2 Samuel 1–20

Footnotes

1. 1 This chapter is closely linked to 1 Sam 31. It should be kept in mind that 1 and 2 Samuel were originally a single book, not separate volumes. Whereas in English Bible tradition the books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah are each regarded as two separate books, this was not the practice in ancient Hebrew tradition. Early canonical records, for example, counted them as single books respectively. The division into two books goes back to the Greek translation of the OT and was probably initiated because of the cumbersome length of copies due to the Greek practice (unlike that of Hebrew) of writing vowels. The present division into two books can be a little misleading in terms of perceiving the progression of the argument of the book; in some ways it is preferable to treat the books of 1–2 Samuel in a unified fashion.
2. 2 The Amalekites were a nomadic people who inhabited Judah and the Transjordan. They are mentioned in Gen 36:15–16 as descendants of Amalek who in turn descended from Esau. In Exod 17:8–16 they are described as having acted in a hostile fashion toward Israel as the Israelites traveled to Canaan from Egypt. In David’s time the Amalekites were viewed as dangerous enemies who raided, looted, and burned Israelite cities (see 1 Sam 30).
3. 3 Ziklag was a city in the Negev which had been given to David by Achish king of Gath. For more than a year David used it as a base from which he conducted military expeditions (see 1 Sam 27:5–12). According to 1 Sam 30:1–19, Ziklag was destroyed by the Amalekites while Saul fought the Philistines.
4. 4 Tearing one’s clothing and throwing dirt on one’s head were outward expressions of grief in the ancient Near East, where such demonstrable reactions were a common response to tragic news.
5. 5 Heb “he”; the referent (the man mentioned at the beginning of v. 2) has been specified in the translation to avoid confusion as to who fell to the ground.
6. 6 Heb “he fell to the ground and did obeisance.”
7. 7 Heb “What was the word?”
8. 8 Heb “from the people.”
9. 9 Heb “fell and died.”
10. 10 In v. 2 he is called simply a “man.” The word used here in v. 5 (so also in vv. 6, 13, 15), though usually referring to a young man or servant, may in this context designate a “fighting” man, i.e., a soldier.
11. 11 Instead of the “who was recounting this to him, ‘How do you know that Saul and his son Jonathan are dead?’ ” the reads “declare to me how Saul and his son Jonathan died.”
12. 12 The and one of the lack the words “who was telling him this” of the .
13. 13 The present translation reads with the Qere and many medieval Hebrew “and I said,” rather than the Kethib which has “and he said.” See the , , and , all of which have the first person.
14. 14 As P. K. McCarter (II Samuel [], ) points out, the Polel of the verb מוּת (mut, “to die”) “refers to dispatching or ‘finishing off’ someone already wounded and near death.” Cf. “put me out of my misery.”
15. 15 Heb “the dizziness has seized me.” On the meaning of the Hebrew noun translated “dizziness,” see P. K. McCarter, II Samuel (), . The point seems to be that he is unable to kill himself because he is weak and disoriented.
16. 16 The Hebrew text here is grammatically very awkward (Heb “because all still my life in me”). Whether the broken construct phrase is due to the fact that the alleged speaker is in a confused state of mind as he is on the verge of dying, or whether the has sustained corruption in the transmission process, is not entirely clear. The former seems likely, although P. K. McCarter understands the to be the result of conflation of two shorter forms of text (P. K. McCarter, II Samuel [], , n. 9). Early translators also struggled with the verse, apparently choosing to leave part of the Hebrew text untranslated. For example, the Lucianic recension of the lacks “all,” while other witnesses (namely, one medieval Hebrew , codices A and B of the , and the ) lack “still.”
17. 17 Heb “after his falling”; “could not survive his wound”; “was too badly wounded to live much longer.”
18. 18 The lacks the definite article, but this is likely due to textual corruption. It is preferable to read the alef (א) of אֶצְעָדָה (’ets’adah) as a ה (he) giving הַצְּעָדָה (hatsé’adah). There is no reason to think that the soldier confiscated from Saul’s dead body only one of two or more bracelets that he was wearing (cf. “one of his bracelets”).
