The Relocation of the Davidic Capital
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8206829 |
|---|---|
| Authors | James W Flanagan (University of Montana, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1979 |
| Volume | 47 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 223-244 |
| Publication date | 1979-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of the American Academy of Religion (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-7189 • E-ISSN: 1477-4585 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/jaarel/xlvii.2.223 |
| OpenAlex | W1970747730 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 7 |
Although the history and religion of ancient Israel were greatly affected by Jerusalem's monarchy, modern historians have had little success in determining David's reasons for abandoning an ancient Yahwistic center in favor of a Jebusite stronghold. The geographical, military, and political advantages of Jerusalem over Hebron are often listed as the motives for, and consequences of, the relocation. Presumably, the new capital's central, neutral position on the boundaries of both Judah and Israel offered David a site which was easily defended and which would not arouse jealousy in either kingdom. These explanations have merit, but they do not consider all the evidence at hand. First, resistance to David's kingship erupted among the Yahwists after he moved to Jerusalem as well as before. Conservative elements still clinging to the ideals of the confederation and to nostalgia for Saul's house mustered support sufficient to force David into exile and to threaten him with two rebellions. Second, anthropologists who have studied peasants'reactions to rapidly imposed social change forced upon them by new ruling classes have found predictable results: transfers from orthogenetic centers like Hebron to heterogenetic cities like Jerusalem often cause rebellions similar to those in Israel. At times, even attempts to legitimate the innovations by forming a Great Tradition cannot subdue the peasants' fears and hostilities. Third, the arrangement of the narratives within the books of Samuel reveals a bias against Shiloh and Hebron in favor of Jerusalem. The roles of the Yahwistic centers have been suppressed in order to enhance the prominence of the new capital. Even the sequence of events leading to the capture and occupation of Jerusalem, as recorded in the books of Samuel, has been altered so that David's decisive defeat of the Philistines appears to have been launched from the new capital rather than from Hebron. This article examines evidence within the Bible and social scientific studies in order to explain the transfer from Hebron to Jerusalem. It concludes that the move lessened Yahwism's restraining influence upon the developing monarchy and prepared the way for the offensive practices which eventually led to the schism after Solomon's reign.
Ancient history · Art · Capital (architecture) · Jealousy · Literature · Monarchy · Narrative · Nobility · Order (exchange) · Political science · Politics · Relocation · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Development, Ethics, and Society · History · Law
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,05 |
| Citation span | 2006 - 2006 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |