Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

attempt to do it thyself. This is the correct explanation given by De Wette and Maurer. Gesenius and Thenius, on the contrary, take is in the sense of " if perchance." But this is evidently incorrect; for even though there are certain passages in which itf may be so rendered, it is only where some other case is supposed, and therefore the meaning or still lies at the foundation. These questions of David were suggested by a correct estimate of the circumstances, namely, that Saul's suspicions would leave him to the conclusion that there was some understanding between Jonathan and David, and that he would take steps in consequence to prevent Jonathan from making David acquainted with the result of his conversation with Saul. — Ver. 11. Before replying to these questions, Jonathan asked David to go with him to the field, that they might there fix upon the sign by which he would let him know, in a way in which no one could suspect, what was the state of his father's mind.

Vers. 12-23. In the field, where they were both entirely free from observation, Jonathan first of all renewed his covenant with David, by vowing to him on oath that he would give him information of his father's feelings towards him (vers. 12, 13); and then entreated him, with a certain presentiment that David would one day be king, even then to maintain his love towards him and his family for ever (vers. 14-16); and lastly, he made David swear again concerning his love (ver. 17), and then gave him the sign by which he would communicate the promised information (vers. 18-23). — Vers. 12 and 13a are connected. Jonathan commences with a solemn invocation of God: "Jehovah, God of Israel!" and thus introduces his oath. We have neither to supply "Jehovah is witness" nor "as truly as Jehovah liveth" as some have suggested. " When I inquire of my father about this time to-morrow, the day after to-morrow (a concise mode of saying ' to-morrow or the day after'), and behold it is (stands) well for David, and then I do not send to thee and make it known to thee, Jehovah shall do so to Jonathan" etc. (" The Lord do so," etc., the ordinary formula used in an oath: see ch. xiv. 44). The other case is then added without an adversative particle: " If it should please my father evil against thee (lit. as regards evil), / will make it known to thee, and let thee go, that thou mayest go in peace; and Jehovah be with thee, as He has been with my father" In this wish there is expressed the presentiment that David would one day occupy that place in Israel which Saul occupied then, i.e. the throne. — In vers. 14 and 15 the Masoretic text gives no appropriate meaning. Luther's rendering, in which he follows the Rabbins and takes the first N?| (ver. 14) by itself, and then completes the sentence from the context (a but if I do it not, show me no mercy, because I live, not even if I die"), contains indeed a certain permissible sense when considered in itself; but it is hardly reconcilable with what follows, u<ind do not tear away thy compassion for ever from my house." The request that he would show no compassion to him (Jonathan) even if he died, and yet would not withdraw his compassion from his house for ever, contains an antithesis which would have been expressed most clearly and unambiguously in the words themselves, if this had been really what Jonathan intended to say. De Wette's rendering gives a still more striking contradiction: " But let not (Jehovah be with thee) if I still live, and thou showest not the love of Jehovah to me, that I die not, and thou withdrawest not thy love from my house for ever? There is really no other course open than to follow the Syriac and Arabic, as Maurer, Thenius, and Ewald have done, and change the *>\ in the first two clauses of ver. 14 into vj or #(\ according to the analogy of the form tw (ch. xiv. 30), and to render the passage thus: " And mayest thou, if I still live, mayest thou show to me the favour of the Lord, and not if I die, not withdraw thy favour from my house for ever, not even (K7i) when Jehovah shall cut off the enemies of David, every one from the face of the earth!" " The favour of Jehovah" is favour such as Jehovah shows to His people. The expression "when Jehovah shall cut off," etc., shows very clearly Jonathan's conviction that Jehovah would give to David a victory over all his enemies. — Ver. 16. Thus Jonathan concluded a covenant with the house of David, namely, by bringing David to promise kindness to his family for ever. The word n*13 must be supplied in thought to rnD^ as in ch. xxii. 8 and 2 Cliron. vii. 18. " And Jehovah required it (what Jonathan had predicted) at the hand of DavioTs enemies." Understood in this manner, the second clause contains a remark of the historian himself, namely, that Jonathan's words were really fulfilled in due time. The traditional rendering of tPjjEN as a relative preterite, with "ien understood, " and said, Let Jehovah take vengeance,' is not only precluded by the harshness of the introduction of the word "saying," but still more by the fact, that if "IBK (saying) is introduced between the copula vav and the verb 55>'j53, the perfect cannot stand for the optative B*j53, as in Josh. xxii. 23. — Ver. 17. "And Jonathan adjured David again by his love to him, because he loved him as his own soul" (cf. ch. xviii. 1, 3); i.e. he once more implored David most earnestly with an oath to show favour to him and his house. — Vers. 18 sqq. He then discussed the sign with him for letting him know about his father's state of mind: " To-morrow is new moon, and thou wilt be missed, for thy seat will be empty" sc. at Saul's table (see at ver. 5). " And on the third day come down quickly (from thy sojourning place), and go to the spot where thou didst hide thyself on the day of the deed, and place thyself by the side of the stone Ezel." The first words in this (19th) verse are not without difficulty. The meaning " on the third day" for the verb ufaw cannot be sustained by parallel passages, but is fully established, partly by IVBvBfrlj the third day, and partly by the Arabic usage (vid. Ges. Thes. s. v.). *lKp after Tjg, lit. "go violently down" is more striking still. Nevertheless the correctness of the text is not to be called in question, since RWW is sustained by rpiaaevaec in the Septuagint, and -1KO Tjj0 by descende ergo festinus in the Vulgate, and also by the rendering in the Chaldee, Arabic, and Syriac versions, " and on the third day thou wilt be missed still more," which is evidently merely a conjecture founded upon the context. The meaning of nOTsn D^3 is doubtful. Gesenius, De Wette, and Maurer render it " on the day of the deed," and understand it as referring to Saul's deed mentioned in ch. xix. 2, viz. his design of killing David; others render it " on the day of business," i.e. the working day (Luther, after the LXX. and Vulgate), but this is not so good a rendering. The best is probably that of Thenius, "on the day of the business" (which is known to thee). Nothing further can be said concerning the stone Ezel than that Ezel is a proper name. — Ver. 20. " And I will shoot off three arrows to the side of it (the stone Ezel), to shoot for me at the mark," i.e. as if shooting at the mark. The article attached to tswri is either to be explained as denoting that the historian assumed the thing as already well known, or on the supposition that Jonathan went to the field armed, and when giving the sign pointed to the arrows in his quiver. In the word rny the

Raphe indicates that the suffix of n— is not a mere toneless n? although it has no mappik, having given up its strong breathing on account of the harsh V sound. — Ver. 21. " And, behold (H3n; directing attention to what follows as the main point), / will send the boy (saying), Go, get the arrows. If 1 shall say to the boy, Behold, the arrows are from thee hitherwards, fetch them; then come, for peace is to thee, and it is nothing, as truly as Jehovah liveth." — Ver. 22. " But if I say to the youth, Behold, the arrows are from thee farther off; then go, for Jehovah sendeth thee away" i.e. bids thee flee. The appointment of this sign was just as simple as it was suitable to the purpose. — Ver. 23. This arrangement was to remain an eternal secret between them. u And (as for) the word that we have spoken, I and thou, behold, the Lord is between me and thee for ever" namely, a witness and judge in case one of us two should break the covenant (vid. Gen. xxxi. 48, 49). This is implied in the words, without there being any necessity to assume that 1J had dropped out of the text. " The word" refers not merely to the sign agreed upon, but to the whole matter, including the renewal of the bond of friendship.

Vers. 24-34. David thereupon concealed himself in the field, whilst Jonathan, as agreed upon, endeavoured to apologize for his absence from the king's table. — Vers. 24, 25. On the new moon's day Saul sat at table, and as always, at his seat by the wall, i.e. at the top, just as, in eastern lands at the present day, the place of honour is the seat in the corner (see Harmar Beobachtungeu ii. pp. QQ sqq.). " And. Jonathan rose tip, and Abner seated himself by the side of Saul, and David's place remained empty." The difficult passage, " And Jonathan rose up," etc., can hardly be understood in any other way than as signifying that, when Abner entered, Jonathan rose from his seat by the side of Saul, and gave up the place to Abner, in which case all that is wanting is an account of the place to which Jonathan moved. Every other attempted explanation is exposed to much graver difficulties. The suggestion made by Gesenius, that the cop. 1 should be supplied before "U3N, and ZW referred to Jonathan (" and Jonathan rose up and sat down, and Abner (sat down) by the side of Saul"), as in the Syriac, is open to this objection, that in addition to the necessity of supplying i, it is impossible to see why Jonathan should have risen up for the purpose of sitting down again. The rendering " and Jonathan came," which is the one adopted by Maurer and De Wette, cannot be philologically sustained; inasmuch as, although Dip is used to signify rise up, in the sense of the occurrence of important events, or the appearance of celebrated persons, it never means simply " to come." And lastly, the conjecture of Thenius, that BiJJl should be altered into E'^, according to the senseless rendering of the LXX., 7rpoi<j)0aa€ rov 'IovdOav, is overthrown by the fact, that whilst D^P does indeed mean to anticipate or come to meet, it never means to sit in front of, i.e. opposite to a person. — Ver. 26. On this (first) day Saul said nothing, sc. about David's absenting himself, "for he thought there has (something) happened to him, that he is not clean; surely (^3) he is not clean" (via1. Lev. xv. 16 sqq.; Deut. xxiii. 11). — Vers. 27 sqq. But on the second day, the day after the new moon (lit. the morrow after the new moon, the second day: Wn is a nominative, and to be joined to W, and not a genitive belonging to tsnhn)? when David was absent from table again, Saul said to Jonathan, " Why is the son of Jesse not come to meat, neither yesterday nor to-day f" Whereupon Jonathan answered, as arranged with David (compare vers. 28 and 29 with ver. 6). u And my brother, he hath commanded me," i.e, ordered me to come, njv as in Ex. vi. 13, and *n$, the elder brother, who was then at the head of the family, and arranged the sacrificial meal. — Vers. 30, 31. Saul was greatly enraged at this, and said to Jonathan, " Son of a perverse woman (^1V.I is a participle, Niph. fern, from TO) of rebellion" — i.e. son of a perverse and rebellious woman (an insult offered to the mother, and therefore so much the. greater to the son), hence the meaning really is, " Thou perverse, rebellious fellow," — " do I not know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own shame, and to the shame of thy mother's nakedness? " "in^? to choose a person out of love, to take pleasure in a person; generally construed with 2 pers., here with?, although many Codd. have 2 here also. " For as long as the son of Jesse liveth upon the earth, thou and thy kingdom (kingship, throne) will not stand." Thus Saul evidently suspected David as his rival, who would either wrest the government from him, or at any rate after his death from his son. u Now send and fetch him to me, for he is a child of death" i.e. he has deserved to die, and shall be put to death. — Vers. 32 sqq. When Jonathan replied, " My father, why shall he die? what has he done?" Saul was so enraged that he hurled his javelin at Jonathan (cf. ch. xviii. 11). Thus Jonathan saw that his father had firmly resolved to put David to death, and rose up from the table in fierce anger, and did not eat that day; for he was grieved concerning David, because his father had done him shame. HP3 is a substantive in the sense of unalter- able resolution, like the verb in ver. 9. W? BNirrtf^ on the second day of the new moon or month.

