Poole on 2 Samuel 1:1-16: The Amalekite's Lying Account of the Death of Saul

[1056 BC]  Verse 1:[1]  Now it came to pass after the death of Saul, when David was returned from (1 Sam. 30:17, 26) the slaughter of the Amalekites, and David had abode two days in Ziklag…

[He remained in Ziklag]  For the city had not been so consumed by fire, that one might not lodge in it.  He was unwilling to migrate to other places of the Philistines, lest he increase their suspicions (Menochius[2]).

David had abode two days in Ziklag:  Which though burnt, yet was not so consumed by the fire, that David and his men could not lodge in it.

Verse 2:[3]  It came even to pass on the third day, that, behold, (2 Sam. 4:10) a man came out of the camp from Saul (1 Sam. 4:12) with his clothes rent, and earth upon his head:  and so it was, when he came to David, that he fell to the earth, and did obeisance.

On the third day; from David’s return to Ziklag, as the foregoing words manifest.  With his clothes rent, and earth upon his head; pretending sorrow for the loss of God’s people, in compliance with David’s humour.

[He did obeisance]  Acknowledging royal dignity in David (Menochius).

Verse 3:[4]  And David said unto him, From whence comest thou?  And he said unto him, Out of the camp of Israel am I escaped.

[Whence comest thou? אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה תָּב֑וֹא]  Verbatim:  where whence wilt thou come? a future/imperfect in the place of the present, that is, where is the place whence thou comest? (Vatablus[5] out of the Hebrews).

Verse 4:[6]  And David said unto him, How went (Heb. what was,[7] etc.; 1 Sam. 4:16[8]) the matter?  I pray thee, tell me.  And he answered, That the people are fled from the battle, and many of the people also are fallen and dead; and Saul and Jonathan his son are dead also.

[Saul and Jonathan]  He names only these two, because these alone seemed to obstruct David’s coming to the kingdom.  The rest were less celebrated, and were pertaining less to David (Menochius).

Saul and Jonathan his son are dead:  He mentions only these two, as those who seemed most to obstruct David’s coming to the crown.

Verse 5:[9]  And David said unto the young man that told him, How knowest thou that Saul and Jonathan his son be dead?

How knowest thou, etc.?:  For the knowledge of this did most concern both David and the whole commonwealth of Israel.

Verse 6:[10]  And the young man that told him said, As I happened by chance upon (1 Sam. 31:1) mount Gilboa, behold, (see 1 Sam. 31:2-4) Saul leaned upon his spear; and, lo, the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him.

[And the young man says, etc.]  Some maintain that he told the truth.  Thus Josephus[11] in Lyra,[12] and Hebrews in Sanchez,[13] and many others, says Estius.[14]  Others maintain that he lied to ingratiate himself with David (thus Lyra, Sanchez, Menochius, Martyr,[15] Malvenda[16]).  [See what thing were noted on 1 Samuel 31:4.]

[By chance I came (thus Munster[17]), נִקְרֹ֤א נִקְרֵ֙יתִי֙]  In happening upon I happened upon (Montanus[18]); by chance I happened upon (Arabic, similarly the Syriac, Vatablus).  Impelled by some fate, I came (Munster).

[And Saul was leaning (thus Munster, Junius[19] and Tremellius,[20] Vatablus, Syriac), נִשְׁעָן]  He was resting (Septuagint, Montanus, Pagnine,[21] Tigurinus[22]).

[Upon his spear (thus Jonathan,[23] Arabic, Munster, Junius and Tremellius, Tigurinus), עַל־חֲנִיתוֹ]  Upon his lance (Septuagint, Montanus, Pagnine), or javelin (Syriac).  Here, the lies reveal themselves, etc.  For Saul fell upon his sword (Sanchez).  But sword, in the expression of Scripture, signifies any sort of weapon, so that, when God threatens a people with pestilence, it is going to perish by His sword, etc. (Menochius).

[The chariots[24]]  That is, armed with scythes (Vatablus).  רֶכֶב is singular; but it is to be understood in the plural (Piscator[25]).

