“The narrator begins by telling us all about David’s successful campaigns, the moving of the ark to Jerusalem and David’s plans to build the Temple. This plan is deferred as Jehovah felt that his House should be erected not by a Warrior King like David but during the more peaceful reign of his successor. The narrator then turns to the ugly Uriah and Bathsheba affair. David’s flawed character is recounted in detail,” I started.

“As you already mentioned, Peter’le, this affair is not covered in Chronicles.”

“It isn’t. It does not fit in with the chronicler’s objective. For our discussion, though, it is essential. Our task is not to narrate David’s transgression but an attempt to reconstruct, cautiously and inferentially, how this episode affected Ahithophel.”

“Let us start by identifying the persons involved,” suggested Peppi.

“King David needs no introduction, Maestro. The other persons involved were Bathsheba, her husband Uriah and, indirectly, Ahithophel.”

“Who was Bathsheba?”

“She was the daughter of Eliam, one of David’s mighty men [2 Sam. 23:24; 1 Chron. 3:5]. Eliam, in turn, was Ahithophel’s son [id; and see 1 Chron. 3:5].

“Does this mean that she was Ahithophel’s granddaughter?”

“Traditional Judaism and some scholars have reached this conclusion. I agree, although it an inference and not a stated fact. And, Maestro, for the purposes of this discussion, I proceed on its basis. Further, it is accepted that Ahithophel’s family was amongst Judah’s elite.”

“And how about Uriah?”

“He, too, was one of David’s mighty men. Both the narrator and the chronicler refer to him as ‘the Hittite’. It is, of course, possible that his ancestor migrated to Judah from the Land of the Hittites. But the household was well integrated in Judah and, I believe became another distinguished family. The marriage of Uriah and Bathsheba strengthened the stature of both families and tied them. I am inclined to regard it a political union.”

“It follows, Peter’le, that we are dealing with Judah’s elite. Well, what took place?”

“One evening King David ‘walked upon the roof of the King’s house: and from the roof he saw a woman bathing’ [1 Sam. 11:3]. David, who found Bathsheba good looking, summoned her to his place, had intercourse with her and impregnated her.”

“That was adultery, wasn’t it?”

“It was, Maestro. David first attempted to cover his tracks by ordering Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, to come to Jerusalem. Uriah – the devoted army man – obeyed but spent his time in Jerusalem with the army. When Uriah returned to take part in the siege of Rabah [the Ammonite’s capital] David arranged that he be placed in a vulnerable spot, where he was killed. David, thereupon, wed Bathsheba.”

“Were there any repercussions, Peter’le?”

“Limited. Nathan, the prophet, remonstrated with David, who expressed his remorse. The narrator tells us that, thereupon, Jehovah forgave him. Oh well! Quite appropriate?”

“Once again, Peter’le, your emotions take hold. Do you suggest God (my Friend) should be remorseless? Shouldn’t repentance trigger forgiveness?”

“But was He the one to forgive? How about Uriah’s family. Further, didn’t David injure and dishonour Bathsheba’s family?”

“Did they avenge?”

“Neither the narrator nor the chronicler mentions any steps taken by Eliam. But, I think, that Ahithophel did. It explains his stand during Absalom’s rebellion. This too will have to covered.”

“Traditional Judaism seeks to put the blame on Bathsheba. Medieval Rabbinical thinkers aver that she displayed herself and, effectively, seduced David,” pointed out Peppi.

“But is this line of argumentation supportable?”

“And why not, Peter’le?”

“To start with, should a King walk on rooftops? A voyeur or peeping tom might! But a mighty monarch? Further, Bathsheba was taking a ritual bath, purifying herself after her monthly period [2 Sam. 11:4]. She was not displaying herself. And, of course, she had to proceed to the King’s palace when summoned. A King’s order must be obeyed by a subject.”

“Your points are arguable, Peter’le. All the same, I sense your antipathy. You dislike King David! Don’t you?”

“I do, Maestro. Early in his career, when he was at odds with King Saul, David became a vassal of Achish, the Philistine regent [Seren] of Gat. Worse still, David offered to join the ranks of the Philistines in their decisive battle against Saul – the then King of Israel. David returned to Ziklag – a territory held by his as a Philistine vassal – only because Achish’s co-regents vetoed his participation. Wasn’t David’s act treason?”

“I see your point, Peter’le. Further, I can imagine what the narrator and the chronicler would have said if Saul had acted in a comparable manner. Nevertheless, you must try to overcome this dislike – be it earned or prejudicial – in the course of our discussion.”

“I’ll endeavour to do so, Maestro,” I replied contritely.

“Very well,” Peppi concluded. “Let us then turn to the next part of David’s narrative – Absalom’s rebellion.”

“Agreed,” I confirmed, “especially because here we see once again Ahithophel’s hand.”