Vers. 35-42. The next morning Jonathan made David acquainted with what had occurred, by means of the sign agreed upon with David. The account of this, and of the meeting between Jonathan and David which followed, is given very concisely, only the main points being touched upon. In the morning (after what had occurred) Jonathan went to the field, in IJttOp, either " at the time agreed upon with David" or " to the meeting with David" or perhaps better still, " according to the appointment (agreement) with David" and a small boy with him. — Ver. 36. To the latter he said, namely as soon as they had come to the field, Run, get the arrows which I shoot. The boy ran, and he shot off the arrows, " to go out beyond him" i.e. so that the arrows flew farther than the boy had run. The form ^n for f*n only occurs in connection with disjunctive accents; beside the present chapter (vers. 36, 37, 38, Chethibh) we find it again in 2 Kings ix. 24. The singular is used here with indefinite generality, as the historian did not consider it necessary to mention expressly, after what he had previously written, that Jonathan shot off three arrows one after another. — Ver. 37. When the boy came to the place of the shot arrow (i.e. to the place to which the arrow had flown), Jonathan called after him, u See, the arrow is (lies) away from thee, farther off;" and again, " Quickly, haste, do not stand still" that he might not see David, who was somewhere near; and the boy picked up the arrow and came to his lord. The Chethibh Wfl is evidently the original reading, and the singular is to be understood as in ver. 37; the Keri D^nn is an emendation, according to the meaning of the words. The writer here introduces the remark in ver. 39, that the boy knew nothing of what had been arranged between Jonathan and David. — Ver. 40. Jonathan then gave the boy his things (bow, arrows, and quiver), and sent him with them to the town, that he might be able to converse with David for a few seconds after his departure, and take leave of him unobserved.— Ver. 41. When the boy had gone, David rose (from his hiding-place) from the south side, fell down upon his face to the ground, and bowed three times (before Jonathan); they then kissed each other, and wept for one another, " till David wept strongly" i.e. to such a degree that David wept very loud. 333rt b^WO, " from the side of the south" which is the expression used to describe David's hiding-place, according to its direction in relation to the place where Jonathan was standing, has not been correctly rendered by any of the early translators except Aquila and Jerome. In the Septuagint, the Chaldee, the Syriac, and the Arabic, the statement in ver. 19 is repeated, simply because the translators could not see the force of 333 n 5>¥NB, although it is intelligible enough in relation to what follows, according to which David fled from thence southwards to Nob. — Yer. 42. All that is given of the conversation between the two friends is the parting word spoken by Jonathan to David: " Go in peace. What we two have sworn in the name of the Lord, saying, The Lord be between me and thee, and between my seed and thy seed forever:" sc. let it stand, or let us abide by it. The clause contains an aposiopesis, which may be accounted for from Jonathan's deep emotion, and in which the apodosis may be gathered from the sense. For it is evident, from a comparison of ver. 23, that the expression " for ever" must be understood as forming part of the oath. — Ch. xxi. 1. David then set out upon his journey, and Jonathan returned to the town. This verse ought, strictly speaking, to form the conclusion of ch. xx.1 The subject to " arose" is David; not because Jonathan was the last one spoken of (Thenius), but because the following words, " and Jonathan came," etc., are in evident antithesis to " he arose and went."

After the information which David had received from Jonathan, nothing remained for him in order to save his life but immediate flight. He could not return to the prophets at Ramah, where he had been miraculously preserved from the first outbreak of Saul's wrath, because they could not ensure him permanent protection against the death with which he was threatened. He therefore fled first of all to Nob, to Ahimelech the high priest, to inquire the will of God through him concerning his future course (ch. xxii. 10, 15), and induced him to give him bread and the sword of Goliath also, under the pretext of having to perform a secret commission from the king with the greatest speed; for which Saul afterwards took fearful vengeance upon the priests at Nob when he was made acquainted with the affair through the treachery of Doeg (vers. 1-9). David then fled to Gath to the Philistian king Achish; but here he was quickly recognised as the conqueror of Goliath, and obliged to feign insanity in order to save his life, and then to flee still farther (vers. 10-15). The state of his mind at this time he poured out before God in the words of Ps. lvi., lii., and xxxiv.

Vers. 1—9. David at Nob. — The town of Nob or Nobeh (unless indeed the form rnb stands for nn: here and in ch. xxii. 9, and the n attached is merely n local, as the name is always written 21 in other places: via7, ch. xxii. 11, 32; 2 Sam. xxi. 16; Isa. x. 32; Neh. xi. 32) was at that time a priests' city (ch. xxii. 19), in which, according to the following account, the tabernacle was then standing, and the legal worship carried on. According to Isa. x. 30, 32, it was between Anathoth (Anata) and Jerusalem, and in all probability it has been preserved in the village of el-Isaiviych, i.e. probably the village of Esau or Edom, which is midway between Anata andJerusalem, an hour from the latter, and the same distance to the south-east of Gibcah of Saul (Tell el Phul), and which bears all the marks of an ancient place, partly in its dwellings, the stones of which date from a great antiquity, and partly in many marble columns which arc found there (via1. Toblcr, Topogr. v. Jerusalem ii. p. 720). Hence v. Kaumer (Pal. p. 215, ed. 4) follows Kiepert in the map which he has appended to Robinson's Biblical Researches, and set down this place as the ancient Nob, for which Robinson indeed searched in vain (see Pal. ii. p. 150). Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub, most probably the same person as Ahiah (ch. xiv. 3), was " the priest" i.e. the high priest (see at ch. xiv. 3). When David came to him, the priest "went trembling to meet him" (rifcOpp TTjJ.) with the inquiry, u Why art thou alone, and no one is ivith thee?" The unexpected appearance of David, the son-in-law of the king, without any attendants, alarmed Ahimelech, who probably imagined that he had come with a commission from the kino; which might involve him in danger. David had left the few servants who accompanied him in his flight somewhere in the neighbourhood, as we may gather from ver. 2, because he wished to converse with the high priest alone. Ahimelech's anxious inquiry led David to resort to the fabrication described in ver. 2: u The king hath commanded me a business, and said to me, No one is to know anything of this matter, in winch (lit. in relation to the matter with regard to which) I send thee, and which I have entrusted to thee (i.e. no one is to know either the occasion or the nature of the commission): and the servants I have directed to such and such a place." JH^, Poel, to cause to know, point, show. Ahimelech had received no information as yet concerning the most recent occurrences between Saul and David; and David would not confess to him that he was fleeing from Saul, because he was evidently afraid that the high priest would not give him any assistance, lest he should draw down the wrath of the king. This falsehood brought the greatest calamities upon Ahimelech and the priests at Nob (ch. xxii. 9-19), and David was afterwards obliged to confess that he had occasioned it all (ch. xxii. 22). — Ver. 3. u And now what is under thy hand,? give into my hand (i.e. hand me) Jive loaves, or ivhatever (else) is to be found." David asked for five loaves, because he had spoken of several attendants, and probably wanted to make provision for two or three days (Thenius). — Ver. 4. The priest answered that he had no common bread, but only holy bread, viz., according to ver. 6, shew-bread that had been removed, which none but priests were allowed to eat, and that in a sacred place; but that he was willing to give him some of these loaves, as David had said that he was travelling upon an important mission from the king, provided only that " the young men had kept themselves at least from women" i.e. had not been defiled by sexual intercourse (Lev. xv. 18). If they were clean at any rate in this respect, he would in such a case of necessity depart from the Levitical law concerning the eating of the shew-bread, for the sake of observing the higher commandment of love to a neighbour (Lev. xix. 18; cf. Matt. xii. 5, 6, Mark ii. 25, 26).1— Ver. 5. David quieted him concerning this scruple, and said, u Nay, but women have been kept from us since yesterday and the day before." The use of DN ^3 may be explained from the fact, that in David's reply he paid more attention to the sense than to the form of the priest's scruple, and expressed himself as concisely as possible. The words, " if the young men have only kept themselves from women," simply meant, if only they are not unclean; and David replied, That is certainly not the case, but women have been kept from us; so that DK *3 has the meaning but in this passage also, as it frequently has after a previous negative, which is implied in the thought here as in 2 Sam. xiii. 33. " When I came out, the young mens things were holy (Levitically clean); and if it is an unholy way, it becomes even holy through the instrument" David does not say that the young men were clean when he came out (for the rendering given to ^"ly^n s?3 in the Septuagint, 7rdvra ra TraiBdpia, is without any critical value, and is only a mistaken attempt to explain the word v3, which was unintelligible to the translator), but simply affirms that B*Jp B"ny3n ^3, i.e., according to Luther's rendering (der Knaben Zeug war heilig), the young men's things (clothes, etc.) were holy. Ey3 does not mean merely vessels, arms, or tools, but also the dress (Deut. xxii. 5), or rather the clothes as wyell as such things as were most necessary to meet the wants of life. By the coitus, or strictly speaking, by the emissio seminis in connection with the coitus, not only were t he persons themselves defiled, but also every article of clothing or leather upon which any of the semen fell (Lev. xv. 18); so that it was necessary for the purpose of purification that the things which a man had on should all be washed. David explains, with evident allusion to this provision, that the young

1 When Mark (ii. 20) assigns this action to the days of Abiathar the high priest, the statement rests upon an error of memory, in which Ahimelech is confounded with Abiathar.

men's things were holy, i.e. perfectly clean, for the purpose of assuring the priest that there was not the smallest Levitical uncleanness attaching to them. The clause which follows is to be taken as conditional, and as supposing a possible case: " and if it is an unholy way." TH, the way that David was going with his young men, i.e. his purpose or enterprise, by which, however, we are not to understand his request of holy bread from Ahimelech, but the performance of the king's commission of which he had spoken. ^ *\K\ lit. besides (there is) also that, = moreover there is also the fact, that it becomes holy through the instrument; i.e., as O. v. Gerlach has correctly explained it, " on the supposition of the important royal mission, upon which David pretended to be sent, through me as an ambassador of the anointed of the Lord," in which, at any rate, David's meaning really was, "the way was sanctified before God, when he, as His chosen servant, the preserver of the true kingdom of God in Israel, went to him in his extremitv." That v3 in the sense of instrument is also applied to men, is evident from Isa. xiii. 5 and Jer. 1. 25. — Yer. 6. The priest then gave him (what was) holy, namely the shew-loaves " that were taken from before Jehovah" i.e. from the holy table, upon which they had lain before Jehovah for seven days (via1. Lev. xxiv. 6-9). — In ver. 7 there is a parenthetical remark introduced, which was of great importance in relation to the consequences of this occurrence. There at the sanctuary there was a man of Saul's servants, "WJtt, i.e. " kept back (shut off) before Jehovah:" i.e. at the sanctuary of the tabernacle, either for the sake of purification or as a proselyte, who wished to be received into the religious communion of Israel, or because of supposed leprosy, according to Lev. xiii. 4. His name was Doegthe Edomite, D^inn T'SNj " the strong one (i.e. the overseer) of the herdsmen of Saul."1 — Ver. 8.

