Bible Commentaries

When the Lord had instructed Samuel to appoint a king over the nation, inaccordance with its own desire, He very speedily proceeded to show himthe man whom He had chosen. Saul the Benjaminite came to Samuel, toconsult him as a seer about his father's she-asses, which had been lost, andfor which he had been seeking in all directions in vain (1 Samuel 9:1-14). Andthe Lord had already revealed to the prophet the day before, that Hewould send him the man who had been set apart by Him as the king ofIsrael; and when Samuel met with Saul, He pointed him out as the man towhom He had referred (1 Samuel 9:15-17). Accordingly, Samuel invited Saul to behis guest at a sacrificial meal, which he was about to celebrate (1 Samuel 9:18-24). After the meal he made known to him the purpose of God, anointed himas king (1 Samuel 9:25-27; 1 Samuel 10:1), and sent him away, with an announcementof three signs, which would serve to confirm his election on the part ofGod (1 Samuel 10:2-16). This occurrence is related very circumstantially, tobring out distinctly the miraculous interposition of God, and to show thatSaul did not aspire to the throne; and also that Samuel did not appoint ofhis own accord the man whom he was afterwards obliged to reject, but thatSaul was elected by God to be king over His people, without anyinterference on the part of either Samuel or himself.

(Note: There is no tenable ground for the assumption of Thenius andothers, that this account was derived from a different source from 1 Samuel 8, 1 Samuel 10:17-27, and 1 Samuel 10:11.; for the assertion that 1 Samuel 10:17-27 connects itself in the most natural way with 1 Samuel 8 is neither well-founded nor correct. In the first place, it was certainly more naturalthat Samuel, who was to place a king over the nation according to theappointment of God, should be made acquainted with the man whomGod had appointed, before the people elected him by lot. Andsecondly, Saul's behaviour in hiding himself when the lots were cast (1 Samuel 10:21.), can only be explained on the supposition that Samuelhad already informed him that he was the appointed king; whereas, ifthis had not been the case, it would be altogether incomprehensible.)

1 Samuel 9:1-2

Saul searches for his father's asses. - 1 Samuel 9:1, 1 Samuel 9:2. The elaborategenealogy of the Benjaminite Kish, and the minute description of the figureof his son Saul, are intended to indicate at the very outset the importanceto which Saul attained in relation to the people of Israel, Kish was the sonof Abiel: this is in harmony with 1 Samuel 14:51. But when, on the otherhand, it is stated in 1 Chronicles 8:33; 1 Chronicles 9:39, that Ner begat Kish, the differencemay be reconciled in the simplest manner, on the assumption that the Nermentioned there is not the father, but the grandfather, or a still moreremote ancestor of Kish, as the intervening members are frequently passedover in the genealogies. The other ancestors of Kish are never mentionedagain. חיל גּבּור refers to Kish, and signifies not a braveman, but a man of property, as in 2:1. This son Saul (i.e., “prayedfor:” for this meaning of the word, comp. 1 Samuel 1:17, 1 Samuel 1:27) was “young andbeautiful.” It is true that even at that time Saul had a son grown up (viz.,Jonathan), according to 1 Samuel 13:2; but still, in contrast with his father, hewas “a young man,” i.e., in the full vigour of youth, probably about fortyor forty-five years old. There is no necessity, therefore, to follow theVulgate rendering electus. No one equalled him in beauty. “From hisshoulder upwards he was higher than any of the people.” Such a figure asthis was well adapted to commend him to the people as their king (cf. 1 Samuel 10:24), since size and beauty were highly valued in rulers, as signs ofmanly strength (see Herod. iii. 20, vii. 187; Aristot. Polit. iv. c. 24).

1 Samuel 9:3-5

Having been sent out by his father to search for his she-asseswhich had strayed, Saul went with his servant through the mountains ofEphraim, which ran southwards into the tribe-territory of Benjamin (see at1 Samuel 1:1), then through the land of Shalishah and the land of Shaalim, andafter that through the land of Benjamin, without finding the asses; and atlength, when he had reached the land of Zuph, he determined to return,because he was afraid that his father might turn his mind from the asses,and trouble himself about them (the son and servant). מן חדל, to desist from a thing, to give it up or renounce it.

