1 Samuel · Chapter 17

V. 1. Gathered, &c.-Probably they had heard, that Samuel had forsaken Saul, and that Saul himself was unfit for business. The enemies of the church are watchful to take all advantages, and they never have greater advantage, than when her protectors have provoked God’s Spirit and prophets to leave them.

Verse 1. Now the Philistines gathered together] Calmet thinks that this war happened eight years after the anointing of David, and ten or twelve years after the war with the Amalekites. We have already seen that there was war between Saul and the Philistines all his days. See 1 Samuel 14:52.

Shochoh and Azekah] Places which lay to the south of Jerusalem and to the west of Bethlehem; about five leagues from the former. Ephes-dammim was somewhere in the vicinity, but it is not known where. See Calmet.

Verse 1. The Philistines gathered together their armies — Probably they had heard that Samuel had forsaken Saul, and that Saul himself was unfit for business. The enemies of the church are watchful to take all advantages, and they never have greater advantages than when her protectors have provoked God’s Spirit and prophets to leave them.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

Verse 2. The valley of Elah] Some translate this the turpentine valley, or the valley of the terebinth trees; and others, the valley of oaks. The situation of this valley is well known.

2. The valley of Elah — The Wady es-Sumt, which has been often visited by travellers, and is represented by all as corresponding fully to the statements of this narrative. This valley is a mile in width, and through its centre runs a watercourse whose banks and bed abound with pebbles. The mountains on either side have a steep, uniform slope, and are about five hundred feet high. “It took its name Elah of old from the terebinth, (butm,) of which the largest specimen we saw in Palestine still stands in the vicinity; just as now it takes its name es-Sumt (Sunt) from the acacias which are scattered in it.” — Robinson.

Verse 3. The Philistines stood on a mountain] These were two eminences or hills, from which they could see and talk with each other.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 4. Six cubits-At least, nine feet, nine inches high. And this is not strange; for besides the giants mentioned in Scripture, Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, and Pliny, make mention of persons seven cubits high.

Verse 4. There went out a champion] Our word champion comes from campus, the field; Campio est enim ille qui pugnat in campo, hoc est, in castris, “Champion is he, properly, who fights in the field; i.e., in camps.” A man well skilled in arms, strong, brave, and patriotic. But is this the meaning of the original הבנים איש ish habbenayim, a middle man, the man between two; that is, as here, the man who undertakes to settle the disputes between two armies or nations. So our ancient champions settled disputes between contending parties by what was termed camp fight, hence the campio or champion. The versions know not well what to make of this man. The Vulgate calls him sir spurius, “a bastard;” the Septuagint, anhr dunatov, “a strong or powerful man;” the Targum, מביניהון arbg gabra mibbeyneyhon, “a man from between them;” the Arabic, [Arabic] rujil jibar, “a great or gigantic man;” the Syriac is the same; and Josephus terms him anhr pammegeqistatov, “an immensely great man.” The Vulgate has given him the notation of spurius or bastard, because it considered the original as expressing a son of two, i.e., a man whose parents are unknown. Among all these I consider our word champion, as explained above, the best and most appropriate to the original terms.

Whose height was six cubits and a span.] The word cubit signifies the length from cubitus, the elbow, to the top of the middle finger, which is generally rated at one foot six inches. The span is the distance from the top of the middle finger to the end of the thumb, when extended as far as they can stretch on a plain; this is ordinarily nine inches. Were we sure that these were the measures, and their extent, which are intended in the original words, we could easily ascertain the height of this Philistine; it would then be nine feet nine inches, which is a tremendous height for a man.

But the versions are not all agreed in his height. The Septuagint read tessarwn phcewn kai spiqamhv, four cubits and a span; and Josephus reads the same. It is necessary however to observe that the Septuagint, in the Codex Alexandrinus, read with the Hebrew text. But what was the length of the ancient cubit? This has been variously computed; eighteen inches, twenty inches and a half, and twenty-one inches. If we take the first measurement, he was nine feet nine; if the second, and read palm instead of span, with the Vulgate and others, he was ten feet seven inches and a half; if we take the last, which is the estimate of Grævius, with the span, he was eleven feet three inches; or if we go to the exactest measurement, as laid down in Bishop Cumberland’s tables, where he computes the cubit at 21.888 inches, the span at 10.944 inches, and the palm at 3.684 inches, then the six cubits and the span will make exactly 11 feet 10.272 inches. If we take the palm instead of the span, then the height will be 11 feet 3.012 inches. But I still think that the nine feet nine inches is the most reasonable.

Verse 4. Goliath of Gath — For to this city the Anakims fled when Joshua rooted them out of the land of Canaan, Joshua 11:22. And here they propagated a race of giants; that is, people of great strength and stature. Whose height was six cubits and a span — At least nine feet nine inches. And this is not strange; for besides the giants mentioned in Scripture, Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, and Pliny make mention of persons seven cubits high.

Verse 4. There went out a champion, Goliath of Gath; a military character well known to the Hebrews. More than thirty years before he had scattered the army of Israel, slain the sons of Eli, and captured the ark, so that even heroes trembled at his name. His height was six cubits and a span; that is, nine feet six inches. Genesis 6:4. Numbers 13:28.

4. A champion — The Septuagint has, a mighty man; Vulgate, bastard; Syriac and Arabic, a giant. But the Hebrew, µynbh vya, literally signifies a man between the two; that is, an arbitrator between the two armies, or one who was lord of the space between the two camps. Goliath, the pride of the Philistine hosts, stepped forth between the two armies and proposed by a personal contest with a chosen warrior from the Israelites, and according to the conditions stated in verse 9, to decide the fortunes of the war. Such single combats at the head of armies were not unusual in ancient times, as is witnessed by the combats of Paris and Menelaus. (Homer, Iliad, book 3.) Of Gath — And therefore probably a remnant of the Anakim that escaped the sword of Joshua. Joshua 11:22. Whose height… six cubits and a span — That is, if we reckon the cubit at twenty-one inches, about ten and one half feet. Josephus (“Antiquities,” 18:4, 5) mentions one Eleazar, a Jew by birth, whose height was seven cubits; and Pliny speaks of a giant Pusio, whose height exceeded ten Roman feet.

V. 5. Coat of mail-Made of brass plates laid over one another, like the scales of a fish. The weight, &c.-The common shekel contained a fourth part of an ounce; and so five thousand shekels made one thousand two hundred and fifty ounces, or seventy-eight pounds: which weight is not unsuitable to a man of such vast strength as his height speaks him to be.

Verse 5. He was armed with a coat of mail] The words in the original, µycqcq שרונ shiryon kaskassim, mean a coat of mail formed of plates of brass overlapping each other, like the scales of a fish, or tiles of a house. This is the true notion of the original terms.

With thin plates of brass or iron, overlapping each other, were the ancient coats of mail formed in different countries; many formed in this way may be now seen in the tower of London.

The weight-five thousand shekels] Following Bishop Cumberland’s tables, and rating the shekel at two hundred and nineteen grains, and the Roman ounce at four hundred and thirty-eight grains, we find that Goliath’s coat of mail, weighing five thousand shekels, was exactly one hundred and fifty-six pounds four ounces avoirdupois. A vast weight for a coat of mail, but not all out of proportion to the man.

Verses 5-7. He was armed with a coat of mail — Made of plates of brass laid over one another like the scales of a fish. Five thousand shekels of brass — The common shekel contained a fourth part of an ounce; and so five thousand shekels made one thousand two hundred and fifty ounces, or seventy-eight pounds; which weight was not unsuitable to a man of such vast strength as his height speaks him to have been. Greaves — Boots. The staff of his spear like a weaver’s beam — On which the weavers fasten their web. It was like this for thickness. And though the whole weight of Goliath’s armour may seem prodigious, yet it is not so much by far as one Athanatus did manage, of whom Pliny relates that he saw him come into the theatre with arms weighing twelve thousand ounces. A shield — Probably for state; for he that was clad in brass little needed a shield.

Ver. 5. A coat of mail; made of plates of foliated brass, with joints to admit of muscular motion in the arms and the body. Budeus in Paris, and more recently bishop Cumberland in England, have given an estimate of the whole of his armour as exceeding three hundred pounds weight.

5. A helmet of brass — A defensive armour for the head. A coat of mail — Literally, a coat of scales. A defensive armour for the body, consisting of plates of brass overlapping each other like the scales on a fish, or shingles on a roof. The Hebrew word is rendered habergeon in 2 Chronicles 26:14, and Nehemiah 4:16. Weight… five thousand shekels — Reckoning the

shekel at half an ounce avoirdupois, the weight of the scale armour would be about one hundred and fifty pounds.

V. 6. Greaves-Boots.

Verse 6. Greaves of brass upon his legs] This species of armour may be seen on many ancient monuments. It was a plate of brass (though perhaps sometimes formed of laminæ or plates, like the mail) which covered the shin or fore part of the leg, from the knee down to the instep, and was buckled with straps behind the leg. From ancient monuments we find that it was commonly worn only on one leg. VEGETIUS, de Revelation Militari, says, Pedites Scutati etiam ferreas ocreas in dextris cruribus copebantur accipere. “The foot soldiers, called Scutati, from their particular species of shield, were obliged to use iron greaves on their right legs.” One of these may be seen in the monument of the gladiator Buto, in Montfaucon; and another in the Mosaic pavement at Bognor, in Surrey.

A target of brass between his shoulders.] When not actually engaged, soldiers threw their shields behind their back, so that they appeared to rest or hang between the shoulders.

There are different opinions concerning this piece of armour, called here כידונ kidon. Some think it was a covering for the shoulders; others, that it was a javelin or dart; others, that it was a lance; some, a club; and others, a sword. It is certainly distinguished from the shield, 1 Samuel 17:41, and is translated a spear, Joshua 8:18.

Verses 5-7. He was armed with a coat of mail — Made of plates of brass laid over one another like the scales of a fish. Five thousand shekels of brass — The common shekel contained a fourth part of an ounce; and so five thousand shekels made one thousand two hundred and fifty ounces, or seventy-eight pounds; which weight was not unsuitable to a man of such vast strength as his height speaks him to have been. Greaves — Boots. The staff of his spear like a weaver’s beam — On which the weavers fasten their web. It was like this for thickness. And though the whole weight of Goliath’s armour may seem prodigious, yet it is not so much by far as one Athanatus did manage, of whom Pliny relates that he saw him come into the theatre with arms weighing twelve thousand ounces. A shield — Probably for state; for he that was clad in brass little needed a shield.

