The biblical evidence for David comes from the book of Samuel (two books in the Christian tradition), and the book of Chronicles (also two books in the Christian tradition). (Although almost half of the Psalms are headed "A Psalm of David", the headings are later additions, and no psalm can be attributed to David with certainty).^[35] Chronicles, however, merely retells Samuel from a different theological vantage point, and contains little if any information not available there, and the biblical evidence for David is therefore dependent almost exclusively on the material contained in the chapters from 1 Samuel 16 to 1 Kings 2.

The question of David's historicity therefore becomes the question of the date, textual integrity, authorship and reliability of 1st and 2nd Samuel. Since Martin Noth put forward his analysis of the Deuteronomistic History biblical scholars have accepted that these two books form part of a continuous history of Israel, compiled no earlier than the late 7th century BC, but incorporating earlier works and fragments. Samuel's account of David "seems to have undergone two separate acts of editorial slanting. The original writers show a strong bias against Saul, and in favour of David and Solomon. Many years later, the Deuteronomists edited the material in a manner that conveyed their religious message, inserting reports and anecdotes that strengthened their monotheistic doctrine. Some of the materials in   Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire  Samuel I and II , notably the lists of officers, officials, and districts are believed to be very early, possibly even dating to the time of David or Solomon. These documents were probably in the hands of the Deuteronomists when they started to compile the material three centuries later."^[36]

Beyond this, the full range of possible interpretations is available, from the "maximalist" position of the late John Bright, whose "History of Israel", dating largely from the 1950s, takes Samuel at face value, to the recent "minimalist" scholars such Thomas L. Thompson, who measures Samuel against the archaeological evidence and concludes that "an independent history of Judea during the Iron I and Iron II periods [i.e., the period of David] has little room for historicizing readings of the stories of I-II Samuel and I Kings."^[37] Within this gamut some interesting  Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire  studies of David have been written. Baruch Halpern has pictured David as a lifelong vassal of Achish, the Philistine king of Gath;^[38] Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman have identified as the oldest and most reliable section of Samuel those chapters which describe David as the charismatic leader of a band of outlaws who captures Jerusalem and makes it his capital.^[39]