As Saul started in any case from Gibeah of Benjamin, his own home (1 Samuel 10:10., 1 Samuel 10:26, 1 Samuel 11:4; 1 Samuel 15:34; 1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1), i.e., the present Tuleil el Phul,which was an hour or an hour and a half to the north of Jerusalem (see atJoshua 18:28), and went thence into the mountains of Ephraim, he no doubttook a north-westerly direction, so that he crossed the boundary ofBenjamin somewhere between Bireh and Atarah, and passing through thecrest of the mountains of Ephraim, on the west of Gophnah (Jifna), cameout into the land of Shalishah. Shalishah is unquestionably the countryround (or of) Baal-shalishah (2 Kings 4:42), which was situated, accordingto Eusebius (Onom. s.v. Βαιθσαρισάθ : Beth-sarisa or Beth-salisa), inregione Thamnitica, fifteen Roman miles to the north of Diospolis(Lydda), and was therefore probably the country to the west of Jiljilia,where three different wadys run into one large wady, called Kurawa; andaccording to the probable conjecture of Thenius, it was from this fact thatthe district received the name of Shalishah, or Three-land. They proceededthence in their search to the land of Shaalim: according to the Onom. (s.v.),“a village seven miles off, in finibus Eleutheropoleos contra occidentem.”But this is hardly correct, and is most likely connected with the mistakemade in transposing the town of Samuel to the neighbourhood ofDiospolis (see at 1 Samuel 1:1). For since they went on from Shaalim into the land of Benjamin, and thenstill further into the land of Zuph, on the south-west of Benjamin, theyprobably turned eastwards from Shalishah, into the country where we findBeni Mussah and Beni Salem marked upon Robinson's and v. de Velde'smaps, and where we must therefore look for the land of Shaalim, that theymight proceed thence to explore the land of Benjamin from the north-eastto the south-west. If, on the contrary, they had gone from Shaalim in asoutherly or south-westerly direction, to the district of Eleutheropolis,they would only have entered the land of Benjamin at the south-westcorner, and would have had to go all the way back again in order to gothence to the land of Zuph. For we may infer with certainty that the landof Zuph was on the south-west of the tribe-territory of Benjamin, fromthe fact that, according to 1 Samuel 10:2, Saul and his companion passedRachel's tomb on their return thence to their own home, and then came tothe border of Benjamin. On the name Zuph, see at 1 Samuel 1:1.

1 Samuel 9:6

When Saul proposed to return home from the land of Zuph, hisservant said to him, “Behold, in this city ('this,' referring to the townwhich stood in front of them upon a hill) is a man of God, much honoured;all that he saith cometh surely to pass: now we will go thither; perhaps hewill tell us our way that we have to go” (lit. have gone, and still go, sc., toattain the object of our journey, viz., to find the asses). The name of thistown is not mentioned either here or in the further course of this history. Nearly all the commentators suppose it to have been Ramah, Samuel'shome. But this assumption has no foundation at all in the text, and isirreconcilable with the statements respecting the return in 1 Samuel 10:2-5. The servant did not say there dwells in this city, but there is in this city(1 Samuel 9:6; comp. with this 1 Samuel 9:10, “They went into the city where the man ofGod was,” not “dwelt”). It is still more evident, from the answer given by the drawers of water,when Saul asked them, “Is the seer here?” (1 Samuel 9:11), - viz., “He came to-day tothe city, for the people have a great sacrifice upon the high place” (1 Samuel 9:12), - that the seer (Samuel) did not live in the town, but had only come thitherto a sacrificial festival. Moreover, “every impartial man will admit, that thefact of Samuel's having honoured Saul as his guest at the sacrificial meal ofthose who participated in the sacrifice, and of their having slept under thesame roof, cannot possibly weaken the impression that Samuel was onlythere in his peculiar and official capacity. It could not be otherwise thanthat the presidency should be assigned to him at the feast itself as priestand prophet, and therefore that the appointments mentioned shouldproceed from him. And it is but natural to assume that he had a house athis command for any repetition of such sacrifices, which we find from 2Kings 4 to have been the case in the history of Elisha” (Valentiner). Andlastly, the sacrificial festival itself does not point to Ramah; for althoughSamuel had built an altar to the Lord at Ramah (1 Samuel 7:17), this was byno means the only place of sacrifice in the nation. If Samuel offeredsacrifice at Mizpeh and Gilgal (1 Samuel 7:9; 1 Samuel 10:8; 1 Samuel 13:8.), he could also dothe same at other places. What the town really was in which Saul met withhim, cannot indeed be determined, since all that we can gather from 1 Samuel 10:2, is, that it was situated on the south-west of Bethlehem.