[And horsemen (thus Pagnine, Strigelius[26]), וּבַעֲלֵ֥י הַפָּרָשִׁ֖ים]  The Lords or Prefects (armies [Jonathan], columns [Munster]) of the horsemen (Septuagint, Tigurinus, Montanus, Malvenda).  But this is foreign; I would prefer, the Lords of the horses; that is, horsemen (Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals[27]).  [See above on 1 Samuel 8:11.[28]]  The chariots of men with the horsemen (Syriac, Arabic); troops of soldiers, who are called פָּרָשִׁים,[29] because they sting their horses with spurs.  Others:  commanders, or prefects,[30] of soldiers (Vatablus).

Verse 7:[31]  And when he looked behind him, he saw me, and called unto me.  And I answered, Here am I (Heb. behold me[32]).

Verse 8:[33]  And he said unto me, Who art thou?  And I answered him, I am an Amalekite.

[I am an Amalekite]  This was the son of Doeg[34] (Hebrews in Lyra).  Objection:  But Doeg was an Edomite.[35]  Response:  That does not matter.  All the Amalekites were Edomites; although not all Edomites were Amalekites.  Perhaps this one was of those that had preserved, contrary to the command of God;[36] and so by the just judgment of God he is killed by him (Martyr).  The lies also reveal themselves here.  For, if the enemies were pressing in, the Amalekite would not have interrupted his flight, in which he was engaged for the sake of his life, to take the bracelet and the crown.  Neither would Saul have been solicitous concerning the race of that man, to whom he was going to stretch forth his neck; nor would the sword of an Amalekite have been less odious to him, than that of a Philistine (Sanchez).

Verse 9:[37]  He said unto me again, Stand, I pray thee, upon me, and slay me:  for anguish is come upon me, because my life (or, my coat of mail, or, my embroidered coat hindereth me, that my life,[38] etc.) is yet whole in me.

Stand upon me, that is, lean upon me by thy weight and force, that the spear may come through me; or, stay by me, that is, stop thy flight, and tarry so long with me till thou hast killed me.

[Anguishes, or darkness (Syriac, similarly the Septuagint), or sorrows (Arabic), hold me, כִּ֥י אֲחָזַ֖נִי הַשָּׁבָ֑ץ]  For apprehends (has grasped [Vatablus], holds [Pagnine]) me anguish (Pagnine, English, similarly Strigelius, Castalio[39]), trembling or trepidation; that is, palpitation (Vatablus).  Thus Schindler:[40]  It is the name of a distemper from a wound or smiting of a sword (Schindler’s Lexicon).  Ring (Tigurinus), that is, they have enclosed me in a circle of enemies[41] (Mariana[42]).  An enclosure, that is, of horsemen (certain interpreters in Munster).  Others:  This coat of mail[43] has hindered me (Junius and Tremellius, Piscator, Buxtorf’s[44] Lexicon, English in the margin, Dutch, Pagnine’s Lexicon, Rabbi Levi[45] and Mercerus[46] in Malvenda); this impeded the spear, that it should not penetrate my body more deeply (Junius, Piscator, Rabbi Levi).  Others:  horsemen clothed in coats of mail (Pagnine’s Lexicon).  שָׁבָץ only appears here.  The cognate term in Exodus 28:4 is descriptive of a tunic.[47]  And elsewhere it signifies the pockets in which the gems are enclosed, Exodus 28:11, 13[48] (Piscator).

Anguish is come upon me, that is, I am in great pain of body, and anguish of mind.  Or thus, my coat of mail, or embroidered coat, hath hindered me, that the spear could not pierce into me.  Thus divers both Hebrew and other learned expositors understand it.

[My life is whole in me]  He speaks in a vulgar sense, as if one’s life might depart by parts, when the external members die by degrees (Menochius, similarly Sanchez).  I am yet full of the life and vigor of the soul (Vatablus).

My life is yet whole in me; I am heart-whole, and not likely to die, as well as not willing to live.

Verse 10:[49]  So I stood upon him, and (Judg. 9:54) slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen:  and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them hither unto my lord.

I stood upon him, and slew him:  it is most probable this was a lie, devised to gain David’s favour, as he supposed.  For, 1.  Saul was not killed by a spear, as he pretends, but by his sword, 1 Samuel 31:4.  2.  It is expressly said that Saul’s armourbearer, being yet living, saw that Saul was dead, 1 Samuel 31:5; which doubtless he would very thoroughly examine and know, before he would kill himself upon that account, as he did.  3.  Saul’s death is manifestly ascribed to his own action, even to his falling upon his sword, 1 Samuel 31:4, 5.

