Ha Nāḡîḏ: A Machiavellian Reading of King David in the Deuteronomistic History
Explorations of political theory, law, power and the people who wield it have existed throughout a majority of human history. From the Code of Hammurabi to Plato’s The Republic to Machiavelli’s The Prince to Hobbes’ Leviathan, people from various times and cultures have debated the importance of gov...
| Published in: | Review and expositor |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sage
2015
|
| In: |
Review and expositor
Year: 2015, Volume: 112, Issue: 3, Pages: 451-460 |
| Further subjects: | B
Hebrew Bible political theology
B King David B Machiavellianism B Deuteronomistic History B Deuteronomist B United Monarchy |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Electronic
|
| Summary: | Explorations of political theory, law, power and the people who wield it have existed throughout a majority of human history. From the Code of Hammurabi to Plato’s The Republic to Machiavelli’s The Prince to Hobbes’ Leviathan, people from various times and cultures have debated the importance of government and its role in the lives of citizens. The Deuteronomist, the anonymous redactor(s) of the Deuteronomistic History (Joshua-2 Kings, with Deuteronomy affixed as a prologue), has also contributed to this vast tradition of political debate. With the retelling of the Law, the Deuteronomist uses the Book of Deuteronomy as a measure to judge the actions and efficacy of later characters according to the standards set by Yahweh.Deuteronomist 16:18–18:22 is a passage that specifically focuses on the paradigmatic governmental structure that Israel should adopt once they are situated in the Promised Land. The excerpt organizes the government into four branches – priests, judges, monarchs, and prophets – and it severely restricts the power of the chief leader, the king. Yet when Israel’s most famous king is evaluated against the rigorous criteria of the Deuteronomist, he falls short. With his aspiring nature and political desires, David instead calls to mind another political ideal – Machiavelli’s hypothetical prince. In short, Machiavelli argues, a prince must manipulate Fortune and Virtue in order to keep and maintain power, for the end justifies the means. It appears that throughout his life, David endeavors to control these two entities for political gain, and his yearning to rule over Israel and Judah justifies his actions along the way. This article will examine some of those actions, specifically those relating to his ambition, his manipulation of the people, and his exploitation of the cult, through a Machiavellian perspective. The article will then argue that David’s politics are more consistent with Machiavelli’s pragmatism than with the Deuteronomist’s Yahwism. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2052-9449 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Review and expositor
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0034637315599114 |