CHAPTER FOUR
KINGS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
OF ISRAEL
Objective
In the preceding chapter, students learnt about the Judges in
Israel. You would recall that the era of Judges ended with Samuel
while the enthronement of Saul was the beginning of monarchy
in Israel. Thus, Saul was the first king who reigned over the
united kingdom of Israel. The main objective of this chapter
is to present the kings that reign over the United Kingdom of
Israel starting with Saul and ending with Solomon. Students
should, at the end of this chapter, be able to identify the kings
of the United Kingdom of Israel; their individual strengths and
weaknesses as well as their contributions to the development of
the United Kingdom of Israel.
Pre-test
1. Why could Samuel be described as a “king maker” and as
a “king breaker”?
2. Who was Saul and what were his achievements and
failures?
3. What was the religious significance of the ceremony of
anointing?
4. Mention the three stages of Saul’s choice as king of Israel.
5. Who was David and what were his achievements and
failures?
29Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
6. What role did Samuel play in Israel in the times of Saul
and David as kings?
7. Who was Solomon and what were his achievements and
failures?
8. What are the immediate and remote causes that led the
division of the United Kingdom of Israel?
Content
Israel had three kings who reigned over the United Kingdom
of Israel. They are Saul, David and Solomon. These three kings
ruled before the division of the kingdoms in the later years.
Among these three kings, Saul was the pioneer kings of Israel,
that is, he was the first king with executive powers. Throughout
the lifetimes of Saul and David, Samuel’s role in Israel includes
the roles of priest (he was chief religious officer); the chief
Judge of Israel; the prophet (he was a moral spokesman and a
clairvoyant or fortune teller who could help to find lost object);
the wise counsellor; the maker of kings and the breaker of kings
(Lemche, 1995).
As an influential and powerful leader in Israel, Samuel put
Saul on the throne of Israel. But when he withdrew his support
for Saul’s kingship, the rulership of Israel under Saul started
eroding away. It was Samuel who chose and certificated Saul as
the Lord’s choice and it was the same Samuel who said Saul’s
kingdom would not continue. Hence, Samuel could aptly be
described as a “king maker” and as a “king breaker”?
Saul: Israel’s First King
As earlier indicated, Saul was son of Kish (who used to have
so many asses) from the tribe of Benjamin. Saul, at this time,
was a young man when his father’s asses got lost. It was while
Saul was searching for his father lost asses that Saul met with
Samuel, the king maker. It does appear that Saul and his family
knew Samuel by report but had never met Samuel before. So,
30Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
when Saul met Samuel, he told him that the asses had been
found and intimated him that he was to be a king. He had to
spend his night in the house of Samuel; and when Saul wanted to
leave, Samuel had to anoint him as king of Israel. The religious
significance of this anointing was to mark Saul as God’s man.
Hence, Samuel charged Saul not to disclose this anointing
yet. Seven days later, Samuel met Saul at Mizpah where he
(Samuel) had gathered all the people. Lot was cast and it fell
on Saul. This was open declaration of Saul as the people’s king.
In summary, the choice of Saul was in three stages: Saul was
privately made king in Ramah; he was publicly picked by lot at
Mizpah but not fully accepted; and was finally accepted by all
the people at Gilgal. All these places were known as the ancient
sanctuaries of worship (Karel Vander, 2004).
Saul’s Achievements and Failures
Saul was very unfortunate in that he was the pioneer king. He
laid the foundation for monarchy. But he was regarded by the
people as a king who started well and ended badly. Despite
this strong condemnation, Saul tried so much for his people.