1 Samuel 9:7-8

Saul's objection, that they had no present to bring to the man ofGod, as the bread was gone from their vessels, was met by the servantwith the remark, that he had a quarter of a shekel which he would give.

1 Samuel 9:9-10

Before proceeding with the further progress of the affair, thehistorian introduces a notice, which was required to throw light upon whatfollows; namely, that beforetime, if any one wished to inquire of God, i.e.,to apply to a prophet for counsel from God upon any matter, it wascustomary in Israel to say, We will go to the seer, because “he that is nowcalled a prophet was beforetime called a seer.” After this parentheticalremark, the account is continued in 1 Samuel 9:10. Saul declared himself satisfiedwith the answer of the servant; and they both went into the town, to askthe man of God about the asses that were lost.

As they were going up to the high place of the town, they met maidenscoming out of the town to draw water; and on asking them whether theseer was there, they received this answer: “Yes; behold, he is before thee:make haste, now, for he has come into the town to-day; for the peoplehave a sacrifice to-day upon the high place.” (Bamah) (in the singular) doesnot mean the height or hill generally; but throughout it signifies the highplace, as a place of sacrifice or prayer.

“When ye come into the city, ye will find him directly before he goes upto the high place to eat.” כּן not only introduces the apodosis, butcorresponds to כּ, as, so: here, however, it is used with reference to time,in the sense of our “immediately.” “For the people are not accustomed toeat till he comes, for he blesses the sacrifice,” etc. בּרך, like εὐλογεῖν , refers to the thanksgiving prayer offered before thesacrificial meal. “Go now for him; yet will meet him even to-day.” Thefirst אתו is placed at the beginning for the sake of emphasis, andthen repeated at the close. כּהיּום, “Even to-day.”

When they went into the town, Samuel met them on his way out to go tothe high place of sacrifice. Before the meeting itself is described, thestatement is introduced in 1 Samuel 9:15-17, that the day before Jehovah hadforetold to Samuel that the man was coming to him whom he was to anointas captain over his people. אזן גּלה, to open any one'sear, equivalent to reveal something to him (1 Samuel 20:12; 2 Samuel 7:27, etc.). אשׁלח, I will send thee, i.e., “I will so direct his way in myoverruling providence, that he shall come to thee” (J. H. Mich.). Thewords, “that he may save my people out of the hand of the Philistines; forI have looked upon my people, for their cry is come unto me,” are not atall at variance with 1 Samuel 7:13. In that passage there is simply theassertion, that there was no more any permanent oppression on the partof the Philistines in the days of Samuel, such as had taken place before;but an attempt to recover their supremacy over Israel is not only notprecluded, but is even indirectly affirmed (see the comm. on 1 Samuel 7:13). The words before us simply show that the Philistines had then begun tomake a fresh attempt to contend for dominion over the Israelites. “I havelooked upon my people:” this is to be explained like the similar passage inExodus 2:25, “God looked upon the children of Israel,” and Exodus 3:7, “I havelooked upon the misery of my people.” God's looking was not a quiet,inactive looking on, but an energetic look, which brought help in trouble. “Their cry is come unto me:” this is word for word the same as in Exodus 3:9. As the Philistines wanted to tread in the footsteps of the Egyptians, itwas necessary that Jehovah should also send His people a deliverer fromthese new oppressors, by giving them a king. The reason here assigned forthe establishment of a monarchy is by no means at variance with thedispleasure which God had expressed to Samuel at the desire of the peoplefor a king (1 Samuel 8:7.); since this displeasure had reference to the state ofheart from which the desire had sprung.

When Samuel saw Saul, the Lord answered him, sc., in reply to the tacitinquiry, 'Is this he?' “Behold, this is the man of whom I spake to thee.”עצר, coercere imperio.

