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.

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 problematizes the historicity of Paul and the communities addressed within Pauline letters and challenges the likelihood of the letters’ status as genuine correspondence. While scholarship assumes Pauline authorship of the “authentic” letters, other than biblical or biblical-like sources, there is no evidence of the historical Paul. That the historical Paul was active in the mid-first century is likewise a characterization found largely in Acts and Pauline letters. Similarly, there is a distinct lack of archaeological evidence of ancient Pauline communities. The chapter argues that internal references to communities in home settings within well-known regions are best assessed rhetorically rather than historically. With the letters read together as a collection, distantly spaced regions function effectively to signify the far-reaching spread of the message into prominent areas. The lack of extant evidence for and references to Pauline letters as unities, as one would expect in the case of genuine correspondence, casts doubt on their status as genuine correspondence. In addition, sightings of Pauline letters in later sources indicate a mid-second century date of the collection. These combined arguments add to the thesis that the letters were from the start pseudonymous and fictional.

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 3 covers the crisis that eventually led to the people’s insistence on having a king, the arguments for and against that development, how a king might be appointed, God’s involvement in the process of his appointment, and how Saul might go about being a king.

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 1 Samuel 1–12 focuses on the rule of the House of Eli, the birth of Samuel and his rule over Israel, and the transition to the rule of King Saul ben Kish.

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.

Chapter 8 assesses De Excidio 3.16–17, a set of speeches made after the Battle of Jotapata (66 CE) by Josephus’ Jewish comrades and then by Flavius Josephus, the Jewish general, himself. The chapter shows how Pseudo-Hegesippus articulates and plays with very Roman ideas of death, war, and virtue by inserting biblical exempla into these two speeches, which are radically changed and rewritten from the Greek versions found in Josephus’ Jewish War.

Chapter 2 focuses on the depiction of Israel’s first kings in the Books of Samuel and 1 Kings 1–2. This chapter deals with narratives about the early days of kingship and the portrayal of kings and members of the royal court who are affected by various ailments and disabilities. The kings and members of the royal court discussed include Saul, who descends into madness; the unnamed son of David and Bathsheba; and David himself, who suffers the effects of old age later in his life. It is shown how royal illness frames David’s and Solomon’s succession to the throne and how royal illness can be framed by sinful behavior. When read against the backdrop of Israel’s and Judah’s monarchic past, the imagery of illness surrounding Saul and David engage in a larger debate about the correct form of leadership and problems inherent to kingship.

This final chapter of Part IV treats Jael’s representative role as a member of the Kenites. While a number of biblical texts identify this group as the nation’s enemies, others depict a special relationship between them and Israel. The chapter’s guiding question is: What does the case of the Kenites reveal paradigmatically about Israel’s ethnogenesis and the formation of biblical literature

This third chapter of Part III examines the case of another population in the book of Joshua. The preceding chapter established that Rahab’s story grew to its present proportions as later writers expanded it both to teach the nation lessons of courage and to address issues posed by contested populations. The Gibeonites were one such contested population. Instead of defending this population by commemorating their loyalty and bravery in wartime, the biblical scribes challenged their belonging and privileges by creating a memory of unheroic conduct. The chapter looks at a number of texts, as well as archeological evidence, to reveal what was at stake in their polemics against this group.