19. 19 The claims that the soldier is making here seem to contradict the story of Saul’s death as presented in 1 Sam 31:3–5. In that passage it appears that Saul took his own life, not that he was slain by a passerby who happened on the scene. Some scholars account for the discrepancy by supposing that conflicting accounts have been brought together in the . However, it is likely that the young man is here fabricating the account in a self-serving way so as to gain favor with David, or so he supposes. He probably had come across Saul’s corpse, stolen the crown and bracelet from the body, and now hopes to curry favor with David by handing over to him these emblems of Saul’s royalty. But in so doing the Amalekite greatly miscalculated David’s response to this alleged participation in Saul’s death. The consequence of his lies will instead be his own death.
20. 20 The present translation follows the Qere and many medieval Hebrew in reading “his garments,” rather than “his garment,” the reading of the Kethib.
21. 21 The Hebrew word used here refers to a foreigner whose social standing was something less than that of native residents of the land, but something more than that of a nonresident alien who was merely passing through.
22. 22 Heb “young men.”
23. 23 Heb “be taught the bow.” The reference to “the bow” is very difficult here. Some interpreters (e.g., S. R. Driver, P. K. McCarter, Jr.) suggest deleting the word from the text (cf. , ), but there does not seem to be sufficient evidence for doing so. Others (cf. ) understand the reference to be elliptical, meaning “the use of the bow.” The verse would then imply that with the deaths of Saul and Jonathan having occurred, a period of trying warfare is about to begin, requiring adequate preparation for war on the part of the younger generation. Various other views may also be found in the secondary literature. However, it seems best to understand the word here to be a reference to the name of a song (i.e., “The Bow”), most likely the poem that follows in vv. 19–27 (cf. , , , , ); “this lament of the bow.” To make this clear the words “the song of” are supplied in the translation.
24. 24 The Book of Yashar is a noncanonical writing no longer in existence. It is referred to here and in Josh 10:12–13 and 1 Kgs 8:12–13. It apparently was “a collection of ancient national poetry” (so 449 יָשָׁר).
25. 25 The word beauty is used figuratively here to refer to Saul and Jonathan.
26. 26 The cities of Gath and Ashkelon are mentioned here by synecdoche of part for the whole. As major Philistine cities they in fact represent all of Philistia. The point is that when the sad news of fallen Israelite leadership reaches the Philistines, it will be for these enemies of Israel the occasion of great joy rather than grief.
27. 27 Instead of the ’s “fields of grain offerings” the Lucianic recension of the reads “your high places are mountains of death.” Cf. the Old Latin montes mortis (“mountains of death”).
28. 28 This is the only biblical occurrence of the Niphal of the verb גָּעַל (ga’al). This verb usually has the sense of “to abhor” or “loathe.” But here it seems to refer to the now dirty and unprotected condition of a previously well-maintained instrument of battle.
29. 29 It is preferable to read here Hebrew מָשׁוּחַ (mashuakh) with many Hebrew , rather than מָשִׁיחַ (mashiakh) of the . Although the understands the statement to pertain to Saul, the point here is not that Saul is not anointed. Rather, it is the shield of Saul that lies discarded and is no longer anointed. In ancient Near Eastern practice a warrior’s shield that was in normal use would have to be anointed regularly in order to ensure that the leather did not become dry and brittle. Like other warriors of his day Saul would have carefully maintained his tools of trade. But now that he is dead, the once-cared-for shield of the mighty warrior lies sadly discarded and woefully neglected, a silent but eloquent commentary on how different things are now compared to the way they were during Saul’s lifetime.
30. 30 The Hebrew imperfect verbal form is used here to indicate repeated past action.
31. 31 Heb “beloved and dear.”
32. 32 Clothing of scarlet was expensive and beyond the financial reach of most people.
33. 33 The expression weapons of war may here be a figurative way of referring to Saul and Jonathan.
34. 1 Heb “he said.” The referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity and for stylistic reasons.
35. 2 The expression “the cities of Hebron” is odd; we would expect the noun to be in the singular, if used at all. Although the has the expected reading “in Hebron,” the is clearly the more difficult reading and should probably be retained here.
36. 3 Heb “house.”
