Abuse of Monarchical Power: David and Achav/0
Abuse of Monarchical Power: David and Achav
Introduction
People in position of power often tend to abuse that power. Biblical characters are no exception, and the stories of David's sin with Batsheva (Shemuel II 11 and 12) and Achav's acquisition of Navot's vineyard (Melakhim I 21) are two cases in point. Despite the vastly contrasting reputations of the two kings, the two stories follow surprisingly similar plot lines. In each, a king, who lacks nothing, nonetheless desires a layperson's beloved property. With the aid of others, a plot is orchestrated to bring about the owner's death, so that the king can take the item for himself. In the end, the king is rebuked by the prophet, but repentance serves to mitigate the punishment.
Content Parallels
- The kings – Both David and Achav were powerful kings who had more than their share of wealth and property, but nonetheless wanted more.1
- The desired "property" – In each story, the kings desire something which is especially significant to the owner. Natan's parable emphasizes that Batsheva was beloved by Uriah, who, in contrast to David, had but one wife. Similarly, the vineyard of Navot is a "נחלת אבות," and therefore land from which he is not willing to part.
- King removed from the murder – The deaths of Uriah and Navot are set up in such a manner as to leave the public unaware of the king's role and believe him innocent. Navot is killed via a staged trial in which he is accused of blasphemy and treason, while Uriah is killed in battle.
- Shared plot components – Both plots involve the "sending of letters" (Izevel to the elders to frame Navot, and David to Yoav to isolate Uriah on the battlefield), an abuse of power by royal institutions (the army and judicial system), and the cooperation of officials whom the victim would have trusted (the townsmen of Navot and Uriah's fellow soldiers and general-in-chief). In each case, after the plot succeeds word is sent back to the king.
- Partners in crime – In neither story does the king act alone. David involves Yoav, who achieves David's goal, but does so through his own means rather than those suggested by the king. Navot shares his distress with his wife, Izevel, who takes matters totally into her own hands, independently coming up with the plan to kill Navot.
- The victims – Each of Uriah and Navot take a moral stance when refusing a request of the king. Uriah questions how he can sleep in his own bed when the nation is camping on the battlefield, while Navot implies that selling his vineyard would be against Hashem's will.
- Fast/ refusal to eat bread – When David is faced with the imminent death of his son, he fasts and refuses bread as part of his prayers to save him. Achav similarly refuses to eat, first as a sullen reaction to not getting what he wanted from Navot, and later in the story, as part of his repentance.2
- Prophetic rebuke – Both kings are essentially told "הֲרָצַחְתָּ וְגַם יָרָשְׁתָּ"3 and punished measure for measure for their sins.4 The punishments are aimed not only at them, but their descendants/house as well.
- Repentance and reprieve – David's cry of "חָטָאתִי לַי"י" earns him reprieve from death, while Achav's penitence defers punishment to the next generationץ
Literary Allusions
There are no significant literary parallels between the two stories, suggesting that the text did not intend for one chapter to allude to the other. As such, the similarities stem solely from the similar actions of the two kings and the potential for abuse of power so inherent in kingship.