6. Greaves of brass upon his legs — Rather, upon his feet. These were shin covers bound by thongs around and above the ankles. Among the ancient Greeks they were elastic behind, and extended upward above the knees. Target — Margin, gorget. This word is elsewhere variously translated — shield, (verse 45, and Job 39:23;) spear, (Joshua 8:18, 26; Job 41:29; Jeremiah 6:23;) lance, (Jeremiah 50:42.) The word is best translated spear, and this Goliath carried between his shoulders, that is, slung upon his back, as the ancients often carried their heavy swords. (Homer, Iliad, book 2:45.) So Josephus understood it: “His spear was such as was not carried like a light thing in his right hand, but he carried it as lying on his shoulders.”

V. 7. Beam-On which the weavers fasten their web. It was like this for thickness. And though the whole weight of Goliath’s armour may seem prodigious; yet it is not so much by far as one Athanatus did manage: of whom Pliny relates, That he saw him come into the theatre with arms weighing twelve thousand ounces. A shield-Probably for state: for he that was clad in brass, little needed a shield.

Verse 7. The staff on his spear was like a weaver’s beam] Either like that on which the warp is rolled, or that on which the cloth is rolled. We know not how thick this was, because there were several sorts of looms, and the sizes of the beams very dissimilar. Our woollen, linen, cotton, and silk looms are all different in the size of their beams; and I have seen several that I should not suppose too thick, though they might be too short, for Goliath’s spear.

His spear’s head weighed six hundred shekels of iron] That is, his spear’s head was of iron, and it weighed six hundred shekels; this, according to the former computation, would amount to eighteen pounds twelve ounces.

And one bearing a shield] hnxh hatstsinnah, from ˆxmb[rc tsan, pointed or penetrating, if it do not mean some kind of a lance, must mean a shield, with what is called the umbo, a sharp protuberance, in the middle, with which they could as effectually annoy their enemies as defend themselves. Many of the old Highland targets were made with a projecting dagger in the centre. Taking the proportions of things unknown to those known, the armour of Goliath is supposed to have weighed not less than two hundred and seventy-two pounds thirteen ounces! Plutarch informs us that the ordinary weight of a soldier’s panoply, or complete armour, was one talent, or sixty pounds; and that one Alcimus, in the army of Demetrius, was considered as a prodigy, because his panoply weighed two talents, or one hundred and twenty pounds.

Verses 5-7. He was armed with a coat of mail — Made of plates of brass laid over one another like the scales of a fish. Five thousand shekels of brass — The common shekel contained a fourth part of an ounce; and so five thousand shekels made one thousand two hundred and fifty ounces, or seventy-eight pounds; which weight was not unsuitable to a man of such vast strength as his height speaks him to have been. Greaves — Boots. The staff of his spear like a weaver’s beam — On which the weavers fasten their web. It was like this for thickness. And though the whole weight of Goliath’s armour may seem prodigious, yet it is not so much by far as one Athanatus did manage, of whom Pliny relates that he saw him come into the theatre with arms weighing twelve thousand ounces. A shield — Probably for state; for he that was clad in brass little needed a shield.

Ver. 7. His spear was like a weaver’s beam in thickness, and twelve feet or more in length. Homer, Iliad 6., says that Hector’s spear was eleven feet in length. When he met Achilles in front of the Greek and Trojan armies, the soldiers suspended the battle to see the single combat. Hector threw his spear, which glided off Achilles’ coat of mail; then Achilles putting his spear between Hector’s legs, threw him on his back, and pierced the side of his throat, which was the signal of victory to the Greeks.

7. The staff of his spear — So the Keri, and the parallel passages in 2 Samuel 21:19; 1 Chronicles 20:5. But the Kethib here reads, wtynj xj, arrow of his spear, that is, the arrow-head, or iron point, of his javelin. The Keri is to be preferred. Like a weaver’s beam — Like the large cylinder of wood on which the weaver winds his warp before weaving, or that on which the cloth is rolled as it is woven. Perhaps the reference is to the upright standards of the loom. See cut of ancient loom at Judges 16:13. Six hundred shekels — About eighteen pounds.

V. 8. Come down-That the battle may be decided by us two alone.

Verse 8. I a Philistine] The Targum adds much to this speech. This is the substance: “I am Goliath the Philistine of Gath, who killed the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas the priests; and led into captivity the ark of the covenant of Jehovah, and placed it in the temple of Dagon my god; and it remained in the cities of the Philistines seven months. Also, in all our battles I have gone at the head of the army, and we conquered and cut down men, and laid them as low as the dust of the earth; and to this day the Philistines have not granted me the honour of being chief of a thousand men. And ye, men of Israel, what noble exploit has Saul, the son of Kish, of Gibeah, done, that ye should have made him king over you? If he be a hero, let him come down himself and fight with me; but if he be a weak or cowardly man, then choose you out a man that he may come down to me.”

Verses 8-11. Let him come down to me — That the battle may be decided by us two alone. They were greatly afraid — This may seem strange, considering the glorious promises of God, and their late experience of divine assistance. And where was Jonathan, who, in the last war, had so bravely engaged a whole army of the Philistines? Doubtless he did not feel himself so stirred up of God as he did at that time. As the best, so the bravest of men, are no more than what God makes them. Jonathan must sit still now, because this honour is reserved for David.

8. Am not I a Philistine — In the Hebrew, Philistine is made emphatic by the article, but the word servants is without it. Thus: Am not I THE Philistine, etc. Am not I the great warrior of the Philistine army? Why then trouble the army with battle? I am empowered to decide alone the fortunes of the day.

Verse 9. Then will we be your servants] Of this stipulation we hear nothing farther.

Verses 8-11. Let him come down to me — That the battle may be decided by us two alone. They were greatly afraid — This may seem strange, considering the glorious promises of God, and their late experience of divine assistance. And where was Jonathan, who, in the last war, had so bravely engaged a whole army of the Philistines? Doubtless he did not feel himself so stirred up of God as he did at that time. As the best, so the bravest of men, are no more than what God makes them. Jonathan must sit still now, because this honour is reserved for David.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

Verse 10. I defy] ytprj yna ani cheraphti, “I strip and make bare,” the armies of Israel; for none dared to fight him. From the Dhunoor Veda Shastra it appears that, among the Hindoos, it was common, before the commencement of an engagement, to challenge the enemy by throwing out some terms of abuse, similar to those used by Goliath. We find this also in Homer: his heroes scold each other heartily before they begin to fight. See on 1 Samuel 17:43.

Verses 8-11. Let him come down to me — That the battle may be decided by us two alone. They were greatly afraid — This may seem strange, considering the glorious promises of God, and their late experience of divine assistance. And where was Jonathan, who, in the last war, had so bravely engaged a whole army of the Philistines? Doubtless he did not feel himself so stirred up of God as he did at that time. As the best, so the bravest of men, are no more than what God makes them. Jonathan must sit still now, because this honour is reserved for David.

10. I defy the armies of Israel this day — Hebrew, I have reproached the armies of Israel this day. He heaps upon them scorn and contempt for their supposed inability to cope with a single warrior.

V. 11. Afraid-This may seem strange, considering the glorious promises, and their late experience of divine assistance. And where was Jonathan, who in the last war had so bravely engaged an whole army of the Philistines? Doubtless he did not feel himself so stirred up of God as he did at that time. As the best, so the bravest of men, are no more than what God makes them. Jonathan must sit still now, because this honour is reserved for David.

Verse 11. Saul and all Israel-were dismayed] They saw no man able to accept the challenge.

Verses 8-11. Let him come down to me — That the battle may be decided by us two alone. They were greatly afraid — This may seem strange, considering the glorious promises of God, and their late experience of divine assistance. And where was Jonathan, who, in the last war, had so bravely engaged a whole army of the Philistines? Doubtless he did not feel himself so stirred up of God as he did at that time. As the best, so the bravest of men, are no more than what God makes them. Jonathan must sit still now, because this honour is reserved for David.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 12. Old man-Therefore he went not himself to the camp.

Verse 12. The 12th verse, to the 31st inclusive, are wanting in the Septuagint; as also the 41st verse; and from the 54th to the end; with the first five verses of 1 Samuel xviii., and the 9th, 10th, 11th, 17th, 18th, and 19th of the same.

All these parts are found in the Codex Alexandrinus; but it appears that the MS. from which the Codex Alexandrinus was copied, had them not. See observations at the end of this chapter. Dr. Kennicott has rendered it very probable that these portions are not a genuine part of the text. Notwithstanding what Bishop Warburton and others have done to clear the chronology of the present printed Hebrew, it is impossible to make a clear consistent sense of the history, unless these verses are omitted. Let any one read the eleventh verse in connection with the thirty-second, leave out the forty-first, and connect the fifty-fourth with the sixth of 1 Samuel 18, and he will be perfectly convinced that there is nothing wanting to make the sense complete; to say nothing of the other omissions noted above. If the above be taken in as genuine, the ingenuity of man has hitherto failed to free the whole from apparent contradiction and absurdity. I must confess that where every one else has failed, I have no hope of succeeding: I must, therefore, leave all farther attempts to justify the chronology; and refer to those who have written for and against the genuineness of this part of the common Hebrew text. At the end of the chapter I shall introduce some extracts from Kennicott and Pilkington: and leave the whole with the unprejudiced and discerning reader.

Verses 12-15. David was the son of that Ephrathite, &c. — Being chosen of God to combat with Goliath, we are here informed of whom he was descended. The man went among men — Was accounted; an old man — Therefore he went not himself to the camp. David was the youngest — Being young, he was not put to the hardships of war; but the three eldest undertook to serve their prince and their country in this time of common danger. David went and returned from Saul — Left his court, with his permission, for the present. Probably he returned upon his father’s sending his three eldest sons into Saul’s service. Having been instrumental in relieving Saul, he was not now particularly wanted at court, but probably was wanted to feed his father’s sheep, and might be sent for again when occasion should require.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

Verses 12-15. David was the son of that Ephrathite, &c. — Being chosen of God to combat with Goliath, we are here informed of whom he was descended. The man went among men — Was accounted; an old man — Therefore he went not himself to the camp. David was the youngest — Being young, he was not put to the hardships of war; but the three eldest undertook to serve their prince and their country in this time of common danger. David went and returned from Saul — Left his court, with his permission, for the present. Probably he returned upon his father’s sending his three eldest sons into Saul’s service. Having been instrumental in relieving Saul, he was not now particularly wanted at court, but probably was wanted to feed his father’s sheep, and might be sent for again when occasion should require.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

Verses 12-15. David was the son of that Ephrathite, &c. — Being chosen of God to combat with Goliath, we are here informed of whom he was descended. The man went among men — Was accounted; an old man — Therefore he went not himself to the camp. David was the youngest — Being young, he was not put to the hardships of war; but the three eldest undertook to serve their prince and their country in this time of common danger. David went and returned from Saul — Left his court, with his permission, for the present. Probably he returned upon his father’s sending his three eldest sons into Saul’s service. Having been instrumental in relieving Saul, he was not now particularly wanted at court, but probably was wanted to feed his father’s sheep, and might be sent for again when occasion should require.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

V. 15. Went-From Saul’s court: where having relieved Saul, he was permitted to go to his father’s house, to be sent for again upon occasion.

