Nadav Na’aman, «Jebusites and Jabeshites in the Saul and David Story-Cycles», Vol. 95 (2014) 481-497
This article re-examines the historical role of the Jebusites in the early monarchical period. The Jebusites, whose name is derived from the verb YBŚ («to be dry»), were a West Semitic pastoral clan that split into two segments, one settling in western Gilead and the other around Jerusalem. The two segments kept their tribal solidarity, as indicated by Saul’s campaign to rescue Jabesh-gilead. The Jebusite stronghold was one of Saul’s power bases, and David took it over. The biased description of David’s conquest influenced the way the Jebusites were presented in the late (Deuteronomistic) biblical historiography and in Israelite cultural memory.
001_naman_co_481-497 13/02/15 11:20 Pagina 485
JEBUSITES AND JABESHITES IN THE SAUL AND DAVID STORY-CYCLES 485
II. The Jebusites under King David
The main source for discussing the history of the Jebusites is
the short account in 2 Sam 5,6-10. The episode in its present form
is well built, with a planned chiastic structure and linguistic repe-
titions 20. Its meticulous internal structure seems to indicate its
original unity 21. The text is difficult to interpret; hence the enor-
mous amount of literature written in an effort to interpret it and to
suggest a reasonable historical scenario of the related event 22. I
will avoid discussing the text in detail and concentrate on three is-
sues that are essential for understanding the role of the Jebusites
in the episode.
1. In the opening of the description (v. 6a), the Jebusites are de-
scribed as “inhabitants of the land” (#rah ybvy). The expression
appears frequently in biblical historiography in reference to the pre-
Israelite inhabitants of the land (Gen 13,7; 34,30; 36,20; 50,11;
Exod 23,31; Num 13,28; 32,17; Josh 2,9.24; 7,9; 9,24; 13,21;
24,18; Judg 1,32-33; 11,21; Neh 9,24; 1 Chr 22,18; 2 Chr 20,7) and
conveys the sense of an autochthonic population 23. The Jebusites
in v. 6a are described as the autochthonous inhabitants of the region
(#rah), not specifically of the city of Jerusalem. Hence, the Je-
busites lived in the Jerusalem region, not only in the city.
2. Scholars dispute the interpretation of the words of the Jebusite
to David (v. 6bβ) 24. The interpretation that David is the subject (“he
20
C.W. TYSON, “Who’s In? Who’s Out? II Sam 5,8b and Narrative Re-
versal”, ZAW 122 (2010) 546-557.
21
Contra Ch. SCHÄFER-LICHTENBERGER, “David und Jerusalem — ein Ka-
pitel biblischer Historiographie”, Eretz Israel 24 (1993) 198*-201*, with ear-
lier literature.
22
In addition to the commentaries, see TYSON, “Who’s In?”, 546-547,
with earlier literature in note 1; SCHÄFER-LICHTENBERGER, “David und Jeru-
salem”, 197*-211*; I. WILLI-PLEIN, “Keine Eroberung Jerusalems. Zu Stel-
lung und Bedeutung von 2 Sam 5 in der Davidshausgeschichte der
Samuelbücher”, For and against David. Story and History in the Books of
Samuel (eds. A.G. AULD – E. EYNIKEL) (BETL 232; Leuven 2010) 213-233.
23
SCHÄFER-LICHTENBERGER, “David und Jerusalem”, 199*. In the
prophetic books, the term “inhabitants of the land” refers to those who lived
at the time of the prophet and thus differs from the historiographical texts
where it refers to the pre-Israelite, autochthonous inhabitants of Canaan.
24
J.C. POIRIER, “David’s ‘Hatred’ for the Lame and the Blind (2 Sam.
5.8A)”, PEQ 138 (2006) 27-33, with earlier literature.
FOLLOW US