For instance, he fought and tried to subdue the Philistines who
were the greatest enemy of Israel; he tried so much to unite the
nation of Israel; he showed great fear of God; he loved Israel
so dearly. Nevertheless, according to I Sam. 13: 8-15, 15: 4- 9,
Saul’s failures as king are the following: he was charged with the
sin of disobedience by offering sacrifices at Gilgal which was
Samuel’s duty to carry out; he failed to destroy the Amalakites
as he was ordered (the command was to kill all and destroy all,
but he failed to do that. The order was from the Lord and he
ought to obey); God therefore, rejected him. When Saul was
rejected by God, evil spirit began to torture him. He eventually
became mentally affected and needed help. Moreover, Saul was
proud in that he was not of broken spirit whenever he erred, in
fact, it was not very easy for him to accept his fault or confess
his sins to God It seems Saul was not as lucky as David who (despite his terrible
sins) really enjoyed divine mercy and favour at all times. Saul
was indeed a sorry case. His kingship did not enjoy much of
divine mercy as that of David. Because of Samuel’s dominating
influence and power, Saul did not enjoy or wield full authority.
Moreover, he lacked self-confidence and patience. He was a
men pleaser. His chief failure was his lack of success in dealing
with the Philistines. Nevertheless, he was God’s anointed.
David: Second King of Israel
Lee (1981) says that the name David means chieftain and that
is a title. He was the son of Jesse and the second king of Israel.
He spent most of his youthful life in Bethlehem of Judah. He
was the youngest of his eight brothers. In the registry of the
tribe of Judah, only seven of the brothers of the sons of Jesse
are named. Perhaps one of them died. David had a tender
mother (Ps. 86:16). His lineage is inspiring, praise worthy
and at times tainted by sin. David was in charge of his father’s
animals where he started displaying faith and courage. He had
musical gifts, which made him to be recommended to Saul who
needed music to soothe his tortured spirit. David had to be in
the court of Saul (after his rejection) to make melody for him.
Meanwhile, no proclamation of David’s being made to succeed
Saul because of the evil intentions of Saul. The act was only
performed in the presence of the elders (II Kings 16:14-5, 13).
David came into the presence of Saul after his rejection to play
music for him at least to reduce the level of his insanity and
melancholy. He learnt war and government and had association
with noble men. He also had a working experience of what
kingship was all about; the bright and sad aspects of it too. As
soon as the king Saul’s condition improved, David went back
to Bethlehem, to continue with his father’s sheep as a shepherd
boy (I king 17:15) (Stern, 2015).
At this period, the Philistines, long time enemy of Israel,
32Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
was on the attack, led by the war-lord Goliath. The brothers
of David have spent some time on the battleground without
coming home, so Jesse sent David to find out what was
wrong. Goliath’s challenges provoked David. David quickly
accepted the challenge against his brother’s wish because of the
defilement of the God of Israel by the uncircumcised Philistine.
Encouraged by the cause of righteousness and confidence in
God, David approached Goliath unhampered in movement by
any armour with a sting (catapult), which he knew very well
with five stones that could be hauled from a distance. Struck
by a stone from David’s string, Goliath fell. That’s how David
(the ruddy boy) came into providence in Israel. Because of
jealousy, David was not received so much by Saul. When Saul
discovered through Abner who David was, trouble loomed.
David’s ancestors were not known for great and heroic deeds.
The victory became a crisis point for David; it earned him
the love and friendship of Jonathan, Saul’s son. On account
of David’s popularity, David eventually became a suspect to
Saul. Saul endeavoured to kill David. He reduced his military
rank, gave Michal his daughter (earlier betrothed to David) to
another man. He tried using Michal to entrap David in order
to kill him. David became a fugitive (i.e. wanderer) and came
to Nob. At Koilah, even when Saul continued to pursue him,
David fought against the Philistines and defeated them. David
had opportunities to kill Saul but spared his life simply because
he feared God and respected God’s act of anointing of Saul
as Israel’s king. But when he learnt of the death of Saul and
his three sons, including Jonathan, he mourned. David’s act
of mourning the death of Saul was genuine in that David was
related to Saul in several ways. First, David was one of Saul’s
subjects, as a citizen of Israel. Second, David became Saul’s
musician. Third, David became one of his soldiers and, in fact,
a commander of an army squadron. Fourth, David became
one of Saul’s household and a lieutenant. Fifth, David became
Saul’s son-in-law. Sixth, David was the best friend of Jonathan,
33Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
Saul’s son (Rapids, 2013).