Verses 12-15. David was the son of that Ephrathite, &c. — Being chosen of God to combat with Goliath, we are here informed of whom he was descended. The man went among men — Was accounted; an old man — Therefore he went not himself to the camp. David was the youngest — Being young, he was not put to the hardships of war; but the three eldest undertook to serve their prince and their country in this time of common danger. David went and returned from Saul — Left his court, with his permission, for the present. Probably he returned upon his father’s sending his three eldest sons into Saul’s service. Having been instrumental in relieving Saul, he was not now particularly wanted at court, but probably was wanted to feed his father’s sheep, and might be sent for again when occasion should require.

15. David went and returned from Saul — “By this it would seem that the king’s affection towards his healer cooled as soon as the cure had been effected. The probability of this most physicians can vouch from their own experience. Besides, it is likely that, from the peculiar nature of his complaint, Saul cared not to be continually reminded, by the presence of his healer, of the sufferings he had gone through, and of paroxysms which it humbled his proud mind to think had made him an object of compassion in the eyes of his subjects. He therefore made no opposition to the application for his son’s return home, which Jesse probably made when he found that David’s services were no longer necessary.” — Kitto.

Ver. 16. The Philistine—presented himself, at the time of morning and evening parade, for forty days. He defied the army, and execrated the God of Israel. This was conformable to the ancient usages. Balak sent for Balaam to curse Jacob, and defy Israel. When the Romans attacked the Druids in the Isle of Anglesey, women were seen with torches, cursing and defying them. It was frequently the case for armies to encamp against each other for a long time, particularly in the wars between the Nabobs of India.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

Verses 17, 18. Jesse said, Take now for thy brethren, &c. — He thought provisions might be scarce with them. But, having other sons at home with him, it was, no doubt, through a divine influence that he sent David from the sheep upon this errand. Carry these ten cheeses unto the captain — Whose favour might be very serviceable to them. And take their pledge — That is, bring me some token of their welfare. Perhaps Jesse and his sons had fixed on some pledge between them, that they might be assured the messengers they sent to each other had been with them, and executed their commission.

17. Parched corn — See note on Ruth 2:14.

V. 18. Pledge-That is, bring me some token of their welfare.

Verse 18. Carry these ten cheeses] Cheeses of milk, says the margin. In the East they do not make what we call cheese: they press the milk but slightly, and carry it in rush baskets. It is highly salted, and little different from curds.

Verses 17, 18. Jesse said, Take now for thy brethren, &c. — He thought provisions might be scarce with them. But, having other sons at home with him, it was, no doubt, through a divine influence that he sent David from the sheep upon this errand. Carry these ten cheeses unto the captain — Whose favour might be very serviceable to them. And take their pledge — That is, bring me some token of their welfare. Perhaps Jesse and his sons had fixed on some pledge between them, that they might be assured the messengers they sent to each other had been with them, and executed their commission.

18. Cheeses — Literally, cuttings of the milk. That is, say some, slices of curdled milk. Cheese is not common at the present day among the Bedouin Arabs, but there is in use among them a substance, consisting of coagulated buttermilk, which is dried until it becomes quite hard, and is then ground. Their pledge — A token from them that they are alive and well.

V. 19. Fighting-That is, in a posture and readiness to fight with them; as it is explained, ver. 20,21.

Verse 19. Fighting with the Philistines.] See at the end of the chapter. See Clarke “1 Samuel 17:58”.

Verse 19. Fighting with the Philistines — That is, in a posture and readiness to fight with them, as it is explained verses 20, 21, being drawn up in battle array. In the valley of Elah — Not, strictly speaking, in the valley, but hard by it, on the side of the mountain, where they faced the Philistines, and showed themselves resolved to fight, if the latter came down from the other mountain to oppose them.

19. Saul, and they… were in the valley of Elah — Better to supply are, instead of were, and understand this verse as a part of Jesse’s words to David. To the instructions which Jesse gives his son in the preceding verses, he here adds, for his further information, that he will find Saul, and his brothers, and all Israel, in the valley of Elah, engaged in war with the Philistines. This obviates the objection urged against the genuineness of this passage, that there was no fighting with the Philistines until after Goliath’s fall. The statement was but a casual remark of Jesse, who was not fully acquainted with the facts, and is not to be taken as literally correct.

V. 20. Went, &c.-Jesse little thought of sending his son to the camp, just at that critical juncture. But the wise God orders the time and all the circumstances of affairs, so as to serve the designs of his own glory.

Verses 20-22. He came to the trench — Probably the carriages wherewith the host was surrounded. As the host was going forth to the fight — Jesse little thought of sending his son to the camp just at that critical juncture. But the wise God orders the time and all the circumstances of affairs so as to serve the designs of his own glory. David left his carriage, &c. — He left the provision which his father had sent his brethren with some proper person, it being not a time to present it to them when the armies were just going to engage. And ran into the army — Eager to know what was doing there, being deeply concerned for the success of Israel, and desirous of seeing and speaking with his brethren before the commencement of the battle; for possibly it might be the last time he should ever converse with them or see them alive.

20. The trench — hlg[mh, the wagon rampart. The barrier formed around the encampment by the baggage wagons and other vehicles of the army. The host was going forth to the fight — That is, they were marching out of the camp to put themselves in battle array. Shouted for the battle — Raised the war cry. Neither of these expressions implies that the armies engaged in actual conflict, as some objectors have absurdly assumed. This appears still more clearly in the following verse.

Verses 20-22. He came to the trench — Probably the carriages wherewith the host was surrounded. As the host was going forth to the fight — Jesse little thought of sending his son to the camp just at that critical juncture. But the wise God orders the time and all the circumstances of affairs so as to serve the designs of his own glory. David left his carriage, &c. — He left the provision which his father had sent his brethren with some proper person, it being not a time to present it to them when the armies were just going to engage. And ran into the army — Eager to know what was doing there, being deeply concerned for the success of Israel, and desirous of seeing and speaking with his brethren before the commencement of the battle; for possibly it might be the last time he should ever converse with them or see them alive.

21. Army against army — Render: And Israel and the Philistines set battle array against battle array — That is, they formed their respective armies in battle array on the mountains on either side of the valley, as stated in verse 3, the two armies facing each other.

Verses 20-22. He came to the trench — Probably the carriages wherewith the host was surrounded. As the host was going forth to the fight — Jesse little thought of sending his son to the camp just at that critical juncture. But the wise God orders the time and all the circumstances of affairs so as to serve the designs of his own glory. David left his carriage, &c. — He left the provision which his father had sent his brethren with some proper person, it being not a time to present it to them when the armies were just going to engage. And ran into the army — Eager to know what was doing there, being deeply concerned for the success of Israel, and desirous of seeing and speaking with his brethren before the commencement of the battle; for possibly it might be the last time he should ever converse with them or see them alive.

22. His carriage — That which he carried. Margin, the vessels from upon him. The parched ears, the ten loaves, and the cheeses which Jesse had sent by him to the camp. The keeper of the carriage — The overseer of the supplies; the quartermaster.

Verses 23, 24. Behold there came up the champion — Although the armies stood ready to engage, yet the vanity of Goliath made him once more desirous that the matter might be determined by single combat, and to challenge the whole host of Israel to produce a man to fight with him. And all the men of Israel fled from him — That is, none of the Israelites dared to come to an equal distance from their camp as Goliath did from that of the Philistines; and probably some that had advanced farther than the rest, retired back when they saw him approaching. Nay, it seems wherever he advanced they fled from him. But surely one Philistine could never have thus dismayed and put ten thousand Israelites to flight, unless their Rock, being forsaken by them, had justly sold them, and shut them up, Deuteronomy 32:30.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

V. 24. Fled-One Philistine could never have thus put ten thousand Israelites to flight, unless their rock, being forsaken by them, had justly sold them and shut them up.

Verses 23, 24. Behold there came up the champion — Although the armies stood ready to engage, yet the vanity of Goliath made him once more desirous that the matter might be determined by single combat, and to challenge the whole host of Israel to produce a man to fight with him. And all the men of Israel fled from him — That is, none of the Israelites dared to come to an equal distance from their camp as Goliath did from that of the Philistines; and probably some that had advanced farther than the rest, retired back when they saw him approaching. Nay, it seems wherever he advanced they fled from him. But surely one Philistine could never have thus dismayed and put ten thousand Israelites to flight, unless their Rock, being forsaken by them, had justly sold them, and shut them up, Deuteronomy 32:30.

24. Fled from him, and were sore afraid — The Israelitish host shrunk backward and trembled before the insolent giant. The whole context shows that there was no actual flight of the whole army, but skirmishing parties may have gone down to the valley, and when Goliath came forth they made a rapid retreat to the camp.

V. 25. Free-Free from all those tributes and charges which either the court or the camp required.

Verses 25, 26. The king will make his father’s house free — Free from all those tributes and charges which either the court or the camp required. Who is this uncircumcised Philistine? &c. — Thus David expresses a high indignation that they, who were the servants of the living God, and fought under his banners, should be thus terrified by the great bulk of this idolater, as if the strength of God were not greater than that of this giant.

25. The man who killeth him, the king will enrich — It is every way probable that in his dismay and terror before the challenge of Goliath, Saul had made such offers as are here specified; but the fact that we have no record of their fulfilment has been construed into an argument against the genuineness of this section. This argument at best is only one from silence. But in reply we urge that Saul’s inquiry respecting David’s father, (vers. 55-58,) and his proposal to give him his daughter in marriage, (1 Samuel 18:17,) seem to have been made in direct reference to the promises here recorded, and all apparent failure to redeem his promise is sufficiently accounted for by Saul’s passionate jealousy at the honours David received from the people. 1 Samuel 18:6-9. Make his father’s house free in Israel — Free from taxation and public burdens; and elevated to the rank of royalty.

Verses 25, 26. The king will make his father’s house free — Free from all those tributes and charges which either the court or the camp required. Who is this uncircumcised Philistine? &c. — Thus David expresses a high indignation that they, who were the servants of the living God, and fought under his banners, should be thus terrified by the great bulk of this idolater, as if the strength of God were not greater than that of this giant.