The thread of the narrative, which was broken off in 1 Samuel 9:15, is resumed in 1 Samuel 9:18. Saul drew near to Samuel in the gate, and asked him for the seer'shouse. The expression השּׁער בּתוך is used to definemore precisely the general phrase in 1 Samuel 9:14, העיר בּתוך בּאים; and there is no necessity to alter העיר in 1 Samuel 9:14 into השּׁער, as Thenius proposes, for העיר בּתוך כּוא does not mean to go (or be) in the middle of the town,as he imagines, but to go into, or enter, the town; and the entrance to thetown was through the gate.

1 Samuel 9:19-21

Samuel replied, “I am the seer: go up before me to the highplace, and eat with me to-day; and to-morrow I will send thee away, andmake known to thee all that is in thy heart.” Letting a person go in frontwas a sign of great esteem. The change from the singular עלה tothe plural אכלתּם may be explained on the ground that, whilstSamuel only spoke to Saul, he intended expressly to invite his servant tothe meal as well as himself. “All that is in thine heart” does not mean “allthat thou hast upon thy heart,” i.e., all that troubles thee, for Samuelrelieved him of all anxiety about the asses at once by telling him that theywere found; but simply the thoughts of thy heart generally. Samuel wouldmake these known to him, to prove to him that he was a prophet. He thenfirst of all satisfied him respecting the asses (1 Samuel 9:20): “As for the asses thatwere lost to thee to-day three days (three days ago), do not set thy heartupon them (i.e., do not trouble thyself about them), for they are found.”After this quieting announcement, by which he had convinced Saul of hisseer's gift, Samuel directed Saul's thoughts to that higher thing whichJehovah had appointed for him: “And to whom does all that is worthdesiring of Israel belong?Is it not to thee, and to all thy father's house?” “The desire of Israel”(optima quaeque Israel, Vulg.; “the best in Israel,” Luther) is not all thatIsrael desires, but all that Israel possesses of what is precious or worthdesiring (see Haggai 2:7). “The antithesis here is between the asses and everydesirable thing” (Seb. Schmidt). Notwithstanding the indefinite character ofthe words, they held up such glorious things as in prospect for Saul, thathe replied in amazement (1 Samuel 9:21), “Am not I a Benjaminite, of the smallestof the tribes of Israel? and my family is the least of all the families of thetribe of Benjamin (בן שׁבטי is unquestionably a copyist's errorfor בן שׁבת); and how speakest thou such a word to me?”Samuel made no reply to this, as he simply wanted first of all to awakenthe expectation in Saul's mind of things that he had never dreamt of before.

1 Samuel 9:22

When they arrived at the high place, he conducted Saul and hisservant into the cell (the apartment prepared for the sacrificial meal), andgave them (the servant as well as Saul, according to the simple customs ofantiquity, as being also his guest) a place at the upper end among thosewho had been invited. There were about thirty persons present, no doubtthe most distinguished men of the city, whilst the rest of the peopleprobably encamped in the open air.

1 Samuel 9:23-24

He then ordered the cook to bring the piece which he haddirected him to set aside, and to place it before Saul, namely the leg andהעליה (the article in the place of the relative; see Ewald, §331,b.); i.e., not what was over it, viz., the broth poured upon it (Dathe andMaurer), but what was attached to it (Luther). The reference, however, isnot to the kidney as the choicest portion (Thenius), for the kidneys wereburned upon the altar in the case of all the slain sacrifices (Leviticus 3:4), andonly the flesh of the animals offered in sacrifice was applied to thesacrificial meal. What was attached to the leg, therefore, can only havebeen such of the fat upon the flesh as was not intended for the altar. Whether the right or left leg, is not stated: the earlier commentators decidein favour of the left, because the right leg fell to the share of the priests(Leviticus 7:32.). But as Samuel conducted the whole of the sacrificialceremony, he may also have offered the sacrifice itself by virtue of hisprophetic calling, so that the right leg would fall to his share, and he mighthave it reserved for his guest. In any case, however, the leg, as the largest and best portion, was to be apiece of honour for Saul (see Genesis 43:34). There is no reason to seek forany further symbolical meaning in it. The fact that it was Samuel'sintention to distinguish and honour Saul above all his other guests, isevident enough from what he said to Saul when the cook had brought theleg: “Behold, that which is reserved is set before thee (שׂים is thepassive participle, as in Numbers 24:21); for unto this time hath it been keptfor thee, as I said I have invited the people.” למּועד is either“to the appointed time of thy coming,” or possibly, “for the (this) meetingtogether.” Samuel mentions this to give Saul his guest to understand thathe had foreseen his coming in a supernatural way. לאמר, saying,i.e., as I said (to the cook).