[I know that he was not able to live]  Thus he speaks so that he might excuse the deed, if perhaps David might not quite approve of it (Menochius).

I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen:  this he addeth by way of caution and excuse, that it might be thought an act of necessity and kindness, and not of choice or ill will, that he killed Saul.  But here also he betrays himself; for how could this be true, when Saul’s life was whole within him, as he had now said, 2 Samuel 1:9?

[I took the diadem]  The royal crown (Grotius[50]).  Some maintain that Saul did not make use of the diadem in the battle itself, lest he should make himself more conspicuous by that insignia; but that Doeg his armourbearer of Saul gave it to his son, so that he, bearing it to David, might insinuate himself into his favor (Tostatus[51] and Salian[52] in Menochius).  But, that he was made conspicuous by the diadem, is urged in verse 6, the weight of the battle was turned against Saul[53] (Menochius).

The crown that was upon his head; not that he then wore it; which would have exposed him too much, and that unnecessarily, to the rage of the Philistines; but that he used to wear it.  It is not likely that he found it now actually upon Saul’s head, but that he met with it in some part of the camp, whither Saul had brought it to wear it when he saw fit.

[And the bracelet from his arm]  Men were also making use of this ornament among those nations; Numbers 31:50 (Grotius).  אֶצְעָדָה is not derived from the Hebrew צָעַד, to march (for it was an ornament, not of the feet, but of the arms), but from the Æthiopic צעד/white, Matthew 5:36; 17:2; Mark 9:3, perhaps because it was glittering with white and clear gems (Dieu[54]).

Unto my lord; unto thee, whom, now Saul is dead, I own for my lord and king.

Verse 11:[55]  Then David took hold on his clothes, and (2 Sam. 3:31; 13:31) rent them; and likewise all the men that were with him…

Verse 12:[56]  And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until even, for Saul, and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the LORD, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword.

[And over the people of the Lord, and over the house of Israel[57]]  The ו/and here is put in the place of that is.  For, the people of Jehovah were the house of Israel (Vatablus).  Repetition of the same thing is common (Menochius).  Or the people of the Lord are the Priests and Levites consecrated to the Lord (Tostatus in Menochius).

Verse 13:[58]  And David said unto the young man that told him, Whence art thou?  And he answered, I am the son of a stranger, an Amalekite.

[Whence art thou? אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה]  Where from there, as in verse 3[59] (Vatablus).  He had told him this, but David, stricken with the surprise of the matter, did not fix his attention on it (Martyr, similarly Lyra).  He here furnishes an example of a good judge:  the defendant is to be examined one and again:  belief is not immediately to be afford to the first response (Martyr).

Whence art thou?  David heard and knew before what he was, but he asked it again judicially, in order to his trial and punishment.

Verse 14:[60]  And David said unto him, (Num. 12:8) How wast thou not (1 Sam. 31:4) afraid to (1 Sam. 24:6; 26:9; Ps. 105:15) stretch forth thine hand to destroy the LORD’S anointed?

How wast thou not afraid? etc.:  Why didst not thou refuse to kill him, as his armourbearer had done?  For notwithstanding his great danger, something might have fallen out through God’s all-disposing providence, whereby his life might have been preserved.

[The Christ of Jehovah]  In whom the image of God is twofold, for he is both man, and a minister of God (Martyr).

Verse 15:[61]  And (2 Sam. 4:10, 12) David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him.  And he smote him that he died.

[Fall upon him]  A similar thing was done to Canutus, killed by his rival, Everhard.  See the Danish histories (Grotius).

Verse 16:[62]  And David said unto him, (1 Sam. 26:9; 1 Kings 2:32, 33, 37) Thy blood be upon thy head; for (2 Sam. 1:10; Luke 19:22) thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the LORD’S anointed.

[Thy blood be upon thy head]  That is, the blood that thou hast shed is the cause of thy death (Vatablus).  Blood; that is, the sin of the shedding of blood is returned upon thine own head; thou shalt be punished for it (Menochius).  Charge the shedding of thy blood upon thyself and thine own head (Lapide[63]).  Blood is put for the shedding of blood; and the latter in the place of the cause of the shedding of the former.  Thus Leviticus 20:9 (Piscator).

