Bathsheba Bathing Watched by David
by Léon Gérôme (1824–1904)
The story of the adulterous affair between David and Bathsheba happened during spring of the year when David decided not to go to war. Instead, David stayed home in Jerusalem and sent Joab, the commander of his army, to fight against the Ammonites.
One evening, after David woke up from an afternoon nap, he got out of bed and began walking on the roof of his palace. As he looked at the houses below, he saw a beautiful woman taking a bath. After asking for the identity of the woman, he discovered that she was Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah, one of the soldiers of his elite army.
Scholars are divided on whether Bathsheba was washing or bathing, that is, whether the act was ritual or non-ritual. This uncertainty is present in some English translations. For instance, the NRSV translates 2 Samuel 11:2 as follows: “he saw from the roof a woman bathing.” The KJV translates as follows: “he saw a woman washing.”
Some English translations believe that Bathsheba was washing herself as an act of purification after her menstrual period. The translations below understand the washing to be ritual. This is seen from the way these English Bibles translate 2 Samuel 11:4:
NRSV: “Now she was purifying herself after her period.”
TNK: “She had just purified herself after her period.”
GWN: “She had just cleansed herself after her monthly period.”
NAB: “She was just purified after her monthly period.”
NET: “She was in the process of purifying herself from her menstrual uncleanness.”
NJB: “She had purified herself from her period.”
NLT: “She had just completed the purification rites after having her menstrual period.”
Every month, when a woman goes through her monthly cycle, her body prepares for pregnancy. Since the biblical writer says that after Bathsheba had sex with David, she conceived, then most commentators associate Bathsheba’s pregnancy with the end of her menstruation.
A Levitical law declares that a woman during her menstrual period becomes unclean for seven days after her period begins: “When a woman has a discharge of blood that is her regular discharge from her body, she shall be in her impurity for seven days” (Leviticus 15:19). In addition, during the seven days of her uncleanness, anything or anyone who comes in contact with her also becomes unclean: “ Everything upon which she lies during her impurity shall be unclean; everything also upon which she sits shall be unclean. Whoever touches her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe in water, and be unclean until the evening” (Leviticus 15:20-21).
According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, “These laws, however, have been extended in many ways and made more onerous, both by rabbinical traditions and interpretations and by customs which have been adopted by Jewish women themselves. According to these more rigid requirements, the woman must reckon seven days after the termination of the period. If, then, this lasts seven days, she cannot become pure until the fifteenth day. Purification, furthermore, can be gained only by a ritual bath.”
Thus, according to Jewish tradition, “A menstruous woman requires immersion, as is shown by II Sam. xi. 2, 4.” However, Auld in his commentary on Samuel said that the Hebrew Bible does not contain one example of washing after menstruation. Washing after menstruation is a Jewish practice that was initiated after the biblical period. Auld (2011: 456) wrote, “The long-standing interpretation of this ‘circumstantial’ phrase is that the time of intercourse (or at least when observed by the king immediately before hand), the woman is still attending to ritual washing following her monthly period.” However, as Auld points out, the Hebrew words used in the text are “not Hebrew terms used in the context of menstruation.”
Tikva Frymer-Kensky (2002: 147) wrote that the bathing in 1 Samuel 11:2 and the purification in 1 Samuel 11:4 are two separate events, and they are not related to Bathsheba’s menstrual period. According to Frymer-Kensky, the view that a woman in ancient Israel bathed after menstruation is anachronistic since it is based on later rabbinic law, a law that was unknown in David’s time.
Frymer-Kensky (2002: 147) gives two reasons why Bathsheba’s bathing has nothing to do with her menstruation:
First is the matter of timing. In rabbinic law women immerse in a ritual pool, a mikvah, before the resumption of marital relations after their menstrual impurity. This immersion takes place one week after the menstrual flow ceases, normally between the twelfth and sixteenth days of their cycle. Sexual relationships after this immersion would quite frequently result in pregnancy. But the biblical period of menstrual impurity is one week long. Sexual relations would resume on the eighth day, a time very unlikely to produce pregnancy. The second flaw in this common understanding is that—in the Bible—women do not seem to wash after menstruation. The phrase “He shall wash his clothes and bathe in water,” used regularly in Leviticus for the end of periods of impurity, is conspicuously absent in the passage on menstruation. Menstrual impurity is regular and time-linked, and time itself, rather than water, brings an end to it. . . . Bathsheba’s bath on the rooftop was simply that: a bath, and probably had nothing to do with postmenstrual purification.