1 The Septuagint translators have rendered these words ui/xav roLg vjptowvc, " feeding the mules of Saul;" and accordingly in ch. xxii. 9 also they have changed Saul's servants into mules, in accordance with which Thenius makes Doeg the upper herdsman of Saul. But it is very evident that the text of the LXX. is nothing more than a subjective interpretation of the expression before us, and does not presuppose any other text, from the simple fact that all the other ancient versions are founded upon the Hebrew text both here and in ch. xxii. 9, including even the Vulgate (potentissimus pastorum); and the clause contained in some of the MSS. of the Vulgate (hie pascebat mulas Saul) is nothing more than a gloss that has

David also asked Ahimelech whether he had not a sword or a javelin at hand; "for I have neither brought my sword nor my (other) weapons with me, because the affair of the king was pressing;' i.e. very urgent, nnJ; aw, X*7-j literally, compressed.— Ver. 9. The priest replied, that there was only the sword of Goliath, whom David slew in the terebinth valley (ch. xvii. 2), wrapped up in a cloth hanging behind theephod (the high priest's shoulderdress),— a sign of the great worth attached to this dedicatory offering. He could take that. David accepted it, as a weapon of greater value to him than any other, because he had not only taken this sword as booty from the Philistine, but had cut off the head of Goliath with it (see ch. xvii. 51). When and how this sword had come into the tabernacle is not known (see the remarks on ch. xvii. 54). The form TO for n?3 is only met with here. On the PisJca, see at Josh. iv. 1.

Vers. 10-15. David with Achish at G 'ath.— David fled from Nob to Achish of Gath. This Philistian king is called Abimelech in the heading of Ps. xxxiv., according to the standing title of the Philistian princes at Gath. The fact that David fled at once out of the land, and that to the Philistines at Gath, may be accounted for from the great agitation into which he had been thrown by the information he had received from Jonathan concerning Saul's implacable hatred. As some years had passed since the defeat of Goliath, and the conqueror of Goliath was probably not personally known to many of the Philistines, he might hope that he should not be recognised in Gath, and that he might receive a welcome there with his few attendants, as a fugitive who had been driven away by Saul, the leading foe of the Philistines.1 But in this he crept in from the Itala; and this is still more obvious in ch. xxii. 9, where 3?tt WIT! is applicable enough to nag, but is altogether unsuitable in connection with niQ, since 3W is no more applied in Hebrew to herdsmen or keepers of animals, than we should think of speaking of presidents of asses, horses, etc. Moreover, it is not till the reign of David that we read of mules being used as riding animals by royal princes (2 Sam. xiii. 29, xviii. 9); and they are mentioned for the first time as beasts of burden, along with asses, camels, and oxen, in 1 Chron. xii. 40, where they are said to have in ployed by the northern tribes to carry provisions to Hebron to the festival held at the recognition of David as king. Before David's time the sons of princes rode upon asses {rid. Judg. x. 4, xii. 14).

was mistaken. He was recognised at once by the courtiers of Achish. They said to their prince, u Is not this David the king of the land? Have they not swig in circles, Said hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands? " (cf. ch. xviii. 6, 7.) u King of the land" they call David, not because his anointing and divine election were known to them, but on account of his victorious deeds, which had thrown Saul entirely into the shade. Whether they intended by these words to celebrate David as a hero, or to point him out to their prince as a dangerous man, cannot be gathered from the words themselves, nor can the question be decided with certainty at all (cf. ch. xxix. 5). — Ver. 12. But David took these words to heart, and was in great fear of Achish, lest he should treat him as an enemy, and kill him. In order to escape this danger, uhe disguised his understanding (i.e. pretended to be out of his mind) in their eyes (i.e. before the courtiers of Achish), behaved insanely under their hands (when they tried to hold him as a madman), scribbled upon the door-ioings, and let his spittle run down into his beard." The suffix to ^W] is apparently superfluous, as the object, to^DTM, follows immediately afterwards. But it may be accounted for from the circumstantiality of the conversation of every-day life, as in 2 Sam. xiv. (3, and (though these cases are not perfectly parallel) Ex. ii. 6, Prov. v. 22, Ezek. x. 3 (cf. Gesenius' Gramm. § 121, 6, Anm. 3). irMj from njFi? to make signs, i.e. to scribble. The Sept.

credibility of the narrative before us, namely, that David would certainly not have taken refuge at once with the Philistines, but would only have gone to them in the utmost extremity (Thenius). It is impossible to see how the words "he fled that day for fear of Saul" (ver. 11) are to prove that this section originally stood in a different connection, and are only arbitrarily inserted here (Thenius). Unless we tear away the words in the most arbitrary manner from the foregoing word nils1, they not only appear quite suitable, but even necessary, since David's journey to Abimelech was not a flight, or at all events it is not described as a flight in the text; and David's flight from Saul really began with his departure from Nob. Still less can the legendary origin of this account be inferred from the fact that some years afterwards David really did take refuge with Achish in the Philistian country (ch. xxvii. and xxix.), or the conjecture sustained that this is only a distorted legend of that occurrence. For if the later sojourn of David with Achish be a historical fact, the popular legend could not possibly have assumed a form so utterly different as the account before us, to say nothing of the fact that this occurrence has a firm historical support. in Ps. xxxiv. 1.

and Vulgate render it irvfiTrdvcQiv, impingebat, he drummed, smote with his fists upon the wings of the door, which would make it appear as if they had read *)JJJ (from ^1?^), which seems more suitable to the condition of a madman whose saliva ran out of his mouth. — Vers. 14, 15. By this dissimulation David escaped the danger which threatened him; for Achish thought him mad, and would have nothing to do with him. " Wherefore do ye bring him to me? Have I need of madmen, that ye have brought this man hither to rave against me? Shall this man come into my houseV Thus Achish refused to receive him into his house. But whether he had David taken over the border, or at any rate out of the town; or whether David went away of his own accord; or whether he was taken away by his servants, and then hurried as quickly as possible out of the land of the Philistines, is not expressly mentioned, as being of no importance in relation to the principal object of the narrative. All that is stated is, that he departed thence, and escaped to the cave Adullam.

david's wanderings in judah and moab. massacre of priests by saul. — chap. xxii.

Vers. 1-5. Having been driven away by Achish, the Philistian king at Gath, David took refuge in the cave Adullam, where his family joined him. The cave Adullam is not to be sought for in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem, as some have inferred from 2 Sam. xxiii. 13, 14, but near the town Adullam, which is classed in Josh. xv. 35 among the towns in the lowlands of Judah, and at the foot of the mountains; though it has not yet been traced with any certainty, as the caves of Deir Dubbaiij of which Van de Velde speaks, are not the only large caves on the western slope of the mountains of Judah. When his brethren and his father's house, i.e. the rest of his family, heard of his being there, they came down to him, evidently because, they no longer felt themselves safe in Bethlehem from Saul's revenge. The cave Adullam cannot have been more than throe hours from Bethlehem, as Socoh and Jarmuth, which were near to Adullam, were only three hours and a half from Jerusalem (see at Josh. xii. 15). — Ver. 2. There a large number of malcontents gathered together round David, viz. all who were in distress, and all who had creditors, and all who were embittered in spirit (bitter of soul), i.e. people who were dissatisfied with the general state of affairs or with the government of Saul, — about four hundred men, whose leader he became. David must in all probability have stayed there a considerable time. The number of those who went over to him soon amounted to six hundred men (xxiii. 13), who were for the most part brave and reckless, and who ripened into heroic men under the command of David during his long flight. A list of the bravest of them is given in 1 Chron. xii., with which compare 2 Sam. xxiii. 13 sqq. and 1 Chron. xi. 15 sqq. — Vers. 3-5. David proceeded thence to Mizpeh in Moab, and placed his parents in safety with the king of the Moabites. His ancestress Ruth was a Moabitess. Mizpeh: literally a watch-tower or mountain height commanding a very extensive prospect. Here it is probably a proper name, belonging to a mountain fastness on the high land, which bounded the Arboth Moab on the eastern side of the Dead Sea, most likely on the mountains of Abarim or Pisgah (Deut. xxxiv. 1), and which could easily be reached from the country round Bethlehem, by crossing the Jordan near the point where it entered the Dead Sea. As David came to the king of Moab, the Moabites had probably taken possession of the most southerly portion of the eastern lands of the Israelites; we may also infer this from the fact that, according to ch. xiv. 47, Saul had also made war upon Moab, for Mizpeh Moab is hardly to be sought for in the actual land of the Moabites, on the south side of the Arnon (Mojeb). D2PIK... Kr*8% "May my father and my mother go out with you? The construction of N£ with HK is a pregnant one: to go out of their home and stay with you (Moabites). " Till J know what God will do to me? Being well assured of the justice of his cause, as contrasted with the insane persecutions of Saul, David confidently hoped that God would bring his fliglvt to an end. His parents remained with the king of Moab as long as David was m^ttS"^ i.e. upon the mountain height, or citadel. This can only refer to the place of refuge which David had found at Mizpeh Moab. For it is perfectly clear from ver. 5, where the prophet Gad calls upon David not to remain any longer nTi¥?p2? but to return to the land of Judah, that the expression cannot refer either to the cave Adullam, or to any other place of refuge in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem. The prophet Gad had probably come to David from Samuel's school of prophets; but whether he remained with David from that time forward to assist him with his counsel in his several undertakings, cannot be determined, on account of our want of information. In 1 Chron. xxi. 9 he is called David's seer. In the last year of David's reign he announced to him the punishment which would fall upon him from God on account of his sin in numbering the people (2 Sam. xxiv. 11 sqq.); and according to 1 Chron. xxix, 29 he also wrote the acts of David. In consequence of this admonition, David returned to Judah, and went into the wood Ilareth, a woody region on the mountains of Judah, which is never mentioned again, and the situation of which is unknown. According to the counsels of God, David was not to seek for refuge outside the land; not only that he might not be estranged from his fatherland and the people of Israel, which would have been opposed to his calling to be the king of Israel, but also that he might learn to trust entirely in the Lord as his only refuge

Vers. 6-23. Murder of the Priests by Saul. — Vers. 6 sqq. When Saul heard that David and the men with him were known, i.e. that information had been received as to their abode or hiding-place, he said to his servants when they were gathered round him, " Hear" etc. The words, u and Saul icas sitting at Gibeah under the tamarisk upon the heiglit" etc., show that what follows took place in a solemn conclave of all the servants of Saul, who were leathered round their king to deliberate upon the more important affairs of the kingdom. This sitting took place at Gibeah, the residence of Saul, and in the open air " under the tamarisk." n91?? upon the height, not u under a grove at Ram ah " (Luther); for Itamah is an appellative, and n»"a which belongs to /BW nnn is a more minute definition of the locality, which is indicated by the definite article (the tamarisk upon the height) as the well-known place whore Saul's deliberative assemblies were held. From the king's address ("hear, ye Benjaminites; will t/w son of Ji ■ also give you all fields arid vineyards?") we perceive that Saul had chosen his immediate attendants from the members of his own tribe, and had rewarded their services ri<dit royally.