After the death of Saul, David was first made king over the house
of Judah. To stop him from becoming king over the whole land
of Israel, Abner enthroned Ish-boshoth (son of Saul). There
was war between Israel and Judah. Judah won the battle and
David was enthroned king over all Israel. David became king
over all Israel by popular consent of all the leaders of Israel.
He transferred the capital city from Hebron to Jerusalem. He
fought and defeated the Philistines and brought back the Ark
of God to Jerusalem (which belongs to no tribe before David
captured it). Being a neutral site, the choice of Jerusalem as
the capital city solves the problem of tribal rivalry among the
people of Israel. He was to build the temple but God denied
him that opportunity. David’s sins include his adulterous act
with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah. This resulted in series
of problems and rebellions in the palace (Mich, 2014).
In terms of achievement, David was probably the most colourful
character in Hebrew history (Lee, 1981). He occupied a place
of greatness to Moses in the Old Testament. His 40 years of
reign brought in a military organisation and administrative
governance of Israel. In fact, Israel became more united and
more organised. He made Jerusalem the most important city in
the world. He was an empire-builder, though by conquest. He
occasioned a new covenant for Israel. He gave the world great
and wonderful poetic literature called the Psalms, which are his
deepest emotional addresses to God. He had many excellent
qualities. Apart from being a shepherd and musician, he was also
a team leader and warrior with a good character and excellent
spirit. Religiously, he was exceptional: he maintained Yahwism
and prepared for the building of the temple of Jerusalem. He
fought all the enemies of Israel and made them to pay homage
to him. It was under his kingship and leadership that Israel
became common wealth of nations. As his Psalms show, he
was highly devoted to God; he did justice to all Israel and not
34Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
for Judah (his tribe) alone. David reign for forty (40) years and
lived a fruitful life. In conclusion, his readiness to accept his
fault even from anybody and his readiness to confess his sins to
God (and never allowed sins to linger in his mind) made God to
call him “a man after His heart”.
David’s failures are both moral and parental in nature. Despite
all the good records of success story in his reign, he was
evidently a very weak family man. He had no control over his
family. Perhaps this was because he gave all his attention to
the affairs of the state with the result that he had no time for
his family. If God had not loved David so much, he could have
been rated as one of the most corrupt leaders in Israel. David
really enjoyed the divine favour in all sides of his life. There
were a number of unexpected happenings or abominable acts
in the royal house namely: the case of incest between Ammon
and Tamar; the snatching of Uriah’s wife by David; the outright
murder of Uriah by David; Absalom rebellion against his father
David; the sexual defilement of David’s wives by Absalom; and
the temporary dethronement and exile of David. It is surprising
to note that David still enjoyed divine favour in spite of all
these moral and spiritual flaws (Niels, 1987).
Solomon: Third King of Israel
Solomon was the son of David and Bathsheba. The period of
his reign was characterized with peace and prosperity. David
had established the kingdom and now Solomon was to reap the
benefits of his father’s labours. The period of his reign has been
looked on as the most magnificent in Israelites’ history. Because
King David had dealt with all the enemies, King Solomon had
no wars to fight. Thus, he inherited a prosperous and healthy
nation. Olotana (1978) says that the accession of Solomon to
the throne was without events. There was no civil strife.
He outlines three main reasons why it was so. It was so because
35Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
Solomon’s choice as king was a promise of David to Bathsheba;
the political supporters of Solomon were very strong; and the
influential persons or threats such as Adonijah and Joab and
Abiather the priest were either sacked from their offices/
positions or banished into exile. For instance, Joab (David’s
cousin as well as army general commander) was removed
as army general while Abiather the priest was banished to
Anathoth.
Solomon’s Wisdom
Solomon assumed the leadership of Israel at an early age.