In the story of Bathsheba, three Hebrew words are used that have been associated with Bathsheba’s menstrual cycle. The first word, rōḥeṣet, appears in 2 Samuel 11:2 and it is translated “bathing” in the NRSV and “washing” in the KJV. In describing how this verb is used in the Hebrew Bible, Chankin-Gould wrote, “The verb rḥṣ (‘to wash’) is found in various conjugations a total of 77 times throughout the Hebrew Bible. Despite its frequent use in the text, rḥṣ is never associated with a woman bathing following her menstrual period.”
The second word, mitqaddešet, appears in 2 Samuel 11:4 and is translated “she was purifying herself” in the RSV. This act of purification occurs immediately after David had sex with Bathsheba: “She came to him and he had sexual relations with her” (2 Samuel 11:4 NET). According to Gesenius (§141e), Bathsheba’s purification must be “contemporaneous with the principal action” of the preceding verb, that is, after David lay with her. As mentioned above, several English translations assume that Bathsheba’s acts of purifying herself happened after her menstrual period. But the text says that this act of purification came after David had sex with her.
The third word, miṭṭumʼātāh, a word translated as “after her period” by NRSV, as “her menstrual uncleanness” by the NET Bible, as “her menstrual period” by the NLT, and as “her uncleanness” by the KJV. Chankin-Gould says that “Despite assumptions to the contrary, the third term under consideration, miṭṭumʼātāh, also does not address menstruation. The issues here concern interpretive assumptions.” The word refers to ceremonial uncleanness in general, “the noun does not always refer to women but can refer to men, Gentiles, food, and objects, which indicates its meaning is not limited to a menstrual period” (Chankin-Gould 2008: 348).
The proper way of understanding Bathsheba’s purification in 2 Samuel 11:4 is in light of the Levitical law about sexual relations. Leviticus 15:18 says, “If a man lies with a woman and has an emission of semen, both of them shall bathe in water, and be unclean until the evening.” Thus, according to Frymer-Kensky (2202: 147), “When Bathsheba purifies herself, she is washing off the impurity that comes with all sexual relations, even licit ones. In our verse, the phrase does not refer back to the bath that she was taking when she was first introduced, but to postcoital purification.”
In conclusion, Bathsheba was forced to enter into a forbidden sexual relationship with David. As for Bathsheba’s act of purification one must ask whether she was purifying herself from her menstrual period or whether she was purifying herself after having sex with David. The Hebrew words used in the text to describe the events before and after the affair indicate that Bathsheba’s purification had nothing to do with her menstrual period.
Bathsheba was an innocent victim of an adulterous sexual affair and she tried to purify herself from the uncleanness of this illicit affair, but as Frymer-Kensky (2002: 147) said, “she can purify herself from the ordinary pollution of sexual intercourse, but the defilement of illicit sexuality is not so easily washed off.”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Auld, A. Graeme. I & II Samuel. Old Testament Library. Louisville. Westminster John Knox Press, 2011
Chankin-Gould, J. D’ror et al., “The Sanctified ‘Adulteress’ and her Circumstantial Clause: Bathsheba’s Bath and Self-Consecration in 2 Samuel 11.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32.3 (2008): 339-352.
Frymer-Kensky, Tikva, Reading the Women of the Bible: A New Interpretation of Their Stories. New York: Schocken Books, 2002.
Kautzsch, E., Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press, 1910.
Claude Mariottini
Emeritus Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
VISIT MY AMAZON AUTHOR’S PAGE
BUY MY BOOKS ON AMAZON (Click here).
NOTE: Did you like this post? Do you think other people would like to read this post? Be sure to share this post on Facebook and share a link on Twitter or Tumblr so that others may enjoy reading it too!
I would love to hear from you! Let me know what you thought of this post by leaving a comment below. Be sure to like my page on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, follow me on Tumblr, Facebook, and subscribe to my blog to receive each post by email.
If you are looking for other series of studies on the Old Testament, visit the Archive section and you will find many studies that deal with a variety of topics.
Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament 
Pingback: A Sympathetic Look at Bathsheba | Marg Mowczko
Thank you, that was interesting. But if she was forced into it, as you write, isn’t it better to call the relationship sexual abuse or rape, rather than an “adulterous illicit affair”? Kings did that routinely in those days – took whichever women they wanted, their consent didn’t matter. That is what we now call rape. Absalom slept with his father’s concubines, their consent was immaterial. In Amnon’s case, the forced intercourse is spelt out. In David’s, we need to read between the lines.