Thy blood be upon thy head; the guilt of thy bloodshed or death lies upon thyself, not upon me, for thy free and voluntary confession is sufficient proof of thy guilt in killing the king.

[Thine own mouth hath spoken against thee]  It spoke those things, because of which he was to be executed (Menochius).  His narration is either true or false.  If true, it is murder; if false, he gives false testimony in a capital case, (in the cause of blood) which was capital.  Therefore, he is justly slain by David.  Question:  Whether belief should be afforded to anyone concerning himself?  Response:  The Canons appear contrary here; but the Glossa[64] thus reconciles them:  if anyone at trial voluntarily confesses concerning himself, and afterwards continues in that confession, that is sufficient.  But, if in questioning the confession be extorted, that is not sufficient.  For often (as Augustine observes, City of God 19:6) an innocent man is tortured over the sin of another; and often he suffers certain punishment over uncertain sins.  Rightly Louis Vives:[65]  One that is able to bear torment, he will not speak; one that is not able, he will lie (Martyr).  Ambrose[66] concerning this deed of David:  Because he preferred honesty to advantage, advantage followed honesty.  Tacitus,[67] Histories 1, after narrating the slaughter of Galba:[68]  More than one hundred and twenty petitions of those demanding rewards for some notable deed done that day were afterwards found by Vitellius;[69] he ordered them all to be hunted and killed, not in honor of Galba, but according to the traditional custom of princes, a fortification for the present, and vengeance for the future.  Seneca the Trajedian:[70]  Kings have the greatest need to guard the life of Kings.[71]  It is not dissimilar, that Julius Cæsar, restoring the statues of Pompey, is said to have established his own (Grotius).  Question:  Whether David did rightly, who was not yet having royal power?  Response:  Just so.  For, 1.  David, with Saul now dead, by the disposition of God, had royal power (Tirinus[72] out of Tostatus and Cajetan,[73] similarly Lapide, Sanchez).  2.  God had commanded that all Amalekites be killed (Lapide).

[1] Hebrew:  וַיְהִ֗י אַֽחֲרֵי֙ מ֣וֹת שָׁא֔וּל וְדָוִ֣ד שָׁ֔ב מֵהַכּ֖וֹת אֶת־הָעֲמָלֵ֑ק וַיֵּ֧שֶׁב דָּוִ֛ד בְּצִקְלָ֖ג יָמִ֥ים שְׁנָֽיִם׃

[2] John Stephen Menochius (1576-1656) joined the Society of Jesuits at an early age.  His superiors in the order, recognizing his academic abilities, set him apart for training in the exposition of Holy Scripture.  His critical acumen and commitment to the literal sense of the text are on display in his Commentariis in Sacram Scripturam.

[3] Hebrew: וַיְהִ֣י׀ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֗י וְהִנֵּה֩ אִ֙ישׁ בָּ֤א מִן־הַֽמַּחֲנֶה֙ מֵעִ֣ם שָׁא֔וּל וּבְגָדָ֣יו קְרֻעִ֔ים וַאֲדָמָ֖ה עַל־רֹאשׁ֑וֹ וַיְהִי֙ בְּבֹא֣וֹ אֶל־דָּוִ֔ד וַיִּפֹּ֥ל אַ֖רְצָה וַיִּשְׁתָּֽחוּ׃

[4] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֤אמֶר לוֹ֙ דָּוִ֔ד אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה תָּב֑וֹא וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֵלָ֔יו מִמַּחֲנֵ֥ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל נִמְלָֽטְתִּי׃

[5] Francis Vatablus (c. 1485-1547) was a prominent Hebrew scholar, doing much to stimulate Hebraic studies in France.  He was appointed to the chair of Hebrew in Paris (1531).  Because of some consonance with Lutheran doctrine, his annotations (Annotationes in Vetus et Novum Testamentum), compiled by his auditors, were regarded with the utmost esteem among Protestants, but with a measure of suspicion and concern by Roman Catholics.  Consequently, the theologians of Salamanca produced their own edition of Vatablus’ annotations for their revision of the Latin Bible (1584).