Certainly, he was less than thirty (30) years, perhaps, about
twenty years of age. Sensing his need for divine wisdom, he
assembled the Israelites at Gibeon where the tabernacle and
the bronze alter were located and made a great sacrifice.
Through a dream, he received divine assurance that his request
for wisdom had been granted and that God has also endowed
him with riches, honour and long life, but conditioned by his
obedience. Solomon’s sagacity became a source of wonderment.
The decision rendered by the king when two women were
contending for one living child (I king 3:16-28) undoubtedly
represents but a sample of the cases demonstrating his wisdom.
As this and other reports circulated throughout the nation, the
Israelites recognised that the king’s prayer for wisdom had been
answered. On this account, Queen Sheba heard of his fame and
visited him with precious gifts (New King James Version).
Solomon’s wise sayings are recorded in the book of Proverbs.
His commercial enterprises were linked with his building
programme. During his reign, trade increased and he
encouraged it. He was deeply involved in trade and controlled
the North to South. Through his friendly ties with Hiram and
Tyre, he raised a heavy merchant ship which sailed to Arabia,
East Africa and possibly India in search of precious stones,
ivory, pearls, bronze, apes and peacocks. Coppers were mined
36Israel: Monarchy to Exile Historical Perpective
in the valley of Arabia (between the Dead Sea and Red Sea).
Some of the aforementioned items such as bronze went into the
building of the temple and other buildings whereas some were
sold in foreign market. The international trade brought about
a closer links among Israel, Egypt and Tyre. Solomon used
seven (7) years to build the temple after which he dedicated
it to Yahweh. He also built a magnificent palace for himself;
this took a period of thirteen (13) years. He also builds great
assembly hall. These building projects were through direct and
hard labour and heavy taxation of the common man in Israel.
This economic policy caused hardship among the people of
Israel and partially paved the way for a later possible revolt and
rebellion. Solomon took many wives from foreign nations; and
as he grew older, he began to accept their gods and built altars
for them. For this reason, God was angry with him and passed a
sentence on him. The sentence was that, after Solomon’s death,
the united kingdom of Israel would be taken from David’s royal
house but not entirely, for David’s sake. In other words, the
kingdom would be divided after Solomon’s death; God would
give the kingdom, except two tribes, to Solomon’s servant
(Jeroboam). The two tribes to be given to Solomon’s son are for
David’s sake. This prophecy was the beginning of the events
that eventually led to the division of the United Kingdom of
Israel (David, 2012).
In conclusion, Solomon’s strengths include his self-confidence;
elimination of oppositions and threats; wisdom in governance
and administration; and international reputation, partnership
and relation. Solomon was a great project builder. His
weaknesses include the following. He was more ruthless and
tasking; he levied heavy taxation of the people; and he lived
an elaborate/ostentatious life. Solomon loved sexual pleasure
and strange women; he was a dictator because he denied the
people of some of their human rights/freedom. Solomon was
less spiritual or religious as he was tolerant of foreign gods.
Finally, he became an apostate because he started worshiping 37Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
and building houses for foreign gods in defiance of the Lord’s
commands. The aforementioned failures set the stage for the
fulfilment of the prophecy of division of the United Kingdom
of Israel. Under Rehoboam, Solomon’s son and successor, the
prophecy was fulfilled as Israel became two kingdoms.
The Divided Kingdom of Israel from
Rehoboam and Jeroboam
The United Kingdom of Israel ruled by Saul, David and
Solomon terminated with the accession of Rehoboam to the
throne after Solomon’s death. Immediately after the exit of
King Solomon, his son Rehoboam took over the governance
of United Kingdom of Israel. Though Rehoboam inherited a
United Kingdom of Israel yet there were lingering murmurings
here and there among the majority of Israelites, perhaps,
because of hard policies of King Solomon.
