Commentary on 2 Samuel 11:1-15
The David and Bathsheba narrative is a compelling text that warns against unchecked power and lustful impulses. Since its placement in the biblical canon, Jewish and Christian audiences have contextualized this story to reflect on moral lessons.
The text highlights the spatial dimensions within this fast-paced narrative arc. These spatial dimensions assume meaningful boundaries that delineate levels of power. Jerusalem is protected and Rabbah is dangerous. The king’s palace issues commands and the battlefield receives them. Attention to these details can inspire new perspectives on the passage. Specifically, David and Uriah occupy different spaces that reflect their own deployment of agency and, ultimately, their moral standing. Bathsheba’s role underscores her own marginal status. Together, the passage uncovers a structural inequality that allows for the most egregious abuses of power.
David in elite spaces
From the opening verses, it is obvious that David has power and deploys this power. Consider his actions in the opening verses:
Verse 1 David sent Joab
David remained
Verse 2 David rose and walked and saw
Verses 3–4 David sent (2x) and lay with her
David also stays within protected and elite boundaries. He sends his army to war with the Ammonites as he stays in Jerusalem (verse 1). He does not directly go to Bathsheba nor Joab nor Uriah, but sends for them to come to the royal residence (verses 4, 6). David tries to send Uriah down (verse 8) but fails (verses 9-11). David then plots murder against Uriah by sending him back (verse 12) and using royal power to write a letter (verse 14) that will effectively execute Uriah.
This is a very different portrayal of David from his battle with Goliath. Rather than engaging in direct combat, David now deploys power from his protected space by writing letters. Rather than fighting battles for Israel (1 Samuel 8:20), David sends others.
The language shows David as occupying the elevated space of a rooftop (verse 2) and a palace that is higher than the dwellings of others (verse 8), even his military officers. All this time, the soldiers and even the ark of God dwell in tents as David dwells in privileged surroundings (verse 11). The contrast between David in his royal dwelling and the ark in the tent is so stunning that it justifies Uriah’s disobedience to David’s command to go down to his house.
Uriah in battlefield spaces
Whereas David issues commands and dwells in privileged spaces, Uriah declines these opportunities. He is named as a Hittite; thus he is ethnically a foreigner from northern Anatolia, perhaps modern-day Turkey. He is a stated enemy of Israel (Deuteronomy 20:7). He comes from the battlefield at the call of David, but when given the opportunity to go down to his house and enjoy a conjugal visit with his wife, he chooses to sleep at the entrance of the king’s house with the servants. Uriah even receives a royal gift, with expectations of a patron-client relationship in which David would have some authority over Uriah. But Uriah does not listen to David.
Despite invitations and promises of physical comfort, Uriah refuses to “go down” to spaces of comfort. David then invites Uriah inside the house for food and drink and again, Uriah does not go to his home. At the end of the narrative, Uriah is the victim of a plot to stage a battlefield death. Uriah the Hittite displays considerable character beyond that of King David.
Bathsheba in objectified spaces
A literary analysis of Bathsheba reveals her very limited agency in this narrative. She is introduced in her vulnerability while bathing, yet is in plain sight of the king. She is described at first by nothing except that she was “very beautiful,” only referring to her physical appearance. The Bible reveals her name as Bathsheba, but her identity is tied to her father Eliam and her husband, Uriah. By the end of the passage, she is only known as “the woman” (verse 5, 26). She is a grammatical indirect object in that David “sent messengers to get her.” The very “to get” (Heb. lqḫ) is the same verb used in the Bible for acquiring/purchasing commodities.
Bathsheba goes up to David’s house. They have sexual relations (it is hard to imagine any scenario where this is consensual), and then she returns. The action of Bathsheba “purifying herself after her period” (verse 4) is consistent with the effort to wash off everything one can after rape. In addition to the physical violence, there is humiliation. David never speaks directly to her. Her only words in the passage are “I am pregnant.” One can imagine her fear and disgrace, even though she was powerless in the events.
The moral corruption is obvious. But a close literary analysis shows different ways for us to think about corruptness. What are the spaces we occupy? Are they elevated and protected spaces like Jerusalem? Are they figurative palaces where we can summon others to our liking? Are they materially prosperous spaces that allow us a higher capacity for evil? Later passages suggest that David did not deliberate on evil. Rather, David’s privileged positions allowed him to conceal his evil even from his own consciousness. A reflective reading allows us to ask, “Do we inhabit or even long to inhabit these privileged spaces?”
What is the agency that we have? Do we have elevated authority? David’s authority is ascribed through his royal office, his physical strength, and his gender. Uriah also had agency, but he chose not to invoke it. Are there ways we can deny our own agency for spiritual reasons? Uriah did so, but it came at great cost.
It is easy to read this passage with judgment against David. This is not incorrect. But perhaps another reading alerts us to examine our own spaces and, thereby, the spaces of our own complicity in doing harm. The repercussions of unchecked power are enormous.
July 28, 2024