LikeLike
Jamila,
I agree with you that Bathsheba was raped. The aim of my post was not to study the rape of Bathsheba, but only to study the false claim that her washing was about menstrual purification. I will write a post on Bathsheba’s rape in the near future. Thank you for your comment.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
IMO, It is called adultery because that crime was considered to be worse than rape, if you look at the penalties listed in Scripture. The penalty for adultery was death, but the penalty for rape (of an unmarried woman) was a fine. Also, the one who committed adultery was not the ewe lamb Bathsheba, but King David. In fact, the only time the Scripture mentions the rape of a particular married woman is the concubine in Judges, with unnamed assailants.
LikeLike
Carolyn,
The incident with David and Bathsheba was both adultery and rape. David had many wives, but it was adultery because he had sex with the wife of another man. It was rape because Bathsheba was taken to David’s house, probably by force to have sex with him. Even today, rape is not a crime that demands the death penalty.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
maybe i am not understanding you explanation but if she was doing the purfication bath then David would have known the law and would have known that she was at a prime time to become pregranant, right? so did he intend for her to become pregranant? was he that dumb?
LikeLike
Juanita,
Bathsheba was not doing a ritual bath after menstruation, but after sex. If you read the post again, you will notice what Frymer-Kensky says about Bathsheba’s ritual bath.
Frymer-Kensky is right in her understanding of what Bathsheba was doing. Thank you for visiting my blog.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
Thanks for the study, very interesting
LikeLike
Dear Friend,
I am glad you enjoyed the post. Thank you for visiting my blog.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
Fascinating explanation! I had never read this narrative from that perspective.
I am interested to see how you can prove “rape” from the biblical text. Remember, the onus probandi, or burden of proof, rests upon those who assert their particular position. And unless your interpretation of the text can be proven in such a way that there is no other possible explanation, it will remain only a possible interpretation, not a definitive one. But consider the case of Joseph & Potiphar’s wife. Not exactly analogous, but Joseph clearly takes action that implies that he was not complicit in the sin. Not only so, he pays a heavy penalty for it.
LikeLike
Zeno,
Thank you for your comment. Scholars are divided on whether Bathsheba was raped, even though the majority agree that she was. I am planning to write a post on Bathsheba’s rape but it will not be anytime soon. I am involved in several projects now that demand my attention right now.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
Late reading this post however, I was mesmerized by your perspective of Bathsheba and David. Thanks for sharing! Enjoyable reading!
LikeLike
Dorothy,
I am glad to know that you enjoyed my post. Thank you for visiting my blog.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
As an incident to reveal the character of God, Bathsheba is not a player but a prop. The revelatory incident is between King David and the Lord. Some may find the questions about Bathsheba’s role interesting, but her role is irrelevant for demonstrating the character of God. King David, as the Lord’s anointed and through whose linage the messiah was to arrive, was not exempt from divine retribution. Beginning with 2 Samuel 11 the remaining narrative of King David mirrors the narrative of unfaithful Israel – tragedy upon tragedy. To be the Lord’s chosen and anointed is neither protection against the consequences of sin nor can sin derail the divine plan of redemption. God has been revealing this since Cain murdered Abel – over and over – again and again.
LikeLike
Boyd,
Thank you for your comment. Bathsheba was not a prop. She was a woman used and abused by David. The focus of the story is not to reveal the character of God. The character of God, however, appears in the story as a judge who severely punished David for his crime.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
In the scene as described in 2 Samuel,nothing but Bathsheba’s alluring appearance is noted. In the movies she could have been an extra. Bathsheba doesn’t become an actor until King David is on his death bed and she intercedes for Solomon in 1 kings 1. Is your emphasis that the “Me Too Movement” is what 2 Samuel 11-12 is about? How does the “Me Too Movement” and the alternatives for Bathsheba’s involvement further the divine narrative concerning redemption? An honest question. Zeno’s comment about rape as only a possible interpretation is generous. It is speculation, imported into the text, rather than commentary. Speculation can be insightful and should be labeled as such, but it is not interpretation.
LikeLike
Boyd,
You are not understanding what I wrote. I am not talking about the “Me Too Movement,” whatever that is. I am writing about a man who had more than ten wives and many concubines taking another man’s wife and killing her husband. This has nothing to do with the God’s plan for redemption. God still used David and his family to accomplish his purpose for the world. If what David did was not rape, then we need a new definition of rape.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
It is worthy of note that the Scripture never says Bathsheba was on a rooftop, although Frymer-Kensky says in the quote that she was on a rooftop.
