1 Samuel 1

Chap. I. Ver. 1—27. David receives tidings of the death of Saul and Jonathan, and laments over them.—*‘David, when dismissed by Achish, came to Ziklag on the third day. ((1 Samuel 30:1).) Then, in following the Amalekites and fighting one day and part of another, and returning to Ziklag, must be spent, suppose four days; and now two days at Ziklag: so this was the ninth day of David’s dismission. The Israelites and Philistines had probably lain encamped some time before they had fought. Saul, after he had viewed the Philistines, went to Endor, and came back before the fight.”—(Dr. Wall’s Crit. The first intelligence which David received of the event of Chap. I. Ver. 6. As happened, &c.—The story of this young man appears to be wholly a fiction, formed for the purpose of ingratiating himself with David, as the next probable successor to the crown.

‘There is no fact in the case, ‘ the bringing of the diadem and bracelets of Saul, as a sufficient evidence of his death, which, as he appears to have been a plunderer of the slain, he had been promised, expostulated, saying, How can this man be our king, who has — Samuel replied, The Lord has chosen him, who disposes of kingdoms without estate? How can he support the expense and dignity of the royal state, control, to whomsoever he pleases. The Israelites would not yet submit, but insisted on having a sign from Samuel, that they might be assured from God, that this was his will. Samuel answered them, This is the miracle that God gives you to confirm his choice; the ark of the Lord which was taken away by the Philistines, shall be brought back to you by angels.

When, therefore, the election of Saul was proclaimed, the Philistines being desirous to conceal the ark of the Lord, which had caused them so many misfortunes by its presence, they hid it in a dunghill, but they were smitten with a fearful disease, which determined them to send it back to the confines of the land of Israel. It was no sooner arrived at this place, than the angels of the Lord took it up, and carried it to the tabernacle of Shiloh; and this miracle secured Saul in his kingdom. (See D’Herbelot, Biblioth. Orient. Pp. 735, 1021.) These traditions may justly be regarded as a confirmation, if such were really wanting, of the Scripture history, and as genuine instances of the variations of tradition from that precision which belongs to truth, even while it approaches near to truth.

In reading this and similar tales, it is impossible the observation should escape our notice, how much SUPERIOR the simple narrations of Scripture are to whatever is current elsewhere; what additional authority they derive from their simplicity, and their unlaboured, unassuming manner; what nature there is in them, what ease and verisimilitude. No person whose taste and judgment are undepraved, can hesitate which system to prefer, even supposing the nonexistence of other criteria.]—Bagster. THE SECOND BOOK OF SAMUEL, OTHERWISE CALLED, BOOK OF REIGNING. building a temple, with his prayer on the occasion; his victories over the Philistines, Ammonites, Syrians, &c.; his sin in the matter of Uriah; the divine judgment pronounced against him; his repentance and pardon; with the birth of Solomon; his domestic troubles in consequence; the sin and fratricide of Amnon; the rebellion and death of Absalom, and David’s mourning on the occasion; the return of David, with the quelling of Sheba’s insurrection; his punishment of the sons of Saul, and last war with the Philistines; his psalm of thanksgiving, his last words, and his mighty men; his offence in numbering the people; its punishment; with his penitence and sacrifice.]—Baz-A.

M. 2949, 4 And David said unto him, « How went the battle? behold, Saul leaned upon his spear; and, lo the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him. The battle was by this Amalekite, who came hypocritically arrayed with all the usual signs of mourning, (see (Joshua 7:6).) while his object was, in fact, to claim a reward, for contributing his part to the fatal catastrophe. As his narrative was framed for this purpose, no regard must be paid to it, any farther than it harmonizes with the preceding history; and by that account it appears that this foreigner charged himself with the death of Saul, in which he perhaps had no hand, and thereby brought upon himself that death, from which the truth would possibly have saved him.

Thus it often happens, that the very method which liars take to screen their guilt, brings on them condemnation and punishment. This man, however, seems to have stripped from the dead body of the unfortunate monarch. It is remarkable, that Saul, who had forfeited his crown by his disobedience and ill-timed clemency with respect to the Amalekites, should now have the insignia of royalty stripped from his person by one of those very people.]—Bagster. 977