Ver. 26. David spake to the men that stood by—What shall be done for the man that killeth this Philistine? Prompted by the Spirit of God, he had come with bread for his brothers in his simplicity, not knowing the insults offered daily to JEHOVAH. He who had anointed David for the throne, opened his way by illustrious means for elevation.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

V. 28. Naughtiness-Thy false-confidence, and vain gloried curiosity. See the folly and wickedness of envy! How groundless its jealousies are, how unjust its censures, how unfair it representations? God preserve us from such a spirit!

Verse 28. He said, Why camest thou down hither? — His passion made him forget that David came by his father’s order, in obedience to him, and out of kindness to them. With whom hast thou left those few sheep? — Thus he intimates that David was fitter to look after sheep than to fight a giant. I know thy pride — Thy false confidence, vain glory, and curiosity. See the folly and wickedness of envy! How groundless its jealousies are, how unjust its censures, how unfair its representations! May God save and preserve us from such a spirit!

28. I know thy pride — “Eliab sought for the splinter in his brother’s eye, and was not aware of the beam in his own.” — Keil.

V. 29. A cause-Of my thus speaking? Is this giant invincible? Is our God unable to oppose him, and subdue him? However David is not deterred from his undertaking, by the hard words of Eliab. They that undertake public services must not think it strange, if they be opposed by those from whom they had reason to expect assistance, but must humbly go on with their work, in the face, not only of their enemies threats, but of their friends slights, suspicions, and censures.

Verse 29. Is there not a cause?] awh rbd awlh halo dabar hu. I believe the meaning is what several of the versions express: I have spoken but a word. And should a man be made an offender for a word?

Verse 29. David said, Is there not a cause? — Of my thus speaking? Is this giant invincible? Is our God unable to oppose him, and subdue him? However, David is not deterred from his undertaking by the hard words of Eliab. They that undertake public services must not think it strange if they be opposed by those from whom they had reason to expect assistance; but must humbly go on with their work, in the face, not only of their enemies’ threats, but of their friends’ slights, suspicions, and censures.

29. Is there not a cause — Literally, Is not that word —? What wrong have I committed? Is not that word — that simple inquiry — allowable? He thought his brother very sensitive.

V. 30. He tarried-For being secretly moved by God’s spirit to undertake the combat. He speaks with divers persons about it, that it might come to the king’s ear.

Verse 30. He turned from him — For, being secretly moved by God’s Spirit to undertake the combat, he speaks with divers persons about it, that it might come to the king’s ear.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

12-31. By many critics this passage has been regarded as an interpolation, chiefly for the following reasons:

(1.) It is wanting in the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint. But if it were wanting in every copy of the Septuagint, this alone would be no sufficient reason for its rejection; for it can be shown that the translators of that version sometimes made omissions and additions at pleasure.

(2.) After what had been written in 1 Samuel 16:1-12, the statements here made (verses 12-14) respecting David’s father and brothers are superfluous, and indicate a different authorship. But such repetition and fulness of detail, especially in matters of genealogy, is characteristic of Hebrew historical composition; and as this victory over Goliath was David’s first bold, though unintentional, step towards the throne, and instrumental in securing for him the affections of the people, it would be unfair criticism to make this minuteness of detail an argument against the genuineness of the passage.

(3.) Eliab’s behaviour towards David, verse 28, is unaccountable and unlikely after he had seen his brother anointed by the hand of Samuel. But this objection assumes that Eliab clearly understood that by Samuel’s anointing of David he designated him as the future king of Israel — an assumption that has no foundation in the sacred record. See note on 1 Samuel 16:13. The honour conferred by Samuel on Jesse’s youngest son made him, like Joseph, the object of his brothers’ jealousy, and Eliab’s angry words were but a single outburst of that jealousy.

(4.) According to 1 Samuel 16:21, David was Saul’s armourbearer, and we would naturally expect to find him acting as such in this battle with the Philistines; but, according to verse 15 of this section, he had retired from Saul’s court and resumed the care of his father’s sheep at Beth-lehem. But surely this is no contradiction. There is no necessity for regarding his appointment as armourbearer as any thing more than an honorary title and office which he never exercised. Joab had ten armourbearers, (2 Samuel 18:15,) and Saul perhaps had many more.

Other minor objections based upon particular expressions will be duly noticed in notes on the passages to which they pertain.

V. 32. Let no man’s heart, &c.-It would have reflected upon his prince to say, Let not thy heart fail: therefore he speaks in general terms, Let no man’s heart fail. A little shepherd, come but this morning from keeping sheep, has more courage than all the mighty men of Israel! Thus doth God often do great things for his people by the weak things of the world.

Verse 32. And David said] This properly connects with the eleventh verse. { 1 Samuel 17:11}

Verses 32, 33. Let no man’s heart fail him, &c. — it would have reflected upon his prince to say, Let not thy heart fail; therefore he speaks in general terms, Let no man’s heart fail. A young shepherd, come but this morning from keeping sheep, has more courage than all the mighty men of Israel! Thus doth God often do great things for his people by the weak things of the world. Thou art but a youth — Not above twenty years old; and a novice, a raw and an inexperienced soldier.

Ver. 32. David said to Saul—thy servant will go and fight with this Philistine. Had it not been for the heroism of slaying a lion one day, and a bear on another, Saul would not have confided the honour of the field to a youth, but twenty three years of age. Killing a lion placed Hercules in the list of heroes. The king perceived that David had a soul equal to the fight, and prayed the Lord to be with him: ver. 37.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 33. A youth-Not above 20 years old; and a novice, a raw and unexperienced soldier.

Verse 33. Thou art but a youth] Supposed to be about twenty-two or twenty-three years of age.

Verses 32, 33. Let no man’s heart fail him, &c. — it would have reflected upon his prince to say, Let not thy heart fail; therefore he speaks in general terms, Let no man’s heart fail. A young shepherd, come but this morning from keeping sheep, has more courage than all the mighty men of Israel! Thus doth God often do great things for his people by the weak things of the world. Thou art but a youth — Not above twenty years old; and a novice, a raw and an inexperienced soldier.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

Verse 34. Thy servant kept his father’s sheep] He found it necessary to give Saul the reasons why he undertook this combat; and why he expected to be victorious. 1. I have courage to undertake it, and strength to perform it. 2. Both have been tried in a very signal manner: (1.) A lion came upon my flock, and seized a lamb; I ran after him, he attacked me, I seized hold of him by his shaggy locks, smote and slew him, and delivered the lamb.

(2.) A bear came in the same way, and I attacked and slew him. 3. This, with whom I am to fight, is a Philistine, an uncircumcised man; one who is an enemy to God: God therefore will not be on his side. On that ground I have nothing to fear. 4. He has defied the armies of the Lord; and has in effect defied Jehovah himself: therefore the battle is the Lord’s, and he will stand by me. 5. I have perfect confidence in his protection and defense; for they that trust in him shall never be confounded. 6. I conclude, therefore, that the Lord, who delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, will deliver me out of the hand of the Philistine.

Verses 34, 35. There came a lion and a bear — Not both together, but at different times. I went out after him — I pursued the beast. When he arose against me — Turned again upon me; I caught him by his beard — I had resolution and strength enough given me to close with him, and, catching him by the hair of his beard, smote and killed him on the spot. David does not say with what instrument he did this; but probably it was with a sword or spear. It is not improbable but in that age, and in those countries, it was usual to pursue, with proper arms, those wild beasts that came to devour their flocks. And travellers tell us, that, at this day, a single Arab, that is properly instructed and armed, will pursue a lion, and, if he overtakes him, will overcome him. But that such a youth as David should have such extraordinary courage and strength cannot be accounted for but by supposing, as the Scriptures inform us, that the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and that God intended by these things to train him up and fit him for the greater things he was to be called to perform.

34. A lion, and a bear — The prowess of the lion is well known. It is a testimony of Samson’s mighty power that he rent a lion as he would have rent a kid. Judges 14:6. No ordinary man would, therefore, dare to fight the king of beasts. “The Syrian bear — still found on the higher mountains of this country — is perhaps equally to be dreaded in a close personal encounter. The inhabitants of Hermon say that when he is chased up the mountain he will cast back large stones upon his pursuers with terrible force and unerring aim. The stoutest hunter will not venture to attack him alone, nor without being thoroughly armed for the deadly strife.” — Thomson.

Verse 35. The slaying of the lion and the bear mentioned here, must have taken place at two different times; perhaps the verse should be read thus: I went out after him, (the lion.) and smote him, &c. And when he (the bear) rose up against me, I caught him by the beard and slew him.

Verses 34, 35. There came a lion and a bear — Not both together, but at different times. I went out after him — I pursued the beast. When he arose against me — Turned again upon me; I caught him by his beard — I had resolution and strength enough given me to close with him, and, catching him by the hair of his beard, smote and killed him on the spot. David does not say with what instrument he did this; but probably it was with a sword or spear. It is not improbable but in that age, and in those countries, it was usual to pursue, with proper arms, those wild beasts that came to devour their flocks. And travellers tell us, that, at this day, a single Arab, that is properly instructed and armed, will pursue a lion, and, if he overtakes him, will overcome him. But that such a youth as David should have such extraordinary courage and strength cannot be accounted for but by supposing, as the Scriptures inform us, that the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and that God intended by these things to train him up and fit him for the greater things he was to be called to perform.

Ver. 35. I caught by the beard, which includes his nostrils. The LXX read throat, which associates best with the idea of suffocation.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

Verses 36, 37. Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear, &c. — There is a remarkable, and never to be sufficiently admired modesty in this relation of David, which he concludes by attributing all he had done to the goodness and power of God. And he takes encouragement from the experience which he had already had of these divine attributes being exerted on his behalf on a less important occasion, to believe that they would be exerted on this occasion also, which was much more important, as peculiarly involving the glory of God and the best interests of his people, which had not been the case in the former instances. This uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them — Goliath debased himself below a brute by his blasphemy, and therefore he now carried no more terror with him to David than a lion or a bear. Seeing he hath defied the armies of the living God — Here we see the foundation of David’s confidence of success. The Philistine had defied the living God in defying his armies, and had openly avowed himself his enemy. And David therefore comes forward, as his friend, to espouse his cause. It is as if he had said, The lion and the bear were only enemies to me and to my sheep, and it was only in defence of them that I attacked these brute beasts; but this Philistine is an enemy to God and his people, and it is for their honour that I attack him.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 37. The Lord, &c.-The lion and the bear were only enemies to me and my sheep, and it was in defence of them I attacked them. But this Philistine is an enemy to my God and his people, and it is for their honour that I attack him.