[6] Hebrew: וַיֹּ֙אמֶר אֵלָ֥יו דָּוִ֛ד מֶה־הָיָ֥ה הַדָּבָ֖ר הַגֶּד־נָ֣א לִ֑י וַ֠יֹּאמֶר אֲשֶׁר־נָ֙ס הָעָ֜ם מִן־הַמִּלְחָמָ֗ה וְגַם־הַרְבֵּ֞ה נָפַ֤ל מִן־הָעָם֙ וַיָּמֻ֔תוּ וְגַ֗ם שָׁא֛וּל וִיהוֹנָתָ֥ן בְּנ֖וֹ מֵֽתוּ׃

[7] Hebrew:  מֶה־הָיָה.

[8] 1 Samuel 4:16:  “And the man said unto Eli, I am he that came out of the army, and I fled to day out of the army.  And he said, What is there done (מֶֽה־הָיָ֥ה הַדָּבָ֖ר), my son?”

[9] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֣אמֶר דָּוִ֔ד אֶל־הַנַּ֖עַר הַמַּגִּ֣יד ל֑וֹ אֵ֣יךְ יָדַ֔עְתָּ כִּי־מֵ֥ת שָׁא֖וּל וִיהֽוֹנָתָ֥ן בְּנֽוֹ׃

[10] Hebrew: וַיֹּ֜אמֶר הַנַּ֣עַר׀ הַמַּגִּ֣יד ל֗וֹ נִקְרֹ֤א נִקְרֵ֙יתִי֙ בְּהַ֣ר הַגִּלְבֹּ֔עַ וְהִנֵּ֥ה שָׁא֖וּל נִשְׁעָ֣ן עַל־חֲנִית֑וֹ וְהִנֵּ֥ה הָרֶ֛כֶב וּבַעֲלֵ֥י הַפָּרָשִׁ֖ים הִדְבִּקֻֽהוּ׃

[11] Flavius Josephus (37-93) was a priest in the Temple of Jerusalem, a Jewish general, and an eyewitness to the final siege of Jerusalem.  Josephus’ works are invaluable to the student of Jewish antiquities and of the history of the fall of Jerusalem.

[12] Little is known about the early life of Nicholas de Lyra (1270-1340).  He entered the Franciscan Order and became a teacher of some repute in Paris.  His Postilla in Vetus et Novum Testamentum are remarkable for the time period:  Lyra was firmly committed to the literal sense of the text, as a necessary control for allegorical exposition; and he drew heavily upon Hebraic and Rabbinical materials.  His commentary was influential among the Reformers.

[13] Gasper Sanchez (1554-1628) was a Jesuit scholar.  He served as Professor of Divinity at Alcala.  He wrote Commentarius et Paraphrasis in Libros Regum, as well as commentaries on Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the Song of Solomon.

[14] William Estius (1542-1613) labored first as a lecturer on Divinity, then as the Chancellor at Doway.  Theologically, he bears the imprint of the modified Augustinianism of Michael Baius.  In his commentary writing, as exemplified in his Commentariis in Sacram Scripturam and Commentariis in Epistolas Apostolicas, he focuses on the literal meaning of the text; and he is widely regarded for his exegetical skill and judgment.

[15] Peter Martyr Vermigli (1499-1562) began his career as an Augustinian monk, preacher, and lecturer in Italy.  Through personal study of the Scripture and the Reformers, he came to embrace the Protestant doctrines.  He settled in England and served as Professor of Divinity at Oxford and as Canon of Christ Church.  Unhappily, he was forced to flee from England as well, when Mary Tudor took the throne.  He settled in Zurich and became Professor of Divinity there.  Vermigli wrote In Duos Libros Samuelis Prophetæ Commentarios Doctissimos.

[16] Thomas Malvenda (1566-1628) was a Spanish Dominican.  Within his order, he was widely regarded for his abilities in philosophy and divinity.

[17] Sebastian Munster (1489-1552) was a German scholar of great talent in the fields of mathematics, Oriental studies, and Divinity.  He left the Franciscans to join the Lutherans, became Professor of Hebrew at Basil (1529-1552), and produced an edition of the Hebrew Bible with a Latin translation and important early Reformation annotations (Annotationibus in Vetus Testamentum).

[18] Benedict Arias Montanus (1527-1598) was a Spanish Benedictine monk.  He attended the Council of Trent, and he was heavily involved in the production of the Antwerp Polyglot Bible.  Montanus also commented on a number of Biblical books.