DD?pp"D3 is placed first for the sake of emphasis, " You Benjaminites also" and not rather to Judahites, the members of his own tribe. The second E?w (before 0^) is not a dative; but b merely serves to give greater prominence to the object which is placed at the head of the clause: As for all of you, ivill he make (you: see Ewald, § 310, a). — Ver. 8. u That you have all of you conspired against me, and no one informs me of it, since my son makes a covenant with the son of Jesse" J"n?2, lit. at the making of a covenant. Saul may possibly have heard something of the facts related in ch. xx. 12-17; at the same time, his words may merely refer to Jonathan's friendship with David, which was well known to him. n£nT*?:, " and no one of you is grieved on my account... that my son has set my servant (David) as a Her in wait against me" i.e. to plot against my life, and wrest the throne to himself. We may see from this, that Saul was carried by his suspicions very far beyond the actual facts. u As at this day:" cf. Deut. viii. 18, etc. — Vers. 9, 10. The Edomite Doeg could not refrain from yielding to this -appeal, and telling Saul what he had seen when staying at Nob; namely, that Ahimelech had inquired of God for David, and given him food as well as Goliath's sword. For the fact itself, see ch. xxi. 1-10, where there is no reference indeed to his inquiring of God; though it certainly took place, as Ahimelech (ver. 15) does not disclaim it. Doeg is here designated 3Stt, " the superintendent of SauVs servants" so that apparently he had been invested with the office of marshal of the court. — Vers. 11 sqq. On receiving this information, Saul immediately summoned the priest Ahimelech and " all his father s house" i.e. the whole priesthood, to Nob, to answer for what they had done. To Saul's appeal, " Why have ye conspired against me, thou and the son of Jesse, by giving him bread?" Ahimelech, who was not conscious of any such crime, since David had come to him with a false pretext, and the priest had probably but very little knowledge of what took place at court, replied both calmly and worthily (ver. 14): " And who of all thy servants is so faithful (proved, attested, as. in Num. xii. 7) as David, and son-in-law of the king, and having access to thy private audience, and honoured in thy house?" The true explanation of ^nynwn'bx "ID may be gathered from a comparison of 2 Sam. xxiii. 23 and 1 Chron. xi. 25, where WW*? occurs again, as the context clearly shows, in the sense of a privy councillor of the king, who hears his personal revelations and converses with him about them, so that it corresponds to our " audience." "HD, lit. to turn aside from the way, to go in to any one, or to look after anything (Ex. iii. 3; Ruth iv. 1, etc.); hence in the passage before us " to have access," to be attached to a person. This is the explanation given by Gesenius and most of the modern expositors, whereas the early translators entirely misunderstood the passage, though they have given the meaning correctly enough at 2 Sam. xxiii. 23. But if this was the relation in which David stood to Saul, — and he had really done so for a long time, — there was nothing wrong in what the high priest had done for him; but he had acted according to the best of his knowledge, and quite conscientiously as a faithful subject of the king. Ahimelech then added still further (ver. 15): u Did I then begin to inquire of God for him this day?" i.e. was it the first time that I had obtained the decision of God for David concerning important enterprises, which he had to carry out in the service of the king? " Far be from me" sc. any conspiracy against the king, like that of which I am accused. " Let not the king lay it as a burden upon thy servant, my whole father s house (the omission of the cop. 1 before rV3"?D3 may be accounted for from the excitement of the speaker); for thy servant knows not the least of all this." nNr^3, of all that Saul had charged him with. — Vers. 16, 17.

Notwithstanding this truthful assertion of his innocence, Saul pronounced sentence of death, not only upon the high priest, but upon all the priests at Nob, and commanded his D'>*"J, " runners" i.e. halberdiers, to put the priests to death, because, as he declared in his wrath, " their hand is with David (i.e. because they side with David), and because they knew that he fled and did not tell me." Instead of the C/wthibh WS, it is probably more correct to read ^TX, according to the Keri, although the Chethibh may be accounted for if necessary from a sudden transition from a direct to an indirect form of address: " and (as he said) had not told him" This sentence was so cruel, and so nearly bordering upon madness, that the halberdiers would not carry it out, but refused to lay hands upon " the priests of Jehovah." — Ver. 18. Saul then commanded Doeg to cut down the priests, and he at once performed the bloody deed. On the expression " icearing the linen ephod" compare the remarks at ch. ii. 18. The allusion to the priestly clothing, like the repetition of the expression "priests of Jehovah " serves to bring out into its true light the crime of the bloodthirsty Saul and his executioner Doeg. The very dress which the priests wore, as the consecrated servants of Jehovah, ought to have made them shrink from the commission of such a murder. — Ver. 19. But not content with even this revenge, Saul had the whole city of Nob destroyed, like a city that was laid under the ban (yid. Deut. xiii. 13 sqq.). So completely did Saul identify his private revenge with the cause of Jehovah, that he avenged a supposed conspiracy against his own person as treason against Jehovah the God-king. — Vers. 20-23. The only one of the whole body of priests who escaped this bloody death was a son of Ahimelech, named Abiathar, wrho "fled after David" i.e. to David the fugitive, and informed him of the barbarous vengeance which Saul had taken upon the priests of the Lord. Then David recognised and confessed his guilt. " / knew that day that the Edomite Doeg was there, that he (i.e. that as the Edomite Doeg was there, he) would tell Saul: lam the cause of all the souls of thy father s house? i.e. of their death. 22D is used here in the sense of being the cause of a thing, which is one of the meanings of the verb in the Arabic and Talmudic (yid. Ges. Lex. s.v.). "Stay with me, fear not; for he who seeks my life seeks thy life: for thou art safe with me." The abstract mishmereth, protection, keeping (Ex. xii. 6, xvi. 33, 34), is used for the concrete, in the sense of protected, well kept. The thought is the following: x\s no other is seeking thy life than Saul, who also wants to kill me, thou mayest stay with me without fear, as I am sure of divine protection. David spoke thus in the firm belief that the Lord would deliver him from his foe, and give him the kingdom. The action of Saul, which had just been reported to him, could only strengthen him in this belief, as it was a sign of the growing hardness of Saul, which must accelerate his destruction.

DAVID DELIVERS KEILAII. HE IS BETRAYED BY THE ZIPHITES, AND MARVELLOUSLY SAVED FROM SAUL IN THE DESERT OF MAON. — CHAI\ XXIII

The following events show how, on the one hand, the Lord gave pledges to His servant David that he would eventually become king, but yet on the other hand plunged him into deeper and deeper trouble, that He might refine him and train him to be a kin£ after His own heart. Saul's ra^e against the priests at Nob not only drove the high priest into David's camp, but procured for David the help of the " light and right" of the high priest in all his undertakings. Moreover, after the prophet Gad had called David back to Judah, an attack of the Philistines upon Keilah furnished him with the opportunity to show himself to the people as their deliverer. And although this enterprise of his exposed him to fresh persecutions on the part of Saul, who was thirsting for revenge, he experienced in connection therewith not only the renewal of Jonathan's friendship on this occasion, but a marvellous interposition on the part of the faithful covenant God.

Vers. 1-14. Kescue of Keilah. — After his return to the mountains of Judah, David received intelligence that Philistines, i.e. a marauding company of these enemies of Israel, were fighting against Keilah, and plundering the threshing-floors, upon which the corn that had been reaped was lying ready for threshing. Keilah belonged to the towns of the lowlands of Judah (Josh. xv. 44); and although it has not yet been discovered, was certainly very close to the Philistian frontier. — Ver. 2. After receiving this information, David inquired of the Lord (through the Urim and Thummim of the high priest) whether he should go and smite these Philistines, and received an affirmative answer. — Vers. 3-5. But his men said to him, " Behold, here in Judah we are in fear (i.e. are not safe from Saul's pursuit); how shall ice go to Keilah against the raid's of the Philistines V In order, therefore, to infuse courage into them, he inquired of the Lord again, and received the assurance from God, " / will give the Philistines into tin/ hand."'' lie then proceeded with his men, fought against the Philistines, drove off their cattle, inflicted a severe defeat upon them, and thus delivered the inhabitants of Keilah. in ver. 6 a supplementary remark is added in explanation of the expression u inquired of the Lord" to the effect that, when Abiathar fled to David to Keilah, the ephod had come to him. The words " to David to Keilah " are not to be understood as signifying that Abiathar did not come to David till he was in Keilah, but that when he fled after David (ch. xxii. 20), he met with him as he was already preparing for the march to Keilah, and immediately proceeded with him thither. For whilst it is not stated in ch. xxii. 20 that Abiathar came to David in the wood of Hareth, but the place of meeting is left indefinite, the fact that David had already inquired of Jehovah (i.e. through the oracle of the high priest) with reference to the march to Keilah, compels us to assume that Abiathar had come to him before he left the mountains for Keilah. So that the brief expression " to David to Keilah," which is left indefinite because of its brevity, must be interpreted in accordance with this fact. — Vers. 7-9. As soon as Saul received intelligence of David's march to Keilah, he said, " God has rejected him (and delivered him) into my hand." "13J does not mean simply to look at, but also to find strange, and treat as strange, and then absolutely to reject (Jer. xix. 4, as in the Arabic in the fourth conjugation). This is the meaning here, where the construction with *T3 is to be understood as a pregnant expression: "rejected and delivered into my hand" (yid. Ges. Lex. s.v.). The early translators have rendered it quite correctly according to the sense "^p, Trkirpanev, tradidit, without there being any reason to suppose that they read "^D instead of "i?J. " For lie hath shut himself in, to come (= coming, or by coming) into a city with gates and bolts." — Ver. 8. He therefore called all the people (i.e. men of war) together to war, to go down to Keilah, and to besiege David and his men. — Vers. 9 sqq. But David heard that Saul was preparing mischief against him (lit. forging, ^^[}, from Knn: Prov. iii. 29, vi. 14, etc.), and he inquired through the oracle of the high priest whether the inhabitants of Keilah would deliver him up to Saul, and whether Saul would come down; and as both questions were answered in the affirmative, he departed from the city with his six hundred men, before Saul carried out his plan. It is evident from vers. 9-12, that when the will of God was sought through the Urim and Thummim, the person making the inquiry placed the matter before God in prayer, and received an answer; but always to one particular question. For when David had asked the two questions given in ver. 11, he received the answer to the second question only, and had to ask the first again (ver. 12). — Ver. 13. " They went whithersoever they could go" (lit. " they wandered about where they wandered about"), i.e. wherever they could go without danger. — Ver. 14. David retreated into the desert (of Judah), to the mountain heights (that were to be found there), and remained on the mountains in the desert of Ziph. The "desert of Judah" is the desert tract between the mountains of Judah and the Dead Sea, in its whole extent, from the northern boundary of the tribe of Judah to the Wady Fikreh in the south (see at.Tosh. xv. 61). Certain portions of this desert, however, received different names of their own, according to the names of different towns on the border of the mountains and desert. The desert of Ziph was that portion of the desert of Judah which was near to and surrounded the town of Ziph, the name of which has been retained in the ruins of Tell Zif an hour und three-quarters to the south-east of Hebron (see at Josh. xv. 55). — Ver. 14b. " And Saul sought him all the days, but God delivered him not into his hand." This is a general remark, intended to introduce the accounts which follow, of the various attempts made by Saul to get David into his power. uAll the days" i.e. as long as Saul lived.

