblical writers to answer this question, so it is not surprising that we face some difficulties when trying to glean the relevant historical data from these documents.
The Literary Evidence: What’s in the Biblical Text? (Judges 2:6—16:31 and 1 Samuel)
The of the book of Judges tells of a time before the emergence of a centralized state in Israel, a time when charismatic leaders called “judges” ruled. The books of Samuel tell of the transition to a monarchy and the rule of Israel’s first two kings, Saul and David.
The biblical texts are not intended to answer our historical question. They make no attempt to provide an objective account of the Hebrew people’s transition from a loose nomadic lifestyle to the settled state of Israel. For them the more important question is the theological significance of the decision to have a king.
Judges
We noted earlier that much of the book of Judges (2:6—16:31) is a collection of short stories about charismatic leaders who delivered the people at a particular point of crisis. The frequent military threats and the temptation to worship other gods presented in this story of the time when “there was no king in Israel” help make the decision to choose a king seem necessary (See Judges 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25).
1 Samuel
The book of First Samuel opens with the story of a charismatic leader named Samuel who is somewhat different from the leaders discussed in Judges (1 Samuel 1—12). Samuel is presented as a leader who exercised some judicial authority (7:13—20) and was not just a war hero, though he does deliver the people in a time of crisis like the earlier judges (7:3—17). Samuel is a transitional figure, the last of the judges, the one who anoints the first king.
The next major character in the book is Saul, also a charismatic leader and in some senses a transitional figure like Samuel. Saul, however, becomes Israel’s first king (11:1—15). Earlier in the narrative (9:1—10:16), Samuel had anointed him as “prince” or “ruler” rather than specifically “king”, and in chapter 10 he is chosen by lots and does not want to accept being made king (10:17—27).
Saul becomes a tragic figure. He is rejected by God for performing a sacrifice in the place of Samuel (13:7—15) and is quickly overshadowed by David. He becomes depressed, keeping the title “king” but lacking the support to govern effectively.
Philistine Metals Technology and the Centralization of the Hebrew Tribes
When the extrabiblical data (including archaeological data) are added to a critical reading of the biblical narratives, we gain a picture of the general circumstances under which Israel adopted a monarchy. The balance of power between the Hebrew tribes and their Canaanite neighbors was disturbed by the rise of the Philistines, who arrived in Canaan in the 12th century BCE if not earlier. The area under their direct control, the Philistine plain, was located in what is now southwestern Palestine.
The Philistines had advanced metals technology which allowed them to make superior weapons. The Israelites had been out of the reach of the chariot-based armies of the main Canaanite cities, but the Philistine armies were based on heavily armed infantry that could march up into the hills where the Israelites had their strongholds. As the aggressive Philistines began to pressure the Israelites, attempting to annex territory and charge tolls, the Israelites were forced to either accept domination or organize to resist the Philistine pressure.
Until this point the people had depended on a citizen army which was recruited at times of emergency. To fend off the Philistines a standing army was needed, and a standing army required a reorganization of the loosely affiliated tribal structure in Israel. It required a centralized government that could raise money to support it.
In this context we can understand the biblical narratives about Saul, the first king, as the story of a man who had the honor of royalty, but not the backing of a fully developed governmental structure. His only advisor appears to have been his uncle, Abner, and his government likely had only one department—the war department. Still, the narrative shows Saul securing the central lands of Benjamin and Ephraim, and bringing the large tribe of Judah into closer alignment with the rest of Israel.
The Perspective of the Deuteronomistic History
We have been surveying the history of the period discussed in the books of Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel. This was clearly not the objective of the biblical writers. The authors of the biblical narratives wrote to answer certain theological questions. In keeping with the perspective expressed throughout the Deuteronomistic History, they address the question, “How does the move to monarchy relate to Israel’s faithfulness to the Lord?” At least two different approaches to this question may be found in the text.
On the one hand, the move to a centralized government coincides with the centralizing tendency of Deuteronomy and the later reforms of Josiah, so it brings about something that the authors see as positive. At the same time, however, it represents a move away from direct dependence on the Lord and introduces the possibility of diverting the people’s loyalty away from the Lord onto a human leader.
In 1 Samuel 8:4—22, where the people request a king and the Lord instructs Samuel to grant their request, the text is wonderfully ambiguous. God disapproves of their motives, but it is God’s will that their request be granted. Does God want Israel to have a king? The question remains open.