[19] Francis Junius (1545-1602) was a Huguenot divine of great learning.  He suffered the varied fortunes of his people; but he had the opportunity to study in Geneva, and he was eventually appointed Professor of Divinity at Leiden (1592).  Junius’ De Vera Theologia was massively important in the development of the Dogmatic structure of Reformed Scholasticism.  He also labored with Tremellius in the production of their famous Latin Version of the Old Testament.

[20] John Immanuel Tremellius (1510-1580) converted from Judaism to Christianity and quickly embraced the principles of the Reformation.  He taught Hebrew at Strasburg (1541) and at Cambridge (succeeding Paul Fagius in 1549), and served as Professor of Old Testament at Heidelberg (1561).

[21] Pagnine (1466-1541) was an Italian Dominican.  He was gifted as a Hebraist, exegete, and preacher.  He was commissioned by Pope Leo X to produce a new Latin translation of the Scripture.

[22] Leo Jud (1482-1542) was a co-laborer of Ulrich Zwingli during the time of the Swiss Reformation.  His translation work might be his most important contribution to the reformation of Zurich.  He labored with other divines to produce a vernacular version for the Swiss people, and he produced a Latin version of the Old Testament, usually known as “Tigurinus”, which would be translated, “of Zurich”.

[23] Jonathan ben Uzziel (first century) was one of the great pupils of Hillel.  It is a matter of some doubt whether Jonathan ben Uzziel is actually responsible for the translation of this portion of the Chaldean Version.  For the most part, Targum Jonathan tends to be more paraphrastic and expansive than Targum Onkelos.

[24] Hebrew:  הָרֶכֶב.

[25] John Piscator (1546-1626) was a learned Protestant divine.  He held the position of Professor of Divinity at Herborn (1584).  His German version was the first, complete and independent, since that of Martin Luther.  Through the course of his career, his views changed from those of the Lutherans to those of the Calvinists, and from those of the Calvinists to those of the Arminians.  He remains widely regarded for his abilities as a commentator.

[26] Victorinus Strigelius (1524-1569) was a Melanchthonian Lutheran scholar and Professor of Philosophy at Jena, and then at Leipzig.  He wrote Libros Samuelis, Regum, et Paralipomenon, ad Veritatem Hebraicam Recognitos, et Brevibus Commentariis Explicatos.

[27] Samuel Bochart (1599-1667) was a French Protestant pastor and scholar with a wide variety of interests, including philology, theology, geography, and zoology.  Indeed his works on Biblical geography (Geographia Sacra) and zoology (Hierozoicon, sive Bipertitum Opus de Animalibus Scripturæ) became standard reference works for generations.  He was on familiar terms with many of the greatest men of his age.

[28] 1 Samuel 8:11:  “And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you:  He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen (וְשָׂ֥ם לוֹ֙ בְּמֶרְכַּבְתּ֣וֹ וּבְפָרָשָׁ֔יו); and some shall run before his chariots.”

[29] פָּרָשׁ can signify a horse or horseman; פָּרַשׁ can also signify to pierce or sting.

[30] פָּרַשׁ can signify to make distinct.

[31] Hebrew:  וַיִּ֥פֶן אַחֲרָ֖יו וַיִּרְאֵ֑נִי וַיִּקְרָ֣א אֵלָ֔י וָאֹמַ֖ר הִנֵּֽנִי׃

[32] Hebrew:  הִנֵּנִי.

[33] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֥אמֶר לִ֖י מִי־אָ֑תָּה וַיֹּאמֶ֣ר אֵלָ֔יו עֲמָלֵקִ֖י אָנֹֽכִי׃

[34] See 1 Samuel 21; 22; Psalm 52.

[35] 1 Samuel 21:7.

[36] See 1 Samuel 15.

[37] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֵלַ֗י עֲמָד־נָ֤א עָלַי֙ וּמֹ֣תְתֵ֔נִי כִּ֥י אֲחָזַ֖נִי הַשָּׁבָ֑ץ כִּֽי־כָל־ע֥וֹד נַפְשִׁ֖י בִּֽי׃

[38] Hebrew:  אֲחָזַ֖נִי הַשָּׁבָ֑ץ כִּֽי—נַפְשִׁ֖י.