Verse 37. Go, and the Lord be with thee.] Saul saw that these were reasonable grounds of confidence, and therefore wished him success.

Verses 36, 37. Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear, &c. — There is a remarkable, and never to be sufficiently admired modesty in this relation of David, which he concludes by attributing all he had done to the goodness and power of God. And he takes encouragement from the experience which he had already had of these divine attributes being exerted on his behalf on a less important occasion, to believe that they would be exerted on this occasion also, which was much more important, as peculiarly involving the glory of God and the best interests of his people, which had not been the case in the former instances. This uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them — Goliath debased himself below a brute by his blasphemy, and therefore he now carried no more terror with him to David than a lion or a bear. Seeing he hath defied the armies of the living God — Here we see the foundation of David’s confidence of success. The Philistine had defied the living God in defying his armies, and had openly avowed himself his enemy. And David therefore comes forward, as his friend, to espouse his cause. It is as if he had said, The lion and the bear were only enemies to me and to my sheep, and it was only in defence of them that I attacked these brute beasts; but this Philistine is an enemy to God and his people, and it is for their honour that I attack him.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 38. Armour-With armour taken out of his armoury. He seems to speak of some military vestments which were then used in war, and were contrived for defence; such as buff-coats are now.

Verse 38. Saul armed David] He knew that although the battle was the Lord’s, yet prudent means should be used to secure success.

Verse 38. Saul armed David with his armour — Not that which he was wont to wear himself, for he was so tall it would not have fitted David, but with armour taken out of his armory. The Hebrew word wydm, madaiv, however, here rendered armour, more properly signifies his vestments, or his garments, and is so translated chap. 18:4, and in most other places where it occurs. Indeed his armour is distinguished from this, and particularly described in the following words. He therefore, doubtless, speaks in this clause of some military vestments which were then used in war, and were contrived for defence, as buff coats now are.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 39. Proved them-I have no skill or experience in the managements of this kind of arms.

Verse 39. I cannot go with these] In ancient times it required considerable exercise and training to make a man expert in the use of such heavy armour; armour which in the present day scarcely a man is to be found who is able to carry; and so it must have been then, until that practice which arises from frequent use had made the proprietor perfect. I have not proved them says David: I am wholly unaccustomed to such armour and it would be an encumbrance to me.

Verse 39. David girded his sword upon his armour — Literally, above, upon his vestments. He assayed to go — tkll lay, joel lalecheth. The learned translate these words different ways, but nearly to the same sense, Voluit ire, tentavit ire, conatus est incedere; he willed, wished, tried, or endeavoured to go; that is, to walk or march. As he had never worn such things before, not being used to go armed, he wished to try how he could walk in them; and finding that they were likely rather to encumber him than facilitate his enterprise, he begged leave to lay them aside. “David marched with difficulty, as not accustomed to these; therefore he said to Saul, I cannot go with these arms, for I am not accustomed to them; and David put them off.” — Houb.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 40. Staff-His shepherd’s staff. These arms in themselves were contemptible, yet chosen by David; because he had no skill to use other arms; because he had inward assurance of the victory, even by these weapons; and because such a conquest would be more honourable to God, and most shameful, and discouraging to the Philistines.

Verse 40. He took his staff] What we would call his crook. Five smooth stones] 1. Had they been rough or angular, they would not have passed easily through the air, and their asperities would, in the course of their passage, have given them a false direction. 2. Had they not been smooth, they could not have been readily despatched from the sling. A shepherd’s bag] That in which he generally carried his provisions while keeping the sheep in the open country.

And his sling] The sling, both among the Greeks and Hebrews, has been a powerful offensive weapon. See what has been said on Judges 20:16. It is composed of two strings and a leathern strap; the strap is in the middle, and is the place where the stone or bullet lies. The string on the right end of the strap is firmly fastened to the hand; that on the left is held between the thumb and middle joint of the fore finger. It is then whirled two or three times round the head; and when discharged, the finger and thumb let go their hold of the left end string. The velocity and force of the sling are in proportion to the distance of the strap, where the bullet lies, from the shoulder joint. Hence the ancient Baleares, or inhabitants of Majorca and Minorca, are said to have had three slings of different lengths, the longest they used when the enemy was at the greatest distance; the middle one, on their nearer approach; and the shortest, when they came into the ordinary fighting distance in the field. The shortest is the most certain, though not the most powerful. The Balearians are said to have had one of their slings constantly bound about their head, to have used the second as a girdle, and to have carried the third always in their hand. See DIOD. Sic. lib. v., c. 18, p. 286, edit. Bipont.

In the use of the sling it requires much practice to hit the mark; but when once this dexterity is acquired, the sling is nearly as fatal as the musket or bow; see on 1 Samuel 17:49. David was evidently an expert marksman; and his sling gave him greatly the advantage over Goliath; an advantage of which the giant does not seem to have been aware. He could hit him within any speaking distance, if he missed once, he had as many chances as he had stones; and after all, being unencumbered with armour, young, and athletic, he could have saved his life by flight. Against him the Philistine could do but little, except in close fight; it is true he appears to have had a javelin or missile spear, (see on 1 Samuel 17:6,) but David took care to prevent the use of all such weapons, by giving him the first blow.

Verses 40, 41. He took his staff — His shepherd’s staff. These arms in themselves were contemptible, yet chosen by David, because he had no skill to use other arms; because he had inward assurance of the victory, even by these weapons; and because such a conquest would be more honourable to God, and most shameful and discouraging to the Philistines. He drew near — Probably a signal was made that the Philistine’s challenge was accepted. David, however, it seems, made the first motion toward him, to show he did not fear him.

Ver. 40. He took his staff, the rod of his sling used as a staff, and chose five smooth stones out of the brook which ran between the two armies. David perceived that Goliath, like the massy Memnon, was heavily armed for close fight, and resolved to attack him by missiles, which would render his strength and his armour of no avail. Bethlehem was adjacent to the children of Benjamin, many of whom could sling a stone to a hair’s breadth and not miss. David had perfected himself in the use of the sling, a weapon which gentiles also had carried to perfection.

40. Smooth stones — Such as would pass most easily and rapidly through the air. The torrent bed of the Wady es-Sumt is said to be lined with smooth pebbles. A scrip — A pouch; a knapsack. Sling — On the use of this instrument in ancient warfare, see note on Judges 20. 16.

V. 41. Drew near-Probably a signal was made, that his challenge was accepted.

Verse 41. The man that bare the shield] See on 1 Samuel 17:7.

Verses 40, 41. He took his staff — His shepherd’s staff. These arms in themselves were contemptible, yet chosen by David, because he had no skill to use other arms; because he had inward assurance of the victory, even by these weapons; and because such a conquest would be more honourable to God, and most shameful and discouraging to the Philistines. He drew near — Probably a signal was made that the Philistine’s challenge was accepted. David, however, it seems, made the first motion toward him, to show he did not fear him.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 42. Fair-Not having so much as the countenance of a martial person.

Verse 42. He disdained him] He held him in contempt; he saw that he was young, and from his ruddy complexion supposed him to be effeminate.

Verses 42, 43. He disdained him — He had looked about, expecting to meet some tall, strong man; but when he saw what a mean figure he made with whom he was to engage, he despised him, and thought it below him to enter the lists with him, fearing that the contemptibleness of the champion with whom he contended would lessen the glory of the victory. For he was a youth of a fair countenance — Not having so much as the countenance of a martial person. Am I a dog? — Dost thou think to beat me as easily as thou wouldst thy dog? The Philistine cursed David by his gods — Imprecating the impotent vengeance of his idols against him, wishing that Dagon, Ashtaroth, and the rest of his gods would confound and destroy David. Thus the Romans used to curse their enemies, saying, “All the gods and goddesses destroy thee.”

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 43. Dog-Dost thou think to beat me as easily as thou wouldst thy dog?

Verse 43. Amos I a dog, that thou comest to me with staves?] It is very likely that Goliath did not perceive the sling, which David might have kept coiled up within his hand.

Cursed David by his gods.] Prayed his gods to curse him. This long parley between David and Goliath is quite in the style of those times. A Hindoo sometimes in a fit of anger says to his enemy, The goddess Kalee shall devour thee! May Doorga destroy thee! Homer’s heroes have generally an altercation before they engage; and sometimes enter into geographical and genealogical discussions, and vaunt and scold most contemptibly.

Verses 42, 43. He disdained him — He had looked about, expecting to meet some tall, strong man; but when he saw what a mean figure he made with whom he was to engage, he despised him, and thought it below him to enter the lists with him, fearing that the contemptibleness of the champion with whom he contended would lessen the glory of the victory. For he was a youth of a fair countenance — Not having so much as the countenance of a martial person. Am I a dog? — Dost thou think to beat me as easily as thou wouldst thy dog? The Philistine cursed David by his gods — Imprecating the impotent vengeance of his idols against him, wishing that Dagon, Ashtaroth, and the rest of his gods would confound and destroy David. Thus the Romans used to curse their enemies, saying, “All the gods and goddesses destroy thee.”

Ver. 43. The Philistine cursed David, wyhlab ba-Elohaiv, by his gods. It is difficult to say whether he understood this Hebrew word. Menochius gives us here a Roman form of execration. Dii te, Deaeque perdant, may the gods and goddesses destroy thee. David’s God requited these curses on Goliath’s head, by covering his eyes with a vapour, as it would seem, so that he repelled not the stone.

43-47. Such parleying and threats as these verses record were common in ancient times between contending heroes. Numerous examples may be found in Homer.

Verse 44. Come to me, and I will give thy flesh] He intended, as soon as he could lay hold on him, to pull him to pieces.

Verses 44, 45. Come to me, and I will give thy flesh unto the fowls of the air — It will be a tender and delicate feast for them. With such confidence did he presume on his success! Thus the security and presumption of fools destroy them. Then said David, I come to thee in the name, &c. — By a commission from Him who commands all creatures in heaven and earth, and who has called me to, and animated me for, this undertaking. I rely on him as thou dost on thy sword and spear.

43-47. Such parleying and threats as these verses record were common in ancient times between contending heroes. Numerous examples may be found in Homer.

Verse 45. Thou comest to me with a sword] I come to thee with the name (בשם beshem) of Jehovah of hosts; the God of the armies of Israel. What Goliath expected from his arms, David expected from the ineffable name.

Verses 44, 45. Come to me, and I will give thy flesh unto the fowls of the air — It will be a tender and delicate feast for them. With such confidence did he presume on his success! Thus the security and presumption of fools destroy them. Then said David, I come to thee in the name, &c. — By a commission from Him who commands all creatures in heaven and earth, and who has called me to, and animated me for, this undertaking. I rely on him as thou dost on thy sword and spear.