Vers. 15-28. David in the Deserts of Ztpii and Maon. — The history of David's persecution by Saul is introduced in vers. 15-18, with the account of an attempt made by the nobleminded prince Jonathan, in a private interview with his friend David, to renew his bond of friendship with him, and strengthen David by his friendly words for the sufferings that yet awaited him. Vers. 15, 16 are to be connected together so as to form one period: u When David saw that Saul was conic out... and David was in the desert of Ziph, Jonathan rose up and went to David info the wood." "TChh, from Bnhj with n paragogic, signifies a wood or thicket; here, however, it is probably a proper name for a district in the desert of Ziph that was overgrown with wood or bushes, and where David was stopping at that time. " There is no trace of this wood now. The land lost its ornament of trees centuries ago through the desolating hand of man" (v. de Velde). " And strengthened his hand in God" i.e. strengthened his heart, not by supplies, or by money, or any subsidy of that kind, but by consolation drawn from his innocence, and the promises of God (vid. Judg. ix. 24; Jer. xxiii. 14). " Fear not" said Jonathan to him, "for the hand of Saul my father ivill not reach thee; and thou ivilt become king over Israel^ and I will be the second to thee; and Saul my father also knoivs* that it is so." Even though Jonathan had heard nothing from David about his anointing, he could learn from David's course thus far, and from his own father's conduct, that David would not be overcome, but would possess the sovereignty after the death of Saul. Jonathan expresses here, as his firm conviction, what he has intimated once before, in ch. xx. 13 sqq.; and with the most loving self-denial entreats David, when he shall be king, to let him occupy the second place in the kingdom. It by no means follows from the last words (" Saul my father knoweth"), that Saul had received distinct information concerning the anointing of David, and his divine calling to be king. The words merely contain the thought, he also sees that it will come. The assurance of this must have forced itself involuntarily upon the mind of Saul, both from his own rejection, as foretold by Samuel, and also from the marvellous success of David in all his undertakings. — Ver. 18. After these encouraging wrords, they two made a covenant before Jehovah: i.e. they renewed the covenant which they had already made by another solemn oath; after which Jonathan returned home, but David remained in the wood.

The treachery of the Ziphites forms a striking contrast to Jonathan's treatment of David. They went up to Gibeah to betray to Saul the fact that David wras concealed in the wood upon their mountain heights, and indeed " upon the hill Hachilah, which lies to the south of the ivaste." The hill of Ziph is a flattened hill standing by itself, of about a hundred

feet in height. u There is no spot from which you can obtain a better view of David's wanderings backwards and forwards in the desert than from the hill of Ziph, which affords a true panorama. The Ziphites could see David and his men moving to and fro in the mountains of the desert of Ziph, and could also perceive how he showed himself in the distance upon the hill Ilachilah on the south side of Ziph (which lies to the right by the desert); whereupon they sent as quickly as possible to Saul, and betrayed to him the hiding-place of his enemy" (v.

de Velde, ii. pp. 104-5). Jeshimon does not refer here to the waste land on the north-eastern coast of the Dead Sea, as in Num. xxi. 20, xxiii. 28, but to the western side of that sea, which is also desert. — Ver. 20 reads literally thus: " And now, according to all the desire of thy soul, 0 king, to come down (from Gibeah, which stood upon higher ground), come down, and it is in us to deliver him (David) into the hand of the king." — Ver. 21. For this treachery Saul blessed them: u Be blessed of the Lord, that ye have compassion upon me." In his evil conscience he suspected David of seeking to become his murderer, and therefore thanked God in his delusion that the Ziphites had had compassion upon him, and shown him David's hidingplace. — Ver. 22. In his anxiety, however, lest David should escape him after all, he charged them, " Go, and give still further heed (pn without 2?, as in Judg. xii. 6), and reconnoitre and look at his place where his foot cometh (this simply serves as a more precise definition of the pronominal suffix in toipp, his place), who hath seen him there (sc. let them inquire into this, that they may not be deceived by uncertain or false reports): for it is told me that he dealeth very subtilly." — Ver. 23. They were to search him out in every corner (the object to yn must be supplied from the context). u And come ye again to me with the certainty (i.e. when you have got some certain intelligence concerning his hiding-place), that I may go with you; and if he is in the land, I will search him out among all the thousands (i.e. families) of Judah." — Ver. 24. With this answer the Ziphites arose and " went to Ziph before Saul " (who would speedily follow with his warriors); but David had gone farther in the meantime, and was with his men " in the desert of Maon, in the steppe to the south of the wilderness." Maon, now Main, is about three hours and three-quarters S.S.E. of Hebron (see at Josh. xv. 55), and therefore only two hours from Ziph, from which it is visible. u The table-land appears to terminate here: nevertheless the principal ridge of the southern mountains runs for a considerable distance towards the south-west, whereas towards the south-east the land falls off more and more into a lower table-land." This is the Arabah or steppe on the right of the wilderness (v. de Velde, ii. pp. 107-8). — Ver. 25. Having been informed of the arrival of Saul and his men (warriors), David went down the rock, and remained in the desert of Maon. " The rock " is probably the conical mountain of Main (Maon\ the top of which is now surrounded with ruins, probably remains of a tower (Robinson, Pal. ii. p. 194), as the rock from which David came down can only have been the mountain (ver. 26), along one side of which David went with his men whilst Saul and his warriors went on the other, namely when Saul pursued him into the desert of Maon. — Vers. 26,

27. " And David was anxiously concerned to escape from Saul, and Saul and his men were encircling David and his men to seize them; but a messenger came to Saul.... Then Said turned from pursuing David" The two clauses, " for Saul and his men" (ver. 26&), and "there came a messenger" (ver. 27), are the circumstantial clauses by which the situation is more clearly defined: the apodosis to in W1 does not follow till 2K>J1_ in ver.

28. The apodosis cannot begin with "^pErt, because the verb does not stand at the head. David had thus almost inextricablv fallen into the hands of Saul; but God saved him by the fact that at that very moment a messenger arrived with the intelligence, " Hasten and go (come), for Philistines have fallen into the land," and thus called Saul away from any further pursuit of David. — Ver. 28. From this occurrence the place received the name of Sela-hammahlekoth, u rock of smoothnesses" i.e. of slipping away or escaping, from P^n, in the sense of being smooth. This explanation is at any rate better supported than " rock of divisions, i.e. the rock at which Saul and David were separated" (Clericus), since P?n does not mean to separate.

Vers. 1-8. Whilst Saul had gone against the Philistines, David left this dangerous place, and went to the mountain heights of Engedi, i.e. the present Ain-jidy (goat-fountain), in the middle of the western coast of the Dead Sea (see at Josh. xv. 62), which he could reach from Maon in six or seven hours. The soil of the neighbourhood consists entirely of limestone; but the rocks contain a considerable admixture of chalk and flint. Round about there rise bare conical mountains, and even ridges of from two to four hundred feet in height, which mostly run down to the sea. The steep mountains are intersected by wadys running down in deep ravines to the sea. u On all sides the country is full of caverns, which might then serve as lurking-places for David and his men, as they do for outlaws at the present day" (Rob. Pal. p. 203). — Vers. 1, 2. When Saul had returned from his march against the Philistines, and was informed of this, he set out thither with three thousand picked men to search for David and his men in the wild-goat rocks. The expression " rocks of the wild goats " is probably not a proper name for some particular rocks, but a general term applied to the rocks of that locality on account of the number of wild goats and chamois that were to be found in all that region, as mountain goats are still (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 204). — Ver. 3. When Saul came to the sheep-folds by the way, where there was a cave, he entered it to cover his feet, whilst David and his men sat behind in the cave. V. de Velde (R. ii. p. 74) supposes the place, where the sheep-folds by the roadside were, to have been the Wady Chareitun, on the south-west of the Frank mountain, and to the north-east of Tekoah, a very desolate and inaccessible valley. " Rocky, precipitous walls, which rise up one above another for many hundred feet, form the sides of this defile. Stone upon stone, and cliff above cliff, without any sign of being habitable, or of being capable of affording even a halting-place to anything but wild goats." Near the ruins of the village of Chareitun, hardly five minutes' walk to the east, there is a large cave or chamber in the rock, with a very narrow entrance entirely concealed by stones, and with many side vaults in which the deepest darkness reigns, at least to any one who has just entered the limestone vaults from the dazzling light of day. It may be argued in favour of the conjecture that this is the cave which Saul entered, and at the back of which David and his men were concealed, that this cave is on the road from Bethlehem to Ain-jidy, and one of the largest caves in that district, if not the largest of all, and that, according to Pococke (Beschr. des Morgenl. ii. p. 61), the Franks call it a labyrinth, the Arabs Elmaama, i.e. hidingplace, whilst the latter relate how at one time thirty thousand people hid themselves in it " to escape an evil wind," in all probability the simoom. The only difficulty connected with this supposition is the distance from Ain-jidy, namely about four or five German miles (fifteen or twenty English), and the nearness of Tekoah, according to which it belongs to the desert of Tekoah rather than to that of Engedi. " To cover his feet " is a euphemism according to most of the ancient versions, as in Judg. iii. 24, for performing the necessities of nature, as it is a custom in the East to cover the feet. It does not mean " to sleep," as it is rendered in this passage in the Peschito, and also by Michael is and others; for although what follows may seem to favour this, there is apparently no reason why any such euphemistic expression should have been chosen for sleep. a The sides of the cave:" i.e. the outermost or farthest sides. — Yer. 4. Then David's men said to him, " See, this is the day of which Jehovah hath said to thee. Behold, I give thine enemy into thy hand, and do to him ivhat seemeth good to thee" Although these words might refer to some divine oracle which David had received through a prophet, Gad for example, what follows clearly shows that David had received no such oracle; and the meaning of his men was simply this, " Behold, to-day is the day when God is saying to thee:" that is to say, the speakers regarded the leadings of providence by which Saul had been brought into David's power as a divine intimation to David himself to take this opportunity of slaying his deadly enemy, and called this intimation a word of Jehovah. David then rose up, and cut off the edge of Said's cloak privily. Saul had probably laid the meil on one side, which rendered it possible for David to cut off a piece of it unobserved. — Ver. 5. But his heart smote him after he had done it; i.e. his conscience reproached him, because he regarded this as an injury done to the king himself. — Yer. 6. With all the greater firmness, therefore, did he repel the suggestions of his men: u Far be it to one from Jehovah (on Jehovah's account: see at Josh. xxii. 29), that (DK, a particle denoting an oath) / should do such a thing to my lord, the anointed of Jehovah, to stretch out my hand against him." These words of David show clearly enough that no word of Jehovah had come to him to do as he liked with Saul. — Yer. 7. Thus he kept back his people with words (V&W, verbis dilacere), and did not allow them to rise up against Saul, sc. to slay him.