LikeLike
Carolyn,
Think for a moment. If Bathsheba was bathing inside the house, David would never see her bathing. If you read a book describing how houses were built in the Iron Age I (the time when Bathsheba lived), you will find that the rooftop was used for many things. But you have a point there. Maybe she was washing herself in the courtyard since the courtyard was used for cooking, bathing, and other activities.
Thank you for visiting my blog.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
Mr. Mariottini… I just came upon this page a year behind all these replies. I just listened to another preaching today blaming Bathsheba for titillating David into sin. It is so infuriating, since number one, “were you there??” We don’t even know the layout of the house or where she was bathing. All the preachers I hear continually talk with certainty about how she was on the rooftop of her home. One of the replies to your article said it never states that in Scripture, and I was thinking to myself, oh my goodness that’s correct… it doesn’t say rooftop, it just says she was bathing! To me this is the age-old blame game and stuff added to Scripture, God’s Word, in order to cover up for the man,.. as usual. One thing I’ve never heard anybody mention… I believe back in the day of King David, women had absolutely no rights, from what I’ve studied, and a man would just make a choice and she had no say in the matter. I also believe, from what I’ve read, that if you disobeyed a king, he could kill you. I am sure she was terrified and coerced by fear to not disobey. She mourned her husband’s death, so she did love Urriah, her husband. If it were me living at that time, one of the things that would have run through my head would be that the king might hurt my husband, (and cover it up), if I disobey. She would have seen already that he had many wives and concubines and known that his character was sliding down hill. God allowed David to do those things that He knew were going to eventually catch up to him, which it did. I was so glad to see a refreshing alternative to the same diatribe of how the woman is again at fault for somehow flirting, knowingly titillating David because she knew she was being observed while bathing. They don’t even know how the houses were situated near the palace, how far, were there plants surrounding her bathing area and on the Palace roof, and did David hear laughter maybe, or chatter from Bathsheeba and an attendant perhaps? I believe she was bathing just to be clean, not to be seen, because it was hot and she was sweaty and sticky and she wanted to be comfortable and relieved from the heat. How come nobody brings that up?? It’s not like they were filthy back then; they had water and Scripture mentions bathing all the time in many different ways.
Thank you for not trying to portray Bathsheeba as an unprincipled, lustful woman. No one REALLY knows!
Catherine S.
LikeLike
Catherine,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply to my post. I completely agree with you. Most preachers do little study before preparing their sermons and in the process they miss the background and the context that can clarify the story.
Another problem is that many men tend to defend David because he was “a man after God’s own heart.” At times, it is much easier to put the blame on the women. This attribution of blame reflects a patriarchal way of thinking.
I would like to invite you to read two posts that deal with the issues you raised. Read “Did David Rape Bathsheba?”. Read also: “Blaming the Woman.”,
Let me know what you think about these two posts.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
” many men tend to defend David because he was “a man after God’s own heart.” At times, it is much easier to put the blame on the women. This attribution of blame reflects a patriarchal way of thinking.”
Why is there a need for blame at all? What is there to blame?
LikeLike
Stan,
I agree with you; there is no reason to blame, but the reality is that people attribute blame to the woman. This should not be, but it happens in real life.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike
2 Sam 11:2 “From the rooftop he saw a woman bathing, and the woman was very beautiful” So she was bathing at that time. Vs 4 “he lay down with her. (This happened while she was purifying herself from her uncleanness.)” Thus her bathing was from the purification after her period for 7 days.
The interesting thing is women are most fertile at the time of ovulation (when an egg is released from her ovaries), which usually occurs 12 to 14 days before her next period starts. This is the time of the month when she’ most likely to get pregnant.
It’s unlikely that a woman will get pregnant just after her period, although it can happen.
I think that she was infertile at that time. God allowed her to become pregnant. That is why killing the child was not wrong, because it never should have been conceived. God allowed the child to be conceived otherwise what would hold David accountable?
And it was not rape. So she came in to him, and he lay down with her and she consented because any woman would want to with the king.
LikeLike
Stan,
Thank you for your comment. I am sorry to disagree with you, but some of your views are not correct. I have written several essays on Bathsheba. I encourage you to read these studies. Maybe I may give you a new perspective on the affair between David and Bathsheba. Here is the kink: “Bathsheba, The Wife of Uriah.”
Thank you for reading and commenting on my post.
Claude Mariottini
LikeLike