Dissatisfied with Solomon’s hard rule, the ten tribes (except
Judah and Benjamin) decided to negotiate the conditions of
their allegiance to the house of David with Rehoboam. These
tribes sent a delegate of elders to Rehoboam to ask him to
soften down some of his father’s policies on taxation, the use
of forced labour and all other forms of inhuman administration.
As Rehoboam was preparing for his answer, the tribal elders
had already sent messages to Jeroboam, son of Nebat, who was
on exile in Egypt to come back home and take over the mantle
of leadership in case Rehoboam would refuse to grant their
demand. The return of Jeroboam was greeted with great joy by
the people who wanted “change” or better governance (Herez,
2014).
Rehoboam, therefore, gave these elders three days for the
answer. Rehoboam, being a youth, went to the young men (that
had been brought up with him) and consulted them for advice.
These young men (his childhood friends) said: “thus shall thou
38Israel: Monarchy to ExileHistorical Perpective
spoke to these people: my father put a heavy yoke on you but I
will add to your yoke, my father beat you with whips, but I will
beat you with scorpions” (I kgs. 12: 10-11). He also consulted
with the elders who were his father’s counsellors. They advised
him to listen to the people and make their hardship less. When
the elders and officers of Israel returned on the third day for
the answer, Rehoboam spoke to them as the young men had
advised.
John Lee (1981) says when the people saw that they had no
hope in their young king, they decided to rebel. Ten of the
tribes threw off Rehoboam’s authority, and opted for Jeroboam
(son of Nebat) as their king. Only two tribes namely the tribe
of Judah and Benjamin clung to the house of David, thus
remained faithful to Rehoboam. From that day, henceforth, the
United Kingdom of Israel became divided into two separate
kingdoms namely the southern kingdom of Israel simply called
Judah (comprising the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) and the
northern kingdom of Israel simply called Israel (comprising ten
tribes). Rehoboam ruled over the southern kingdom (Judah)
while Jeroboam ruled over the northern kingdom (Israel).
Certaincommentatorshaveopinedthattheterm“united
monarchy” is more appropriate than the term “United Kingdom
of Israel”. Their argument is twofold. First, they reminded us
that David made separate covenants with the two kingdoms
(Judah and Israel) to rule over them. There is no mention of
David making a common covenant with the south and the north.
The two kingdoms remained separate and were united only
in the person of the king. There was thus a united monarchy
and not a United Kingdom in Israel. Secondly, I Kings. 12:1
says “Rehoboam went to Shechem, for all Israel had come to
Shechem to make him king”. This, according to them, explains
thetwoseparatecoronationsofRehoboam,Solomon’s
successor. Having been readily accepted by Judah at Jerusalem,
Rehoboam travelled to the ancient northern capital of Shechem39Historical PerpectiveIsrael: Monarchy to Exile
to be crowned king by the northerners. If there were a United
Kingdom, there would have been no need for Rehoboam to
travel all the way to Shechem for a separate coronation. The
importance of this verse, therefore, lies in the light it throws on
the united monarchy in Israel. It is also worthy of note that the
united monarchy made for a fragile union which needed tact
and diplomacy on the part of the king to keep it intact. When
Rehoboam’s stupidity shook the foundations of this fragile
union, the kingdom disrupted. Thus, the united monarchy with
its inherent elastic union contributed to the dissolution of the
kingdom (Lee, 1981).
Immediate and Remote Causes of the
Division
One of the remote causes of the division could be traced back
to the time when Saul, the first king of Israel died. It is evident
that his son was made king over the Northern part of Israel
while David was reigning in Hebron (south). It is, therefore,
interesting to suggest that there had been anti-North and South
feeling even before the period of King Solomon. Another
factor is the sins of David and the fulfilment of the consequent
prophesy that the kingdom (comprising twelve tribes) would
be shared into two: southern kingdom (Judah, comprising two
tribes) and northern kingdom (Israel, comprising ten tribes).