Yers. 8-16. But when Saul had gone out of the cave, David went out, and called, " My lord king," that when the king looked round he might expostulate with him, with the deepest reverence, but yet with earnest words, that should sharpen his conscience as to the unfounded nature of his suspicion and the injustice of his persecution. a Why dost thou hearken to icords of men, ivho say, Behold, David seeketh thy hurt? Behold, this day thine eyes have seen that Jehovah hath given thee to-day into my hand in the cave, and they said C1*?^, thought) to kill thee, and I spared thee:" lit. it (mine eye) spared thee (cf. Gen. xlv. 20, Deut. vii. 16, etc., which show that *3*g is to be supplied). — Ver. 11. To confirm what he said, he then showed him the lappet of his coat which he had cut off, and said, " My father, seer In these words there is an expression of the childlike reverence and affection which David cherished towards the anointed of the Lord. a For that I cut off the lappet and did not kill thee, learn and see (from this) that (there is) not evil in my hand {i.e. that I do not go about for the purpose of injury and crime), and that I have not sinned against thee, as thou nevertheless lay est wait for my soul to destroy it." — Vers. 12, 13.

After he had proved to the king in this conclusive manner that he had no reason whatever for seeking his life, he invoked the Lord as judge between him and his adversary: u Jehovah will avenge me upon thee, hut my hand will not he against thee. As the proverb of the ancients (^iEnfpn is used collectively) says, Evil proceedeth from the evil, hut my hand shall not he upon, thee." The meaning is this: Only a wicked man could wish to avenge himself; I do not. — Yer. 14. And even if he should wish to attack the king, he did not possess the power. This thought introduces ver. 14: u After whom is the king of Israel gone out f After whom dost thou pursue? A dead dog, a single flea." By these similes David meant to describe himself as a perfectly harmless and insignificant man, of whom Saul had no occasion to be afraid, and whom the king of Israel ought to think it beneath his dignity to pursue. A dead dog cannot bite or hurt, and is an object about which a king ought not to trouble himself (cf. 2 Sam. ix. 8 and xvi. 9, where the idea of something contemptible is included). The point of comparison with a flea is the insignificance of such an animal (cf. eh. xxvi. 20). — Ver. 15. As Saul had therefore no good ground for persecuting David, the latter could very calmly commit his cause to the Lord God, that He might decide it as judge, and deliver him out of the hand of Saul: " Let Him look at it, and conduct my cause" etc. Vers. 16-22 These words made an impression upon Saul. David's conduct went to his heart, so that he wept aloud, and confessed to him: u Thou art more righteous than i, for thou hast shown me good, and I (have shown) thee evil; and thou hast given me a proof of this to-day." — Ver. 19. " If a man meet with his enemy, will he send him (let him go) in peace?" This sentence is to be regarded as a question, which requires a negative reply, and expresses the thought: When a man meets with an enemy, he does not generally let him escape without injury. But thou hast acted very differently towards me. This thought is easily supplied from the context, and what follows attaches itself to this: " The Lord repay thee good for what thou hast done to me this day" — Vers. 20, 21. This wish was expressed in perfect sincerity. David's behaviour towards him had conquered for the moment the evil demon of his heart, and completely altered his feelings. In this better state of mind he felt impelled even to give utterance to these words, " / know that thou wilt be king, and the sovereignty will have perpetuity in thy hand" Saul could not prevent this conviction from forcing itself upon him, after his own rejection and the failure of all that he attempted against David; and it was this which drove him to persecute David whenever the evil spirit had the upper hand in his soul. But now that better feelings had arisen in his mind, he uttered it without envy, and merely asked David to promise on oath that he would not cut off his descendants after his death, and seek to exterminate his name from his father's house. A name is exterminated when the whole of the descendants are destroyed, — a thing of frequent occurrence in the East in connection with a change of dynasties, and one which occurred again and again even in the kingdom of the ten tribes (yid. 1 Kings xv. 28 sqq., xvi. 11 sqq.; 2 Kings x.). — Ver. 22. When David had sworn this, Saul returned home. But David remained upon the mountain heights, because he did not regard the passing change in Saul's feelings as likely to continue. rniran (translated " the hold") is used here to denote the mountainous part of the desert of Judah; It is different in ch. xxii. 5.

Ver. 1. The death of Samuel is inserted here, because it occurred at that time. The fact that all Israel assembled together to his burial, and lamented him, i.e. mourned for him, was a sign that his labours as a prophet were recognised by the whole nation as a blessing for Israel. Since the days of Moses and Joshua, no man had arisen to whom the covenant nation owed so much as to Samuel, who has been justly called the reformer and restorer of the theocracy. They buried him " in his house at Ramah." The expression " his house" does not mean his burial-place or family tomb, nor his native place, but the house in which he lived, with the court belonging to it, where Samuel was placed in a tomb erected especially for him. After the death of Samuel, David went down into the desert of Paran, i.e. into the northern portion of the desert of Arabia, which stretches up to the mountains of Judah (see at Num. x. 12); most likely for no other reason than because he could no longer find sufficient means of subsistence for himself and his six hundred men in the desert of Judah.

Vers. 2-44. The following history of NabaPs folly, and of the wise and generous behaviour of his pious and intelligent wife Abigail towards David, shows how Jehovah watched over His servant David, and not only preserved him from an act of passionate excitement, which might have endangered his calling to be king of Israel, but turned the trouble into which he had been brought into a source of prosperity and salvation.

Vers. 2-13. At MaoiX) i.e. Main or the mountains of Judah (see at Josh. xv. 55), there lived a rich man (7fa|, great through property and riches), who had his establishment at Carmel. TU&VJQ, work, occupation, then establishment, possessions (cid. Ex. xxiii. 1G). Carmel is not the promontory of that name (Tlienius), but the present Kurmxd on the mountains of Judah, scarcely half an hour's journey to the north-west of Maon (see at Josh. xv. 55). This man possessed three thousand sheep and a thousand goats, and was at the sheep-shearing at Carmel. His name was Nabal (i.e. fool): this was hardly his proper name, but was a surname by which he was popularly designated on account of his folly. His wife Abigail was "of good understanding" Le.' intelligent, uand of beautiful figure;"

but the husband was " harsh and evil in his doings." He sprang from the family of Caleb. This is the rendering adopted by the Chaldee and Vulgate, according to the Keri ^73. The Chethibh is to be read to?3, " according to his heart;" though the LXX. (avOpcdiro^ icvvlkos) and Josephus, as well as the Arabic and Syriac, derive it from X>3, and understand it as referring to the dog-like, or shameless, character of the man. — Vers. 4, 5. When David heard in the desert (cf. ver. 1) that Nabal was shearing his sheep, which was generally accompanied with a festal meal (see at Gen. xxxviii. 12), he sent ten young men up to Carmel to him, and bade them wish him peace and prosperity in his name, and having reminded him of the friendly services rendered to his shepherds, solicit a present for himself and his people. Dw?)? pnb^ ask him after his welfare, i.e. greet him in a friendly maimer (cf. Ex. xviii. 7). The word *n? is obscure, and was interpreted by the early translators merely according to uncertain conjectures. The simplest explanation is apparently in vitam, long life, understood as a wish in the sense of "good fortune to you" (Luther, Maurer, etc.); although the word '•n in the singular can only be shown to have the meaning life in connection with the formula used in oaths, ^M '•n, etc. But even if *n must be taken as an adjective, it is impossible to explain TO in any other way than as an elliptical exclamation meaning " good fortune to the living man." For the idea that the word is to be connected with DJT1DK, " say to the living man," i.e. to the man if still alive, is overthrown by the fact that David had no doubt that Nabal was still living. The words which follow are also to be understood as a wish, " May thou and thy house, and all that is thine, be well!" After this salutation they were to proceed with the object of their visit: a And now I have heard that thou hast sheep-shearers. Now thy shepherds have been ivith ns; we have done them no harm (DvDn? as in Juclg. xviii. 7: on the form, see Gcs. § 53, 3, Anra. 6), and nothing was missed by them so long as they were in Carmel." TV hen living in the desert, David's men had associated with the shepherds of Nabal, rendered them various services, and protected them and their flocks against the southern inhabitants of the desert (the Bedouin Arabs); in return for which they may have given them food and information. Thus David proved himself a protector of his people even in his banishment. NGttM, "50 may the young men (those sent by David) find favour in thine eyes! for we have come to a good (i.e. a festive) day. Give, I pray, what thy hand findeth (i.e. as much as thou canst) to thy servant, and to thy son David.1' With the expression " thy son" David claims Nabal's fatherly goodwill. So far as the fact itself is concerned, " on such a festive occasion near a town or village even in our own time, an Arab sheikh of the neighbouring desert would hardly fail to put in a word either in person or by message; and his message both in form and substance would be only the transcript of that of David" (Robinson, Palestine, p. 201). — Ver. 9. David's messengers delivered their message to Nabal, ^^% a and sat down" sc. awaiting the fulfilment of their request. The rendering given by the Chaldee (^ipDS, cessaverunt loqui) and the Vulgate (siluerunt) is less suitable, and cannot be philologically sustained. The Septuagint, on the other hand, has koI aveTrrjSncre, " and he (Nabal) sprang up," as if the translators had read Dp^ (yid. LXX. at ch. xx. 34). This rendering, according to which the word belongs to the following clause, gives a very appropriate sense, if only, supposing that Dpjl really did stand in the text, the origin and general adoption of *IW1 could in any way be explained.— Ver. 10. Nabal refused the petitioners in the most churlish manner: " Who is David? who the son of Jesse?" i.e. what have I to do with David? " There be many servants nowa-days who tear away every one from his master." Thus, in order to justify his own covetousness, he set down David as a vagrant who had run away from his master. — Ver. 11. "And 7 should take my bread and my water (i.e. my food and drink), and my cattle,... and give them to men whom I do not know whence they areV **fx$% is a perfect with vav consec, and the whole sentence is to be taken as a question. — Vers. 12, 13. The messengers returned to David with this answer. The churlish reply could not fail to excite his anger. He therefore commanded his people to gird on the sword, and started with 400 men to take vengeance upon Nabal, whilst 200 remained behind with the things.