When the sacrificial meal was over, Samuel and Saul went down from thehigh place into the town, and he (Samuel) talked with him upon the roof(of the house into which Samuel had entered). The flat roofs of the Eastwere used as placed of retirement for private conversation (see at Deuteronomy 22:8). This conversation did not refer of course to the call of Samuel to theroyal dignity, for that was not made known to him as a word of Jehovahtill the following day (1 Samuel 9:27); but it was intended to prepare him for thatannouncement: so that O. v. Gerlach's conjecture is probably the correctone, viz., that Samuel “talked with Saul concerning the deep religious andpolitical degradation of the people of God, the oppression of the heathen,the causes of the inability of the Israelites to stand against these foes, thenecessity for a conversion of the people, and the want of a leader who wasentirely devoted to the Lord.”

(Note: For הגּג על עם־שׁאוּל וידבּר the lxx have καὶ διέστρωσαν τῷ Σαοὺλ ἐπι τῷ δώματι καὶ ἐκοιμήθη , “theyprepared Saul a bed upon the house, and he slept,” from whichClericus conjectured that these translators had read לשאול וירבדו (וירבּדוּ or ויּרבּדוּ); and Ewald and Thenius propose to alterthe Hebrew text in this way. But although וגו ויּשׁכּימוּ (1 Samuel 9:26) no doubt presupposes that Saul had slept in Samuel's house,and in fact upon the roof, the remark of Thenius, “that the privateconversation upon the roof (1 Samuel 9:25) comes too early, as Saul did notyet know, and was not to learn till the following day, what was aboutto take place,” does not supply any valid objection to the correctnessof the Masoretic text, or any argument in favour of the Septuagintrendering or interpretation, since it rests upon an altogetherunfounded and erroneous assumption, viz., that Samuel had talkedwith Saul about his call to the throne. Moreover, “the strangeness” of the statement in 1 Samuel 9:26, “they rose upearly,” and then “when the morning dawned, Samuel called,” etc.,cannot possibly throw any suspicion upon the integrity of the Hebrewtext, as this “strangeness” vanishes when we take וגו כּעלות ויהי as a more precise definition of ויּשׁכּימוּ. The Septuagint translators evidently held the same opinion astheir modern defenders. They took offence at Samuel's privateconversation with Saul, because he did not make known to him theword of God concerning his call to the throne till the next morning;and, on the other hand, as their rising the next morning is mentionedin 1 Samuel 9:26, they felt the absence of any allusion to their sleeping, andconsequently not only interpreted ידבר by a conjectural emendationas standing for ירבד rof, because מרבדּים רבד is usedin Proverbs 7:16 to signify the spreading of mats or carpets for a bed, butalso identified וישׁכמו with ישׁכבו, and rendered it ἐκοιμήθη . At the same time, they did not reflect that the preparation of the bedand their sleeping during the night were both of them matters ofcourse, and there was consequently no necessity to mention them;whereas Samuel's talking with Saul upon the roof was a matter ofimportance in relation to the whole affair, and one which could notbe passed over in silence. Moreover, the correctness of the Hebrewtext is confirmed by all the other ancient versions. Not only do theChaldee, Syriac, and Arabic follow the Masoretic text, but Jeromedoes the same in the rendering adopted by him, “Et locutus est cum Saule in solario. Cumque mane surrexissent;” though the words“stravitque Saul in solario et dormivit” have been interpolatedprobably from the Itala into the text of the Vulgate which has comedown to us.)

1 Samuel 9:26-27

“And they rose up early in the morning: namely, when themorning dawn arose, Samuel called to Saul upon the roof (i.e., he calledfrom below within the house up to the roof, where Saul was probablysleeping upon the balcony; cf. 2 Kings 4:10), Get up, I will conduct thee.”As soon as Saul had risen, “they both (both Samuel and Saul) went out(into the street).” And when they had gone down to the extremity of thetown, Samuel said to Saul, “Let the servant pass on before us (and he didso), and do thou remain here for the present; I will show thee a word ofGod.”