43-47. Such parleying and threats as these verses record were common in ancient times between contending heroes. Numerous examples may be found in Homer.

V. 46. A God-Heb. that God, the only true God, is for Israel; or on Israel’s side, and against you. Or, that Israel hath a God, a God indeed, one who is able to help them; and not such an impotent idol as you serve.

Verse 46. This day will the Lord deliver thee into mine hand] This was a direct and circumstantial prophecy of what did take place.

Verse 46. This day will the Lord deliver thee into my hand — He speaks with as much assurance as Goliath had done, but upon better grounds, confiding, not in his own strength, but in the divine omnipotence, and expecting, through it, certain victory, not only over Goliath, but over the whole army of the Philistines. That all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel — Superior to all others. Hebrew, That God is for Israel, or on Israel’s side, and against you. Or, that Israel hath a God, a God indeed! one who is able to help them; and not such an impotent idol as you serve.

43-47. Such parleying and threats as these verses record were common in ancient times between contending heroes. Numerous examples may be found in Homer.

V. 47. Saveth-That is, that he can save without these arms, and with the most contemptible weapons. The battle-That is, the events of war are wholly in his power. He will-David speaks thus confidently, because he was assured of it by a particular inspiration.

Verse 47. For the battle is the Lord’s] It is the Lord’s war: you are fighting against him and his religion, as the champion of your party; I am fighting for God, as the champion of his cause.

Verse 47. Saveth not with sword and spear — That is, that he can save without these arms, and with the most contemptible weapons, and that he needs not human force to effect his designs. For the battle is the Lord’s — The events of war are wholly in his power. And he will give you into our hands — David speaks thus confidently, because he was assured of success, by particular inspiration. How great is the difference between the speech of Goliath and that of David! The former consists of the vain-glorious boasting words of a man proudly confiding in his own strength, and thinking of nothing but his own glory. The words of the latter, although expressing an equal assurance of victory, are humble and modest, attributing nothing to himself, but all to the power and goodness of God; building his hopes upon, and rejoicing in, the honour that would accrue to God from his success, instead of puffing himself up with the glory that would arise to himself therefrom.

43-47. Such parleying and threats as these verses record were common in ancient times between contending heroes. Numerous examples may be found in Homer.

V. 48. Drew nigh-Like a stalking mountain. Ran-So far was he from fear!

Verse 48. The Philistine arose] This was an end of the parley; the Philistine came forward to meet David, and David on his part ran forward to meet the Philistine.

Verses 48, 49. The Philistine arose, and came and drew nigh — Like a stalking mountain. Having nothing but victory in his thoughts, he marched in a stately manner, pompously covered over with armour, and fearing nothing. But David, being loaded with no armour, ran nimbly toward him, so far was he from fear! David smote the Philistine in his forehead — Which was bare, perhaps the proud giant contemning David so much as to neglect to pull down his helmet over his face, lifting up that part of it which covered his forehead; or else the stone was thrown with such force that it pierced the helmet first, and then the forehead, or went in at the place that was left open for his eyes. However it was, the divine hand directed it. And he fell upon his face to the earth — “See,” says Henry, “how frail and uncertain life is, even then when it thinks itself best fortified, and how quickly, how easily, and with how small a matter, the passage may be opened for life to go out and death to enter. Goliath himself has not power over the spirit to retain the spirit, Ecclesiastes 8:8: let not the strong man glory in his strength, nor the armed man in his armour. See how God resists the proud, and pours contempt upon those that bid defiance to him and his people! None ever hardened his heart against God and prospered.”

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 49. Forehead-Probably the proud giant had lift up that part of his helmet which covered his fore-head; in contempt of David and his weapons, and by the singular direction of providence.

Verse 49. Smote the Philistine in his forehead] Except his face, Goliath was everywhere covered over with strong armour. Either he had no beaver to his helmet, or it was lifted up so as to expose his forehead; but it does not appear that the ancient helmets had any covering for the face. The Septuagint however supposes that the stone passed through the helmet, and sank into his forehead: Kai diedu o liqov dia thv perikefalaiav eiv to metwpon autou, “and the stone passed through his helmet, and sank into his skull.” To some this has appeared perfectly improbable; but we are assured by ancient writers that scarcely any thing could resist the force of the sling.

Diodorus Siculus, lib. v., c. 18, p. 287, edit. Bipont, says “The Baleares, in time of war, sling greater stones than any other people, and with such force, that they seem as if projected from a catapult. Dio kai kata tav teicomaciav en taiv provbolaiv tuptontev touv pro twn epalxewn efestwtav katatraumatizousin, en de taiv parataxesi touv te qureouv, kai ta kranh, kai pan skepasthrion oplon

suntribousi. kata de thn eustocian outwv akribeiv eisin, wste kata to pleiston mh amartanein tou prokeimenou skopou.

Therefore, in assaults made on fortified towns, they grievously wound the besieged; and in battle they break in pieces the shields, helmets, and every species of armour by which the body is defended. And they are such exact marksmen that they scarcely ever miss that at which they aim.” The historian accounts for their great accuracy and power in the use of the sling, from this circumstance: aitiai de toutwn, k. t. l. “They attain to this perfection by frequent exercise from their childhood; for while they are young and under their mother’s care, they are obliged to learn to sling; for they fasten bread for a mark at the top of the pole; and till the child hit the bread he must remain fasting; and when he has hit it, the mother gives it to him to eat.”-Ibid.

I have given these passages at large, because they contain several curious facts, and sufficiently account for the force and accuracy with which David slung his stone at Goliath. We find also in the mh amartanein, not miss the mark, of the historian, the true notion of amartanein, to sin, which I have contended for elsewhere. He who sins, though he aims thereby at his gratification and profit, misses the mark of present and eternal felicity.

Verses 48, 49. The Philistine arose, and came and drew nigh — Like a stalking mountain. Having nothing but victory in his thoughts, he marched in a stately manner, pompously covered over with armour, and fearing nothing. But David, being loaded with no armour, ran nimbly toward him, so far was he from fear! David smote the Philistine in his forehead — Which was bare, perhaps the proud giant contemning David so much as to neglect to pull down his helmet over his face, lifting up that part of it which covered his forehead; or else the stone was thrown with such force that it pierced the helmet first, and then the forehead, or went in at the place that was left open for his eyes. However it was, the divine hand directed it. And he fell upon his face to the earth — “See,” says Henry, “how frail and uncertain life is, even then when it thinks itself best fortified, and how quickly, how easily, and with how small a matter, the passage may be opened for life to go out and death to enter. Goliath himself has not power over the spirit to retain the spirit, Ecclesiastes 8:8: let not the strong man glory in his strength, nor the armed man in his armour. See how God resists the proud, and pours contempt upon those that bid defiance to him and his people! None ever hardened his heart against God and prospered.”

Ver. 49. The stone sank into his forehead, and he fell upon his face to the earth: he fell to rise no more. The prostration of this monster reminds us of Virgil’s description of the fall of Entellus. Entellus vires in ventum effudit, et ultrò Ipse gravis graviterque ad terram pondere vasto Concidit: ut quondam cava concidit, aut Erymantho, Aut Idâ in magnâ, radicibus eruta pious, ÆN. lib. 5. 50:446.

Entellus wastes his forces on the wind; And thus deluded of the stroke design’d, Headlong and heavy fell; his ample breast, And weighty limbs, his ancient mother press’d. So falls a hollow pine, that long had stood On Ida’s height, or Erymanthus wood, Torn from the roots, — DRYDEN.

49. In his forehead — The only unprotected portion of his body. According to the Septuagint, however, the stone passed through Goliath’s helmet.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

V. 51. David took-Hence it appears, that David was not a little man, as many fancy; but a man of considerable bulk and strength, because he was able to manage a giant’s sword. The stone threw him down to the earth, and bereaved him of sense and motion; but there remained some life in him, which the sword took away, and so compleated the work. God is greatly glorified, when his proud enemies are cut off with their own sword.

Verse 51. When the Philistines saw their champion was dead, they fled.] They were panic-struck; and not being willing to fulfil the condition which was stipulated by Goliath, they precipitately left the field. The Israelites took a proper advantage of these circumstances, and totally routed their enemies.

Verse 51. David took his sword — Hence it appears that David was not a little man, as many fancy, but a man of considerable bulk and strength, because he was able to manage a giant’s sword. The stone threw him down to the earth, and bereaved him of sense and motion; but there remained some life in him, which the sword took away, and so completed the work. God is greatly glorified when his proud enemies are cut off with their own sword.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

52. The valley — Where the Wady es-Sumt opens into the great western plain of Philistia. Shaaraim — The site of this place is unknown. It is probably to be looked for somewhere between Gath and Ekron. On the two last named cities, see notes on 1 Samuel 5:8, 10.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

Verse 54. David took the head of the Philistine] It has been already remarked that this, with the following verses, and the five first verses of the eighteenth chapter, are omitted by the Septuagint. See the observations at the end. See Clarke “1 Samuel 17:58”.

Verse 54. And brought it to Jerusalem — After he had shown it to Saul, verse 57, and exposed it to all the people, chap. 18:6. Jerusalem was now become a noted city, which was the reason why he brought his head thither. Some think, however, that this is spoken of a future action, namely, that when David was come to the kingdom, and had made Jerusalem his royal seat, he ordered the scull of Goliath to be fixed up in some public place there, as a monument of this most signal victory. But he put his armour in his tent — A tent which probably was set up for David on this occasion. The sword was afterward placed behind the ephod in the tabernacle, being consecrated to God, and preserved as a memorial of the victory to his honour, 1 Samuel 21:9.

54. David took the head… and brought it to Jerusalem; but he put his armour in his tent — According to some critics this verse is utterly irreconcilable with the context, and is, therefore, to be regarded as the interpolation of a later hand. But what are the difficulties? (1.) Jerusalem was then in the hands of the Jebusites, and remained so until a much later day, when David himself conquered them. 2 Samuel 5:7. But this is no good reason why the head of the Philistine might not have been taken there; for, according to Judges 1:21, the Benjamites occupied Jerusalem in common with the Jebusites. But if this were not now the case, and the Jebusites were in possession of the whole city, David, passing by Jerusalem on his return from the battle, might have thought to awe the Jebusite stronghold by placing Goliath’s ghastly head in sight of them. (2.) Another difficulty is that David could have had no tent in the camp. The tent his brothers occupied, however, may not improperly have been spoken of as his tent. But his tent, in which he put the giant’s armour, more probably refers to David’s home in Beth-lehem, not to an army tent. That this is a common meaning of the word tent a reference to 1 Samuel 4:10; 13:2; Joshua 22:7, and 1 Kings 12:16, will abundantly show. This verse simply informs the reader what became of Goliath’s head and armour; but we are not necessarily to suppose that the facts recorded took place immediately after the battle, or even that David did these things in his own person. Various displays may have been made of the head before it was brought to Jerusalem, and also of the armour before it was taken to David’s home. From chap. 21:9, we learn that at a later day Goliath’s sword was kept at Nob in care of the priests.