Vers. 14-31. However intelligible David's wrath may appear in the situation in which he was placed, it was not right before God, but a sudden burst of sinful passion, which was unseemly in a servant of God. By carrying out his intention, he would have sinned against the Lord and against His people. But the Lord preserved him from this sin by the fact that, just at the right time, Abigail, the intelligent and pious wife of Nabal, heard of the affair, and was able to appease the wrath of David by her immediate and kindly interposition. — Vers. 14, 15. Abigail heard from one of (Nabal's) servants what had taken place (T?.?, to wish any one prosperity and health, i.e. to salute, as in ch. xiii. 10; and W, from B\P, to speak wrathfully: on the form, see at ch. xv. 19 and xiv. 32), and also what had been praiseworthy in the behaviour of David's men towards Nabal's shepherds; how they had not only done them no injury, had not robbed them of anything, but had defended them all the while. " They were a ivall (i.e. a firm protection) round us by night and by day, as long as we were with them feeding the sheep" i.e. a wall of defence against attacks from the Bedouins living in the desert. — Ver. 17. " And novo" continued the servant, " know and see ivhat thou doest; for evil is determined (cf. ch. xx. 9) against our master and all his house: and he (Nabal) is a wicked man, that one cannot address him." — Vers. 18, 19. Then Abigail took as quickly as possible a bountiful present of provisions, — two hundred loaves, two bottles of wine, five prepared (i.e. slaughtered) sheep (n'l'OT, a rare form for rfaBW: see Ewald, § 189, a), five seahs (an ephah and two-thirds) of roasted grains (Kali: see ch. xvii. 17), a hundred B'ppy (dried grapes, i.e. raisin-cakes: Ital. simmuki), and two hundred fig-cakes (consisting of pressed figs joined together), — and sent these gifts laden upon asses on before her to meet David, whilst she herself followed behind to appease his anger by coming to meet him in a friendly manner, but without saying a word to her husband about what she intended to do. — Ver. 20. When she came down riding upon the ass by a hidden part of the mountain, David and his men came to meet her, so that she lighted upon them, "inn "inp? a hidden part of the mountain, was probably a hollow between two peaks of a mountain. This would explain the use of the word TV, to come down, with reference both to Abigail, who approached on the one side, and David, who came on the other. — Vers. 21 and 22 contain a circumstantial clause introduced parenthetically to explain what follows: but David had said,

Only for deception (i.e. for no other purpose than to be deceived in my expectation) have I defended all that belongs to this man (Nabal) in the desert, so that nothing of his was missed, and (for) he hath repaid me evil for good. God do so to the enemies of David, if I leave, etc.; i.e. " as truly as God will punish the enemies of David, so certainly will I not leave till the morning light, of all that belongeth to him, one that pisseth against the wall." This oath, in which the punishment of God is not called down upon the swearer himself (God do so to me), as it generally is, but upon the enemies of David, is analogous to that in ch. iii. 17, where punishment is threatened upon the person addressed, who is there made to swear; except that here, as the oath could not be uttered in the ears of the person addressed, upon whom it was to fall, the enemies generally are mentioned instead of u to thee." There is no doubt, therefore, as to the correctness of the text. The substance of this imprecation may be explained from the fact that David is so full of the consciousness of fighting and suffering for the cause of the kingdom of God, that he discerns in the insult heaped upon him by Nabal an act of hostility to the Lord and the cause of His kingdom. The phrase "l%i?3 PHSfo, mingens in parietem, is only met with in passages which speak of the destruction of a family or household to the very last man (viz., besides this passage, 1 Kings xiv. 10, xvi. 11, xxi. 21; 2 Kings ix. 8), and neither refers primarily to dogs, as Ephraem Syrus, Juda ben Karish, and others maintain; nor to the lowest class of men, as Winer, Maurer, and others imagine; nor to little boys, as L. de Dieu, Gesenius, etc., suppose; but, as we may see from the explanatory clause appended to 1 Kings xiv. 10, xxi. 21, 2 Kings ix. 8, to every male (guemcumque masculi generis hominem.: vid. Bochart, Hieroz. i. pp. 776 sqq., and Rodiger on Ges. Thes. pp. 1397-8). — Ver. 23 is connected with ver. 20. When Abigail saw David, she descended hastily from the ass, fell upon her face before him, bowed to the ground, and fell at his feet, saying, " Upon me, me, my lord, be the guilt; allow thy handmaid to reveal the thing to thee." She takes the guilt upon herself, because she hopes that David will not avenge it upon her. — Ver. 25. She prayed that David would take no notice of Nabal, for lie was what his name declared — a fool, and folly in him; but she (Abigail) had not seen the messengers of David. u The prudent woman uses a good argument; for a wise man should pardon a fool" (Seb. Schmidt). She then endeavours to bring David to a friendly state of mind by three arguments, introduced with nnyi (vers. 26, 27), before asking for forgiveness (ver. 28). She first of all pointed to the leadings of God, by which David had been kept from committing murder through her coming to meet him.1 "As truly as Jehovah liveth, and by the life of thy soul! yea, the Lord hath kept thee, that thou earnest not into blood-guiltiness, and thy hand helped thee" (i.e. and with thy hand thou didst procure thyself help). "^N, introducing her words, as in ch. xv. 20, lit. " as truly as thou livest, (so true is it) that," etc. In the second place, she points to the fact that God is the avenger of the wicked, by expressing the wish that all the enemies of David may become fools like Nabal; in connection with which it must be observed, in order to understand her words fully, that, according to the Old Testament representation, folly is a correlate of ungodliness, which inevitably brings down punishment.2 The predicate to the sentence " and they that seek evil to my lord" must be supplied from the preceding words, viz. " may they become just such fools." — Ver. 27. It is only in the third line that she finally mentions the present, but in such a manner that she does not offer it directly to David, but describes it as a gift for the men in his train. "And now this blessing (^^3. here and ch. xxx. 26, as in Gen. xxxiii. 11: cf. 77 evXoyia, 2 Cor. ix. 5, 6), which thine handmaid hath brought, let it be given to the young men in my lord's train" (lit. "at the feet of:" cf. Ex. xi. 8; Judg. iv. 10, etc.).— Ver. 28. The shrewd and pious woman supports her prayer for

1 " She founds her argument upon their meeting, which was so marvellously seasonable, that it might be easily and truly gathered from this fact that it had taken place through the providence of God; i.e. And now, because I meet thee so seasonably, do thou piously acknowledge with me the providence of God, which has so arranged all this, that innocent blood might not by chance be shed by thee." — Seb. Schmidt.

2 Seb. Schmidt has justly observed, that "she reminds David of the

promise of God. Not that she prophesies, but that she has gathered it from the general promises of the word of God. The promise referred to is, that whoever does good to his enemies, and takes no vengeance upon them, God himself will avenge him upon his enemies; according to the saying, Vengeance is mine, I will repay. And this is what Abigail says: And now thine enemies shall be as Nabal."

forgiveness of the wrong, which she takes upon herself, by promises of the rich blessing with which the Lord would recompense David. She thereby gives such clear and distinct expression to her firm belief in the divine election of David as king of Israel, that her words almost amount to prophecy: " For Jehovah will make my lord a lasting house (cf. ch. ii. 35; and for the fact itself, 2 Sam. vii. 8 sqq., where the Lord confirms this pious wish by His own promises to David himself); for my lord fighteth the xvars of Jehovah (vid. ch. xviii. 17), and evil is not discovered in thee thy whole life long" njn? evil, i.e. misfortune, mischief; for the thought that he might also be preserved from wrong-doing is not expressed till ver. 31. " All thy days," lit. a from thy days," i.e. from the beginning of thy life. — Ver. 29. "And should any one rise up to pursue thee,... the soul of my lord will be bound up in the bundle of the living with the Lord thy God." The metaphor is taken from the custom of binding up valuable things in a bundle, to prevent their being injured. The words do not refer primarily to eternal life with God in heaven, but only to the safe preservation of the righteous on this earth in the grace and fellowship of the Lord. But whoever is so hidden in the gracious fellowship of the Lord in this life, that no enemy can harm him or injure his life, the Lord will not allow to perish, even though temporal death should come, but will then receive him into eternal life. " But the soul of thine enemies. He will hurl away in the cup of the sling." " The cup (caph: cf. Gen. xxxii. 26) of the sling" was the cavity in which the stone was placed for the purpose of hurling. — Vers. 30, 31. Abigail concluded her intercession with the assurance that the forgiveness of Nabal's act would be no occasion of anguish of heart to David when he should have become prince over Israel, on account of his having shed innocent blood and helped himself, and also with the hope that he would remember her. From the words, " When Jehovah shall do to my lord according to all the good that lie hath spoken concerning him, and shall make thee prince over Israel," it appears to follow that Abigail had received certain information of the anointing of David, and his designation to be the future king, probably through Samuel, or one of the pupils of the prophets. There is nothing to preclude this assumption, even if it cannot be historically sustained. Abigail manifests such an advance and maturity in the life of faith, as could only have been derived from intercourse with prophets. It is expressly stated with regard to Elijah and Elisha, that at certain times the pious assembled together around the prophets. What prevents us from assuming the same with regard to Samuel? The absence of any distinct testimony to that effect is amply compensated for by the brief, and for the most part casual, notices that are given of the influence which Samuel exerted upon all Israel. — Ver. 31 introduces the apodosis to ver, 30: So will this (i.e. the forgiveness of Nabal's folly, for which she had prayed in ver. 28) not be a stumbling-block (pukah: anything in the road which causes a person to stagger) and anguish of heart (i.e. conscientious scruple) to thee, and shedding innocent blood, and that my lord helps himself. 'W f\B&?) is perfectly parallel to 'til fipDpj and cannot be taken as subordinate, as it is in the Vulgate, etc., in the sense of " that thou hast not shed blood innocently," etc. In this rendering not only is the vav cop. overlooked, but " not" is arbitrarily interpolated, to obtain a suitable sense, which the Vulgate rendering, quod ejfuderis sanguinem innoxiam, does not give. ^OTI is to be taken conditionally: " and if Jehovah shall deal well with my lord, then" etc.