[39] Sebastian Castalio (1515-1563) distinguished himself as a scholar by means of his linguistic talents, evident in his Annotationibus in Vetus et Novum Testamentum.  After a period of working closely with Calvin, the two fell into controversy.  Castalio was inclined towards Pelagianism, and his views were influential in the development of Socinianism.  As a translator of the Bible, he takes great liberty with the text, molding the speech of the prophets to conform to the standards of classical Latin.

[40] Valentine Schindler (died 1604) was a Lutheran Hebraist.  He was Professor of Oriental Languages at Wittenberg and at Helmstadt, and composed Lexicon Pentaglotton:  Hebraicum, Chaldaicum, Syriacum, Talmudico-Rabbinicum, et Arabicum.

[41] שָׁבַץ, in the Pual, signifies to be enclosed.

[42] John Mariana (c. 1536-1624) was a Spanish Jesuit priest and scholar.  While teaching theology in Rome, Robert Bellarmine was among his pupils.  His magnum opus was the thirty-book history of Spain, Historiæ de Rebus Hispaniæ.

[43] שָׁבַץ, in the Piel, signifies to weave in a plaited work.

[44] Johann Buxtorf, Sr. (1564-1629) was a renowned Reformed Hebraist, known as the “Master of the Rabbis”.  He served as Professor of Hebrew at Basel from 1590 to 1629.

[45] Although little is known about the life of Levi ben Gershon, also known as Gersonides and Ralbag (1288-1344), his interests included, not only Biblical and Talmudic interpretation, but also philosophy, science, and mathematics.  He composed commentaries on 1 and 2 Samuel.

[46] John Mercerus (c. 1510-1572) was a French Catholic Hebraist, successor to Francis Vatablus as Professor of Hebrew and Chaldean at the Hebrew College, Paris (1549), a scholar and lecturer of great reputation in his day.  He was suspected of having Calvinistic sympathies.

[47] Exodus 28:4:  “And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat (וּכְתֹ֥נֶת תַּשְׁבֵּ֖ץ, and a coat of plaited work), a mitre, and a girdle:  and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.”

[48] Exodus 28:11, 13:  “With the work of an engraver in stone, like the engravings of a signet, shalt thou engrave the two stones with the names of the children of Israel:  thou shalt make them to be set in ouches of gold (מִשְׁבְּצ֥וֹת זָהָ֖ב)….  And thou shalt make ouches of gold (מִשְׁבְּצֹ֖ת זָהָֽב׃)…”

[49] Hebrew: וָאֶעֱמֹ֤ד עָלָיו֙ וַאֲמֹ֣תְתֵ֔הוּ כִּ֣י יָדַ֔עְתִּי כִּ֛י לֹ֥א יִֽחְיֶ֖ה אַחֲרֵ֣י נִפְל֑וֹ וָאֶקַּ֞ח הַנֵּ֣זֶר׀ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־רֹאשׁ֗וֹ וְאֶצְעָדָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־זְרֹע֔וֹ וָאֲבִיאֵ֥ם אֶל־אֲדֹנִ֖י הֵֽנָּה׃

[50] Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) distinguished himself in the field of international law, but he was interested in many fields of learning, including Christian apologetics, theology, and Biblical criticism and exegesis.  He was a strict practitioner of the historical-contextual method of exegesis, and both his methods and conclusions are on display in his influential Annotationibus in Vetus et Novum Testamentum.  He is also remembered for his role in the Arminian controversy, siding with the Remonstrants, and for his governmental theory of atonement.

[51] Alonso Tostado, or Tostatus (c. 1400-1455), was a Spanish, Roman Catholic churchman and scholar.  He was trained in philosophy, theology, civil and canon law, Greek, and Hebrew.  He wrote commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament (Genesis-2 Chronicles), and on the Gospel of Matthew.

[52] Jacques Salian (1557-1640) was a French Jesuit.  He wrote Annales Ecclesiasticos Veteris Testamenti, quibus Connexi Sunt Annales Imperii Assyriorum, Babyloniorum, Persarum, Græcorum, atque Romanorum.

[53] 1 Samuel 31:3.

[54] Louis de Dieu (1590-1642) was a Dutch Reformed minister, linguist, and orientalist.  He brought his considerable learning to bear upon the interpretation of the Scripture.