V. 55. Whose son-David had been some considerable time dismissed from Saul’s court, and was returned home. And therefore it is not strange, if Saul for the present had forgot David. Besides the distemper of Saul’s mind might make him forgetful; and that David might be now much changed, both in his countenance and in his habit. I cannot tell-Abner’s employment was generally in the camp, when David was at the court; and when Abner was there, he took little notice of a person so much inferior to him as David was.

Verse 55. Whose son is this youth? — It may, at first sight, appear strange that Saul should be represented here as not knowing who David was, when we have a relation in the foregoing chapter of his sending for him to court, being highly pleased with his behaviour, and much delighted with his music, making him his armour-bearer, and sending to his father Jesse to ask his leave for his continuance at court. But it may be observed that Saul, in this place, does not express an entire ignorance of David, but only inquires whose son he was — A question of the more consequence to him, as he had promised his daughter in marriage to the conqueror of Goliath. Either Saul had never before made any inquiry about his parentage, or both he and Abner had forgotten whence he was. And this might very easily happen to a king and a general of an army, who daily see and have to do with so many different faces, and who pay so little regard to things of this sort. Nay, if Saul had entirely forgotten David, it would not have been strange, considering that he had been but little with him, had some time ago been dismissed from the court, and was returned home, where he had remained at least a year or two, during which time Saul had not seen him. Besides, the distemper of Saul’s mind might make him forgetful, and David might now be much changed, both in his countenance and in his habit. Abner said, I cannot tell — Abner’s employment was generally in the camp, when David was at the court; and when Abner was there he probably took little notice of a youth so much inferior to him as David was.

“We may learn from the whole of this pleasing chapter,” says Dr. Dodd, “how ready God is to help those who trust in him; for whose defence and protection he makes use of means apparently the most weak, to humble the pride of the wicked, and to destroy the powers which seem most formidable. Some writers have considered this destruction of Goliath by David as a type of the victory of Jesus Christ, in his state of weakness and humiliation, over the strong and gigantic powers of hell and the grave.”

55. Whose son is this youth — But did not Saul remember David, whose services on the harp had been of so much advantage to him in his madness? 1 Samuel 16:20-23. Perhaps not, for probably some time had elapsed since the youth had left his court, and Saul’s memory may have suffered somewhat from his disease. A man of Saul’s varying moods would be quite likely to forget even a benefactor; or if he remembered David’s musical service, he may have forgotten his looks, so as not to have recognised him on this occasion. But now, having promised to reward not only him who slew Goliath, but his father also, (verse 25,) and seeing the youth go forth against the giant confident of victory, he begins to inquire after the tribe and position of his father’s house.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.

Verse 58. Whose son art thou, thou young man?] That Saul should not know David with whom he had treated a little before, and even armed him for the combat, and that he should not know who his father was, though he had sent to his father for permission to David to reside constantly with him, (1 Samuel 16:22,) is exceedingly strange! I fear all Bishop Warburton’s attempts to rectify the chronology by assumed anticipations, will not account for this. I must honestly confess they do not satisfy me; and I must refer the reader to what immediately follows on the authenticity of the verses which concern this subject.

ON the subject of that large omission in the Septuagint of which I have spoken on 1 Samuel 17:12, I here subjoin the reasons of Mr. Pilkington and Dr. Kennicott for supposing it to be an interpolation of some rabbinical writer, added at a very early period to the Hebrew text. “Had every version of the Hebrew text,” says Mr. Pilkington, “agreed to give a translation of this passage, as we now find, the attempts of clearing it from its embarrassments would have been attended with very great difficulties; but, as in several other cases before mentioned, so here, the providence of God seems to have so far secured the credit of those who were appointed to be the penmen of the oracles of truth, that the defence of their original records may be undertaken upon good grounds, and supported by sufficient evidence. For we are now happily in possession of an ancient version of these two chapters, which appears to have been made from a Hebrew copy, which had none of the thirty-nine verses which are here supposed to have been interpolated, nor was similar to what we have at present in those places which are here supposed to have been altered. This version is found in the Vatican copy of the Seventy, which whoever reads and considers, will find the accounts there given regular, consistent, and probable. It will be proper, therefore, to examine the several parts where such alterations are supposed to have been made in the Hebrew text, in order to produce such other external or internal evidence, as shall be necessary to support the charge of interpolation, which ought not to be laid merely upon the authority of any single version.

“The first passage, which is not translated in the Vatican copy of the Greek version, is from the 11th to the 32d verse of the 17th chapter wherein we have an account: 1. Of David’s being sent to the camp to visit his brethren.

2. Of his conversation with the men of Israel, relating to Goliath’s challenge; and their informing him of the premium Saul had offered to any one that should accept it, and come off victorious. 3. Of Eliab’s remarkable behaviour to his brother David, upon his making this inquiry. And, 4. Of Saul’s being made acquainted with what David had said upon this occasion.

“It is obvious to remark upon this passage:—

“1. That, after David had been of so much service to the king, in causing the evil spirit to depart from him; after its being recorded how greatly Saul loved him, and that he had made him his armour-bearer; after the king had sent to Jesse to signify his intention of keeping his son with him; all of which are particularly mentioned in the latter part of the preceding chapter; the account of his keeping his father’s sheep afterwards, and being sent to his brethren upon this occasion, must appear to be somewhat improbable.

2. That what is here said of the premium that Saul had offered to him who should conquer the Philistine, is not well consistent with the accounts afterwards given, of which we shall have occasion to take particular notice.

3. That Eliab’s behaviour, as here represented, is not only remarkable but unaccountable and absurd. And, 4. That the inquiries of a young man, who is not said to have declared any intentions of accepting the challenge of the Philistine, would scarcely have been related to the king. But now, if this passage be supposed to have been interpolated, we must see how the connection stands upon its being omitted.

“Verse 11. ‘When Saul and all Israel heard these words of the Philistine, they were dismayed, and greatly afraid.’

“Verse 32. ‘Then David said unto Saul, Let no man’s heart fail because of him; thy servant will go and fight with this Philistine.’ “No connection can be more proper, and in this view David is represented as being at that time an attendant upon the king; and when we had been told just before, ( 1 Samuel 16:21,) that Saul had made him his armour-bearer, we might justly expect to find him with him when the battle was set in array; 1 Samuel 17:2. In this connection David is also represented as fully answering the character before given of him: ‘A mighty valiant man, and a man of war,’ 1 Samuel 16:18, and ready to fight with the giant upon the first proposal, (for the account of the Philistine presenting himself forty days is in this passage here supposed to have been interpolated, 1 Samuel 17:16.) I shall leave it to the critical Hebrew reader to make what particular remarks he may think proper in respect to the style and manner of expression in these twenty verses, and let Jesse go for an old man amongst men in the days of Saul, &c.”-PILKINGTON’S Remarks upon several Passages of Scripture, p. 62.

“The authorities,” says Dr. Kennicott, “here brought to prove this great interpolation are the internal evidence arising from the context, and the external arising from the Vatican copy of the Greek version. But how then reads the Alexandrian MS.? The remarks acknowledge that this MS. agrees here with the corrupted Hebrew; and therefore was probably translated, in this part, from some late Hebrew copy which had thus been interpolated; see pages 72, 75. Now that these two MSS. do contain different readings in some places, I observed in pages 398-404, and 414. And in this 17th chapter of Samuel, 1 Samuel 17:4, the Alexandrian MS. says, agreeably to the present Hebrew, that the height of Goliath was six cubits and a span, i.e., above eleven feet; but the Vatican MS., agreeably to Josephus, that it was four cubits and a span, i.e., near eight feet. And in 1 Samuel 17:43, what the Vatican renders he cursed David by his gods, the Alexandrian renders by his idols. But though the Hebrew text might be consulted and a few words differently rendered by the transcriber of one of these MSS., or by the transcribers of the MSS. from which these MSS. were taken; yet, as these MSS. do contain, in this chapter, such Greek as is almost universally the same, (in verb, noun, and particle,) I presume that they contain here the same translation with the designed alteration of a few words, and with the difference of the interpolated verses found in the Alexandrian MS.

“But, after all, what if the Alexandrian MS., which now has these verses should itself prove them interpolated? What if the very words of this very MS. demonstrate that these verses were not in some former Greek MS.? Certainly if the Alexandrian MS. should be thus found, at last, not to contradict, but to confirm the Vatican in its omission of these twenty verses, the concurrence of these authorities will render the argument much more forcible and convincing.

“Let us then state the present question; which is, Whether the twenty verses between ver. 11 and 32, which are now in the Hebrew text, are interpolated? The Vatican MS. goes on immediately from the end of the 11th verse (kai efobhqhsan sfodra) to ver. 32, which begins kai eipe Dauid: whereas the 12th verse in the Hebrew begins, not with a speech, but with David’s birth and parentage. If then the Alexandrian MS. begins its present 12th verse as the 32d verse begins, and as the 12th verse could not begin properly, I appeal to any man of judgment whether the transcriber was not certainly copying from a MS. in which the 32d verse succeeded the 11th verse; and if so, then from a MS. which had not these intermediate verses? Now that this is the fact, the case will at once appear upon examining the Alexandrian copy, where the 12th verse begins with KAI EIPE DAUID; as the 32d verse begins, and as the 12th verse could not begin properly.

“The case seems clearly to be, that the transcriber, having wrote what is now in the 11th verse, was beginning what is now the 32d verse; when, after writing kai eipe dauid, he perceived that either the Hebrew, or some other Greek copy, or the margin of his own copy, had several intermediate verses: upon which, without blotting out the significant word eipe, he goes on to write the addition: thus fortunately leaving a decisive proof of his own great interpolation. if this addition was in the margin of that MS. from which the Alexandrian was transcribed, it might be inserted by that transcriber; but if it was inserted either from the Hebrew, or from any other Greek copy, the transcriber of this MS. seems to have had too little learning for such a proceeding. If it was done by the writer of that former MS., then the interpolation may be a hundred or a hundred and fifty years older than the Alexandrian MS. Perhaps the earliest Christian writer who enlarges upon the strong circumstance of David’s coming from the sheep to the army, is Chrysostom, in his homily upon David and Saul; so that it had then been long in some copies of the Greek version. The truth seems to be, that the addition of these twenty verses took its first rise from what Josephus had inserted in his variation and embellishment of this history; but that many circumstances were afterwards added to his additions.