Vers. 32-38. These words could not fail to appease David's wrath. In his reply he praised the Lord for having sent Abigail to meet him (ver. 32), and then congratulated Abigail upon her understanding and her actions, that she had kept him from bloodshed (ver. 33); otherwise he would certainly have carried out the revenge which he had resolved to take upon Nabal (ver. 34). DJWi is strongly adversative: nevertheless. SH?*?, inf. constr. Hiph. of VT\. ^, on, introduces the substance of the affirmation, and is repeated before the oath: &K *3... w *3, (that) if thou hadst not, etc., (that) truly there would not have been left (cf. 2 Sam. ii. 27). The very unusual form ^fcfari, an imperfect with the termination of the perfect, might indeed possibly be a copyist's error for '•fcpij (Olsh. Gr. pp. 452, 525), but in all probability it is only an intensified form of the second pers. fem. imperf., like nrifctun (Deut. xxxiii. 16; cf. Ewald, § 191, c). — Ver. 35. David then received the gifts brought for him, and bade Abigail return to her house, with the assurance that he had granted her request for pardon. D^B NK>J, as in Gen.

xix. 21, etc. — Ver. 36. When Abigail returned home, she found her husband at a great feast, like a king's feast, very merry y?y, " therewith," refers to nn^p: cf. Prow xxiii. 30), and drunken above measure, so that she told him nothing of what had occurred until the break of day. — Ver. 37. Then, " when the wine had gone from Nabal" i.e. when he had become sober, she related the matter to him; whereat he was so terrified, that he was smitten with a stroke. This is the meaning of the words, " his heart died within him, and it became as stone." The cause of it was not his anger at the loss he had sustained, or merely his alarm at the danger to which he had been exposed, and which he did not believe to be over yet, but also his vexation that his wife should have made him humble himself in such a manner; for he is described as a hard, i.e. an unbending, self-willed man. — Ver. 38. About ten days later the Lord smote him so that he died, i.e. the Lord put an end to his life by a second stroke.

Vers. 39-44. When David heard of Nabal's death, he praised Jehovah that He had avenged his shame upon Nabal, and held him back from self-revenge. 'tfl 2"J Y^S? " who hath pleaded the cause of my reproach (the disgrace inflicted upon me) against Nabal." " Against Nabal" does not belong to " my reproach," but to " pleaded the cause." The construction of 3"") with |p is a pregnant one, to fight (and deliver) out of the power of a person (vid. Ps. xliii. 1); whereas here the fundamental idea is that of taking vengeance upon a person. — Ver.- 40. lie then sent messengers to Abigail, and conveyed to her his wish to marry her, to which she consented without hesitation. With deep reverence she said to the messengers (ver. 41), u Behold, thy handmaid as servant (i.e. is ready to become thy servant) to ivash the feet of the serva?its of my lord;" i.e., in the obsequious style of the East, "I am ready to perform the humblest possible services for thee." — Ver. 42. She then rose up hastily, and went after the messengers to David with five damsels in her train, and became his wife. — Ver. 43. The historian appends a few notices here concerning David's wives: '; And David had taken Ahinoam from Jezrcel; thus they also both became his wires." The expression " also" points to David's marriage with Michal, the daughter of Saul (ch. xviii. 28). Jezrecl is not the city of that name in the tribe of Issachar (Josh. xix. 18), but the one in the mountains of Judah (Josh. xv. 56). — Ver. 44. But Saul had taken his daughter Michal away from David, and given her to Palti of Gallim. Palti is called Paltiel in 2 Sam. iii. 15. According to Isa. x. 30, Gallim was a place between Gibeah of Saul and Jerusalem. Valentiner supposes it to be the hill to the south of Tuleil el Phul (Gibeah of Saul) called Kkirbet el Jisr. After the death of Saul, however, David persuaded Ishbosheth to give him Michal back again (see 2 Sam. iii. 14 sqq.).

DAVID IS BETRAYED AGAIN BY THE ZIPHITES, AND SPARES SAUL A SECOND TIME. — CHAP. XXVI.

The repetition not only of the treachery of the Ziphites, but also of the sparing of Saul by David, furnishes no proof in itself that the account contained in this chapter is only another legend of the occurrences already related in ch. xxiii. 19-xxiv. 23. As the pursuit of David by Saul lasted for several years, in so small a district as the desert of Judah, there is nothing strange in the repetition of the same scenes. And the assertion made by Thenius, that " Saul would have been a moral monster, which he evidently was not, if he had pursued David with quiet deliberation, and through the medium of the same persons, and had sought his life again, after his own life had been so magnanimously spared by him," not only betrays a superficial acquaintance with the human heart, but is also founded upon the mere assertion, for which there is no proof, that Saul was evidently not so; and it is proved to be worthless by the fact, that after the first occasion on which his life was so masmanimously spared by David, he did not leave off seeking him up and down in the land, and that David was obliged to seek refuge with the Philistines in consequence, as may be seen from ch. xxvii,, which Thenius himself assigns to the same source as ch. xxiv. The agreement between the two accounts reduces it entirelv to outward and unessential things. It consists chiefly in the fact that the Ziphites came twice to Saul at Gibeah, and informed him that David was stopping in their neighbourhood, in the hill HachilaJi, and also that Saul went out twice in pursuit of David with 3000 men. But the three thousand were the standing body of men that Saul had raised from the very beginning of his reign out of the whole number of those who were capable of bearing arms, for the purpose of carrying on his smaller wars (ch. xiii. 2); and the hill of llachilah appears to have been a place in the desert of Judah peculiarly well adapted for the site of an encampment. On the other hand, all the details, as well as the final results of the two occurrences, differ entirely from one another. When David was betrayed the first time, he drew back into the desert of Maon before the advance of Saul; and being completely surrounded by Saul upon one of the mountains there, was only saved from being taken prisoner by the circumstance that Saul was compelled suddenly to relinquish the pursuit of David on account of the report that the Philistines had invaded the land (ch. xxiii. 25-28). But on the second occasion Saul encamped upon the hill of llachilah, whilst David had drawn back into the adjoining desert, from which he crept secretly into Saul's encampment, and might, if he had chosen, have put his enemy to death (ch. xxvi. 3 sqq.). There is quite as much difference in the minuter details connected with the sparing of Saul. On the first occasion, Saul entered a cave in the desert of Engedi, whilst David and his men were concealed in the interior of the cave, without having the smallest suspicion that they were anywhere near (ch. xxiv. 2-4). The second time David went with Abishai into the encampment of Saul upon the hill of Hachilah, while the king and all his men were sleeping (ch. xxvi. 3, 5). It is true that on both occasions David's men told him that God had given his enemy into his hand; but the first time they added, Do to him what seemeth good in thy sight; and David cut off the lappet of Saul's coat, whereupon his conscience smote him, and he said, " Far be it from me to lay my hand upon the Lord's anointed" (ch. xxiv. 5-8). In the second instance, on the contrary, when David saw Saul in the distance lying by the carriage rampart and the army sleeping round him, he called to two of his heroes, Ahimelech and Abishai, to go with him into the camp of the sleeping foe, and then went thither with Abishai, who thereupon said to him, " God hath delivered thine enemy into thy hand: let me alone, that I may pierce him with the spear." But David rejected this proposal, and merely took away the spear and water-bowl that were at Saul's head (ch. xxvi. 6-12). And lastly, notwithstanding the fact that the words of David and replies of Saul agree in certain general thoughts, yet they differ entirely in the main. On the first occasion David showed the king that his life had been in his power, and yet he had spared him, to dispel the delusion that he was seeking his life (ch. xxiv. 10-16). On the second occasion he asked the king why he was pursuing him, and called to him to desist from his pursuit (ch. xxvi. 18 sqq.). But Saul was so affected the first time that he wept aloud, and openly declared that David would obtain the kingdom; and asked him to promise on oath, that when he did, he would not destroy his family (ch. xxiv. 17-23). The second time, on the contrary, he only declared that he had sinned and acted foolishly, and would do David no more harm, and that David would undertake and prevail; but he neither shed tears, nor brought himself to speak of David's ascending the throne, so that he was evidently much more hardened than before (ch. xxvi. 21-25). These decided differences prove clearly enough that the incident described in this chapter is not the same as the similar one mentioned in ch. xxiii. and xxiv., but belongs to a later date, when Saul's enmity and hardness had increased.

Yers. 1-12. The second betrayal of David by the Ziphites occurred after David had married Abigail at Carmel, and when he had already returned to the desert of Judah. On vers. 1 and 2 compare the explanations of ch. xxiii. 19 and xxiv. 3. Instead of " before (in the face of) Jeshimon" (i.e. the wilderness), we find the situation defined more precisely in ch. xxiii. 19, as " to the right (i.e. on the south) of the wilderness19 (Jeshimon). — Vers. 3, 4. When David saw (i.e. perceived) in the desert that Saul was coming behind him, he sent out spies, and learned from them that he certainly had come (P3J~?K, for a certainty, as in ch. xxiii. 23). — Vers. 5 sqq. Upon the receipt of this information, David rose up with two attendants (mentioned in ver. 6) to reconnoitre the camp of Saul. When he saw the place where Saul and his general Abner were lying — Saul was lying by the waggon rampart, and the fighting men were encamped round about him — he said to Ahimelech and Abishai, " Who will go down with me into the camp to Saul?" Whereupon Abishai declared himself ready to do so; and they both went by night, and found Saul sleeping with all the people. Ahimelech the Hittite is never mentioned again; but Abishai the son of

Zeruiah, David's sister (1 Chron. ii. 16), and a brother of Joab, was afterwards a celebrated general of David, as was also his brother Joab (2 Sam. xvi. 9, xviii. 2, xxi. 17). Saul's spear was pressed (stuck) into the ground at his head, as a sign that the king was sleeping there, for the spear served Saul as a sceptre (cf. ch. xviii. 10). — Ver. 8. When Abishai exclaimed, u God hath delivered thine enemy into thy hand: now will I pierce him with the spear into the ground with a stroke, and will give no second" (sc. stroke: the Vulgate rendering gives the sense exactly: et secinido non opus erit, there will be no necessity for a second), David replied, " Destroy him not; for who hath stretched out his hand against the anointed of the Lord, and remained unhurt f" njM? as in Ex. xxi. 19, Num. v. 31. He then continued (in vers. 10, 11): " As truly as Jehovah liccth, unless Jehovah smite him (i.e. carry him off with a stroke; cf. ch. xxv. 38), or his day cometh that he dies (i.e. or he dies a natural death; ' his day' denoting the day of death, as in Job xiv. 6, xv. 32), or he goes into battle and is carried off, far be it from me icith Jehovah (n\n!P, as in ch. xxiv. 7) to stretch forth my hand against JchovaJi s anointed" The apodosis to ver. 10 commences with nW>n, « far be it," or « the Lord forbid," in ver. 11. " Take now the spear which is at Ins head, and the pitcher, and let us go." — Ver. 12. They departed with these trophies, without any one waking up and seeing them, because they were all asleep, as a deep sleep from the Lord had fallen upon them. ^N£> *D^?19 stands for 'V ^Jlb^ntDD, " from the head of Saul," with D dropped. The expression " a deep sleep of Jehovah," i.e. a deep sleep sent or inflicted by Jehovah, points to the fact that the Lord favoured David's enterprise.