[55] Hebrew:  וַיַּחֲזֵ֥ק דָּוִ֛ד בִּבְגָדָ֖ו וַיִּקְרָעֵ֑ם וְגַ֥ם כָּל־הָאֲנָשִׁ֖ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר אִתּֽוֹ׃

[56] Hebrew: וַֽיִּסְפְּדוּ֙ וַיִּבְכּ֔וּ וַיָּצֻ֖מוּ עַד־הָעָ֑רֶב עַל־שָׁא֞וּל וְעַל־יְהוֹנָתָ֣ן בְּנ֗וֹ וְעַל־עַ֤ם יְהוָה֙ וְעַל־בֵּ֣ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל כִּ֥י נָפְל֖וּ בֶּחָֽרֶב׃ ס

[57] Hebrew:  וְעַל־עַ֤ם יְהוָה֙ וְעַל־בֵּ֣ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל.

[58] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֣אמֶר דָּוִ֗ד אֶל־הַנַּ֙עַר֙ הַמַּגִּ֣יד ל֔וֹ אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה אָ֑תָּה וַיֹּ֕אמֶר בֶּן־אִ֛ישׁ גֵּ֥ר עֲמָלֵקִ֖י אָנֹֽכִי׃

[59] 2 Samuel 1:3:  “And David said unto him, From whence (אֵ֥י מִזֶּ֖ה) comest thou?  And he said unto him, Out of the camp of Israel am I escaped.”

[60] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֵלָ֖יו דָּוִ֑ד אֵ֚יךְ לֹ֣א יָרֵ֔אתָ לִשְׁלֹ֙חַ֙ יָֽדְךָ֔ לְשַׁחֵ֖ת אֶת־מְשִׁ֥יחַ יְהוָֽה׃

[61] Hebrew:  וַיִּקְרָ֣א דָוִ֗ד לְאַחַד֙ מֵֽהַנְּעָרִ֔ים וַיֹּ֖אמֶר גַּ֣שׁ פְּגַע־בּ֑וֹ וַיַּכֵּ֖הוּ וַיָּמֹֽת׃

[62] Hebrew:  וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֵלָיו֙ דָּוִ֔ד דָּמֶיךָ֖ עַל־רֹאשֶׁ֑ךָ כִּ֣י פִ֗יךָ עָנָ֤ה בְךָ֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר אָנֹכִ֥י מֹתַ֖תִּי אֶת־מְשִׁ֥יחַ יְהוָֽה׃ ס

[63] Cornelius à Lapide (1567-1637) was a Flemish Jesuit scholar.  His talents were employed in the professorship of Hebrew at Louvain, then at Rome.  Although his commentaries (covering the entire Roman Catholic canon, excepting only Job and the Psalms) develop the four-fold sense of Scripture, he emphasizes the literal.  His knowledge of Hebrew, Greek, and the commentators that preceded him is noteworthy.

[64] Anselm of Laon (died 1117) became the dean and chancellor of the cathedral school at Laon.  The great contribution of Anselm and his school is the Glossa Ordinaria, a collection of Biblical glosses from the Church Fathers.  This collection was begun by Anselm and completed by his students, and was eventually printed in the margins of the Vulgate.  The Glossa Ordinaria became the standard commentary on the Scriptures in Western Europe.

[65] John Louis Vives (1492-1540) was a Spanish classicist.  He wrote a commentary on Augustine’s City of God.

[66] Ambrose (340-397), Bishop of Milan, was a man of great influence, ecclesiastically and politically, and was instrumental in the conversion of Augustine.

[67] Publius Cornelius Tacitus (c. 56-c. 117) was a Roman historian.  The information that he preserves about his era and its emperors is invaluable.

[68] Galba was Roman Emperor from 68 to 69.  He was assassinated by his Prætorian Guard.

[69] Vitellius was Roman Emperor in 69, having succeeded Otho and Galba.

[70] Lucius Annæus Seneca (c. 4 BC-65 AD) was a Roman philosopher and dramatist.

[71] Œdipus 242.

[72] James Tirinus (1580-1636) was a Flemish Jesuit priest.  His abilities as a commentator are displayed in his Commentariis in Sacram Scripturam.

[73] Thomas Cajetan (1469-1534) was an Italian cardinal and one of the more able opponents of the Reformation.