Another factor is the over taxation of King Solomon and his
use of force labour which were not cherished policies among
the people. Even though the nation was rich, there was a
great margin of difference between the rich and the poor. The
Israelites were praying for a change of leadership and perhaps
wished a discontinuity to the house of David. The immature
response of Rehoboam should be reconsidered as one of the last
factors for the division. With the separation of the North from
the South, the southern kingdoms with its two tribes retained
Jerusalem as their capital and religious centre. The Northern
kingdom (Israel) chose Samaria as its capital. The effects of40Israel: Monarchy to ExileHistorical Perpective
the separation went further as Jeroboam king of Israel thought
within himself that if the people continued to go to Jerusalem
to offer sacrifice to the Lord in the temple, their hearts would
sooner or later return to the house of David. So, Jeroboam made
Samaria to be the capital and Damascus was developed into a
big city. He thus set up idolatrous sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel
to rival the temple in Jerusalem (Hans, 2013).
Jerobom’s sin
Shortly after crowned king of Israel, Jeroboam set up two
calves of gold (idols or gods) for Israel at Bethel and Dan in
order to prevent northern Israelites from patronising Jerusalem
temple. I Kings 12: 29-30 says “And he set one in Bethel and
the other he put in Dan. And this thing became a sin: for the
people went to worship before the one, even unto Dan”. The
erection of the golden bulls at Bethel and Dan was strategic in
that these cities were strategically located. Bethel and Dan were
also ancestral sanctuaries and ancient centres of pilgrimage in
the north. The main motive was to attract pilgrims and keep
the northerners away from the Jerusalem temple. This became
necessary because many of the northerners considered the
Solomonic temple as the only place of worship and thus were
tempted to go there too. If Jeroboam allowed the northerners to
continue this practice, it would weaken their loyalty to him and
this would in turn militate against his efforts at consolidating
his newly-won kingdom (Hans, 2013).
Obaze (2015) asserted that Jeroboam’s intension of setting
up the golden calves was to promote the worship of Yahweh
in the north. He meant the golden calves to be symbolic
representation of Yahweh in accordance with ancient Israelite
tradition of portraying Yahweh as status invisibly on the back
of a young Oxen. The Oxen was thus the throne of Yahweh,
serving the same purpose as the Cherubim in the Jerusalem
Temple. However, the Canaanites, among whom the Israelites lived, associated their gods with images of bulls. Practically, on
the other hand, the golden calves became another gods rather
than a symbol of Yahweh. The danger was that, in practice,
many of the northerners looked upon the golden bulls as images
to be worshipped.
Summary
Samuel could be described as a “king maker” and as a “king
breaker” because he set up King Saul by prophecy and dethrone
him by prophecy. As the first king of United Kingdom of Israel,
Saul, son of Kish, united the tribes and led them into victories
in many battles but his disobedience to God’s command led
to his ruin. Israel experienced time of glory under David and
Solomon. David, son of Jesse, succeeded Saul. He won all
battles, expanded the land of Israel and promoted Yahwism.
His inability to control his children; his adulterous act with
Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah eventually dimmed his
glory and the future of his lineage.
Solomon, son of David, was a builder and seasoned
administrator. However, his harsh economic policies, large
harem and idolatrous leaning constituted his ruin. Due to the
aforementioned, the United Kingdom of Israel was divided
into two: Judah and Israel during the reign of Rehoboam, son
of Solomon. Jeroboam, son of Nebat, was allotted ten tribes
while Rehoboam ruled over only two tribes (tribes of Judah
and Benjamin). Shortly after his accession as king of Israel,
Jeroboam led Israel into national sin of idolatry.
Post test
1. Mention six ways David was related to Saul.
2. Examine the factors that led to the secession of the Northern
Kingdom of Israel under Rehoboam.
3. Discuss the causes that resulted in the disruption of the
Kingdom of David.
42
4. How far was Solomon responsible for the eventual break-
up of the Kingdom?
5. Examine the reign of Jeroboam the son of Nebat. How
justifiable were the Biblical writers in condemning him?