“For (and it is extremely remarkable) though Josephus has some, he has not half the improbabilities which are found at present in the sacred history: as for instance: Nothing of the armies being fighting in the valley, or fighting at all, when David was sent by his father, as in 1 Samuel 17:19. Nothing of the host going forth, and shouting for the battle, at the time of David’s arrival, as in 1 Samuel 17:20. Nothing of all the men of Israel fleeing from Goliath, as in 1 Samuel 17:24; on the contrary, the two armies, (it should seem,) continued upon their two mountains. Nothing of David’s long conversation with the soldiers, 1 Samuel 17:25-27, in seasons so very improper, as, whilst they were shouting for the battle, or whilst they were fleeing from Goliath; and fleeing from a man after they had seen him and heard him twice in every day for forty days together, 1 Samuel 17:16, the two armies, all this long while, leaning upon their arms, and looking very peaceably at one another. Nothing of Goliath’s repeating his challenge every morning and every evening, as in 1 Samuel 17:16. David, (it is said, 1 Samuel 17:23,) happened to hear one of these challenges; but if he heard the evening challenge, it would have been then too late for the several transactions before, and the long pursuit after, Goliath’s death; and David could not well hear the morning challenge, because he could scarce have arrived so early, after travelling from Beth-lehem to the army, (about fifteen miles,) and bringing with him an ephah of parched corn, and ten loaves, and ten cheeses, as in 1 Samuel 17:17, 18. Nothing of encouraging any man to fight Goliath, by an offer of the kinds daughter, 1 Samuel 17:25; which, as it seems from the subsequent history, had never been thought of; and which, had it been offered, would probably have been accepted by some man or other out of the whole army. Nothing of Eliab’s reprimanding David for coming to see the battle, as in 1 Samuel 17:28; but for a very different reason; and, indeed, it is highly improbable that Eliab should treat him at all with contempt and scurrility, after having seen Samuel anoint him for the future king of Israel, see 1 Samuel 16:1-13. Nothing of a second conversation between David and the soldiers, as in 1 Samuel 17:30, 31. Nothing of Saul and Abner’s not knowing who was David’s father, at the time of his going forth against the Philistine, as in 1 Samuel 17:55. Nothing of David’s being introduced to the king by Abner, in form, after killing the Philistine, 1 Samuel 17:57, at a time when the king and the captain of the host had no leisure for complemental ceremony; but were set out, 1 Samuel 17:57, in immediate and full pursuit of the Philistines. Nor, lastly, is any notice taken here by Josephus of what now begins the 18th chapter, Jonathan’s friendship for David, which is related elsewhere, and in a different manner; on the contrary, as soon as Josephus has mentioned Goliath’s death, and told us that Saul and all Israel shouted, and fell at once upon the Philistines, and that, when the pursuit was ended, the head of Goliath was carried by David into his own tent, (and he could have then no tent of his own if he had not been then an officer in the army:) I say, as soon as Josephus has recorded these circumstances, he goes on to Saul’s envy and hatred of David, arising from the women’s songs of congratulation; exactly as these capital parts of the history are connected in the VATICAN MS. And with this circumstance I shall conclude these remarks; earnestly recommending the whole to the learned reader’s attentive examination.

“It must not however be forgot, that the learned F. Houbigant has, in his Bible, placed these twenty verses (from the 11th to the 32d) between hooks, as containing a passage which comes in very improperly. “If it be inquired as to this interpolation in Samuel, when it could possibly be introduced into the text? It may be observed that, about the time of Josephus, the Jews seem to have been fond of enlarging and, as they vainly thought, embellishing the sacred history, by inventing speeches, and prayers, and hymns, and also new articles of history, and these of considerable length; witness the several additions to the book of Esther; witness the long story concerning wine, women, and truth, inserted amidst parts of the genuine history of Ezra and Nehemiah, and worked up into what is now called the First Book of Esdras; witness the hymn of the three children in the fiery furnace, added to Daniel; and witness also the many additions in Josephus. Certainly, then, some few remarks might be noted by the Jews, and some few of their historical additions might be inserted in the margin of their Hebrew copies; which might afterwards be taken into the text itself by injudicious transcribers.

“The history of David’s conquest of the mighty and insulting Philistine is certainly very engaging; and it gives a most amiable description of a brave young man, relying with firm confidence upon the aid of the GOD of battle against the blaspheming enemy. It is not therefore very strange that some fanciful rabbin should be particularly struck with the strange circumstances of the Philistines daring to challenge all Israel; and David’s cutting off the giant’s head with the giant’s own sword. And then, finding that Josephus had said that David came from the sheep to the camp, and happened to hear the challenge, the rabbin might think it very natural that David should be indignant against the giant, and talk valorously to the soldiers, and that the soldiers should mightily encourage David; and then, to be sure, this was the most lucky season to introduce the celebrated friendship of Jonathan for David; particularly when, according to these additions, Jonathan had seen Abner leading David in triumph to the king’s presence; every one admiring the young hero, as he proudly advanced with the grim head of the Philistine in his hand. So that this multiform addition and fanciful embellishment of the rabbin reminds one of the motley absurdity described by the poet in the famous lines:—

Humano capiti cervicem pictor equinam

Jungere si velit, et varias inducere plasmas, &c.

“The passage supposed to be interpolated here, was in the Hebrew text before the time of Aquila; because there are preserved a few of the differences in those translations of it which were made by Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus. These verses, being thus acknowledged at that time, would doubtless be found in such copies as the Jews then declared to be genuine, and which they delivered afterwards to Origen as such. And that Origen did refer to the Jews for such copies as they held genuine, he allows in his epistle to Africanus; for there he speaks of soothing the Jews, in order to get pure copies from them.”-KENNICOTT’S Second Dissertation on the Hebrew Text, p. 419.

In the general dissertation which Dr. Kennicott has prefixed to his edition of the Hebrew Bible, he gives additional evidence that the verses in question were not found originally in the Septuagint, and consequently not in the Hebrew copy used for that version. Several MSS. in the royal library at Paris either omit these verses or have them with asterisks or notes of dubiousness. And the collation by Dr. Holmes and his continuators has brought farther proof of the fact. From the whole, there is considerable evidence that these verses were not in the Septuagint in the time of Origen; and if they were not in the MSS. used by Origen, it is very probable they were not in that version at first; and if they were not in the Septuagint at first, it is very probable that they were not in the Hebrew text one hundred and fifty years before Christ; and if not then in the Hebrew text, it is very probable they were not in that text originally. See Dissertation on Gen., p. 9; and Remarks on Select Passages, p. 104.

I have only to remark here, that the historical books of the Old Testament have suffered more by the carelessness or infidelity of transcribers than any other parts of the sacred volume; and of this the two books of Samuel, the two books of Kings, and the two books of Chronicles, give the most decided and unequivocal proofs. Of this also the reader has already had considerable evidence; and he will find this greatly increased as he proceeds.

It seems to me that the Jewish copyists had not the same opinion of the Divine inspiration of those books as they had of those of the law and the prophets; and have therefore made no scruple to insert some of their own traditions, or the glosses of their doctors, in different parts; for as the whole must evidently appear to them as a compilation from their public records, they thought it no harm to make different alterations and additions from popular statements of the same facts, which they found in general circulation. This is notoriously the case in Josephus; this will account, and it does to me very satisfactorily, for many of the various readings now found in the Hebrew text of the historical books. They were held in less reverence, and they were copied with less care, and emended with less critical skill, than the pentateuch and the prophets; and on them the hands of careless, ignorant, and temerarious scribes, have too frequently been laid. To deny this, only betrays a portion of the same ignorance which was the parent of those disorders; and attempts to blink the question, though they may with some be an argument of zeal, yet with all the sincere and truly enlightened friends of Divine revelation, will be considered to be as dangerous as they are absurd.

Where the rash or ignorant hand of man has fixed a blot on the Divine records, let them who in the providence of God are qualified for the task wipe it off; and while they have the thanks of all honest men, God will have the glory.

There have been many who have affected to deny the existence of giants. There is no doubt that the accounts given of several are either fabulous or greatly exaggerated. But men of an extraordinary size are not uncommon even in our own day: I knew two brothers of the name of Knight, who were born in the same township with myself, who were seven feet six inches high; and another, in the same place, Charles Burns who was eight feet six! These men were well and proportionately made. I have known others of this height, whose limbs were out of all proportion; their knees bent in, and joints rickety.

Ireland, properly speaking, is the only nation on the earth that produces GIANTS; and let me tell the poor, that this is the only nation in the world that may be said to live on potatoes; with little bread, and less flesh-meat. I have seen and entertained in my house the famous Polish dwarf, the Count Boruwlaski, who was about thirty-six inches high, every part of whose person was formed with the most perfect and delicate symmetry. The prodigious height and bulk of Charles Burns, and the astonishing diminutiveness of Count Boruwlaski, could not be properly estimated but by comparing both together. Each was a perfect man; and yet, in quantum, how disproportionate! Man is the only creature in whom the extremes of minuteness and magnitude are so apparent, and yet the proportion of the parts in each strictly correlative.

I SAMUEL

DAVID’S VICTORY OVER GOLIATH, 1-58.

Of this Philistine war, in which Goliath was slain, the time and causes are unknown; but as there was bitter war against the Philistines all the days of Saul, (1 Samuel 14:52,) we need not suppose that there was any special provocation on the part of the Israelites. Those obstinate enemies on the seacoast, who had held Israel in subjection forty years, (Judges 13:1,) were loath to lose them from among their tributaries; and their sufferings from the ark, (chap. 5,) and by the hand of Samuel, (1 Samuel 7:10,) and still more recently by the heroism of Jonathan, (chap. 14,) were sufficient provocation for them to attempt war at any time. Possibly, also, they had heard of the madness of Saul, and therefore deemed the present a favourable opportunity to wreak their fill of vengeance. As to the time of this war, Josephus tells us that it was shortly after the events narrated in the last chapter. But as we learn from verse 15 that David had returned from Saul to his father, and from verse 55 that Saul had forgotten Jesse, we incline to the belief that this war occurred some years after David’s introduction to Saul’s court.

1. Socoh — One of the cities of Judah. It has been identified with the modern Suweikeh, fourteen miles southwest of Jerusalem. Azekah… Ephes-dammim — These places have not been satisfactorily identified, but we incline to locate Ephes-dammim at the ruins of the modern Damum, a little to the east of Suweikeh; in which case Azekah may be, as Van de Velde has conjectured, at Ahbek, a little to the northeast of Damum.