37. 4 Heb “and they told David.” The subject appears to be indefinite, allowing one to translate the verb as passive with David as subject.
38. 5 Heb “men.”
39. 6 Or “loyalty.”
40. 7 Or “loyalty and devotion.”
41. 8 Heb “will do with you this good.”
42. 9 Heb “let your hands be strong.”
43. 10 The name Ish-bosheth means in Hebrew “man of shame.” It presupposes an earlier form such as Ish-baal (“man of the Lord”), with the word “baal” being used of Israel’s God. But because the Canaanite storm god was named “Baal,” that part of the name was later replaced with the word “shame.”
44. 11 The here reads “the Ashurite,” but this is problematic if it is taken to mean “the Assyrian.” Ish-bosheth’s kingdom obviously was not of such proportions as to extend to Assyria. The renders the word as “the Geshurite,” while the has “of the house of Ashur.” We should probably emend the Hebrew text to read “the Geshurite.” The Geshurites lived in the northeastern part of the land of Palestine.
45. 12 Heb “house.”
46. 13 Heb “And the number of the days in which David was king in Hebron over the house of Judah was seven years and six months.”
47. 14 Heb “play.” What is in view here is a gladiatorial contest in which representative groups of soldiers engage in mortal combat before the watching armies. Cf. “perform for us”; “hold (have ) a contest before us”; “put on an exhibition of hand-to-hand combat.”
48. 15 Heb “let them arise.”
49. 16 Heb “and they grabbed each one the head of his neighbor with his sword in the side of his neighbor and they fell together.”
50. 17 The meaning of the name “Helkath Hazzurim” (so ; , , similar) is not clear. relates the name to the Hebrew term for “side,” and this is reflected in “the Field of the Sides”; the Greek OT revocalizes the Hebrew to mean something like “Field of Adversaries.” Cf. also , “Field of Swords”; “Field of Daggers.”
51. 18 Heb “servants.” So also elsewhere.
52. 19 Heb “young men.” So also elsewhere.
53. 20 Heb “Why should I strike you to the ground?”
54. 21 Heb “lift.”
55. 22 Heb “he”; the referent (Asahel) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
56. 23 Heb “the.” The article functions here as a possessive pronoun.
57. 24 Heb “he”; the referent (Asahel) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
58. 25 Heb “him”; the referent (Abner) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
59. 26 Heb “and they stand.”
60. 27 Heb “were gathered together.”
61. 28 The Hebrew verb נַעֲלָה (na’alah) used here is the Niphal perfect 3rd person masculine singular of עָלָה (’alah, “to go up”). In the Niphal this verb “is used idiomatically, of getting away from so as to abandon … especially of an army raising a siege …” (see S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel, ).
62. 29 Heb “stood.”
63. 30 Heb “they no longer chased after Israel and they no longer fought.”
64. 31 The word “River” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.
65. 32 Heb “and they went, all the Bitron.” The meaning of the Hebrew word “Bitron,” which is used only here in the OT, is disputed. The translation above follows 144 בִּתְרוֹן in taking the word to be a proper name of an area east of the Jordan. A different understanding was advocated by W. R. Arnold, who took the word to refer to the forenoon or morning; a number of modern scholars and translations have adopted this view (cf. , , , , ). See W. R. Arnold, “The Meaning of בתרון,” 28 (1911–1912): 274–83. In this case one could translate “and they traveled all morning long.”
66. 33 For location see ; ; ; .
67. 1 The Hebrew text does not have the word “son.” So also in vv. 3–5.
68. 2 Heb “wife.”
69. 3 The Hebrew text does not have “sons.”
70. 4 Heb “was strengthening himself.” The statement may have a negative sense here, perhaps suggesting that Abner was overstepping the bounds of political propriety in a self-serving way.
71. 5 The Hebrew of the reads simply “and he said,” with no expressed subject for the verb. It is not likely that the text originally had no expressed subject for this verb, since the antecedent is not immediately clear from the context. We should probably restore to the Hebrew text the name “Ish-bosheth.” See a few medieval Hebrew , Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and . Perhaps the name was accidentally omitted by homoioarcton. Note that both the name Ishbosheth and the following preposition אֶל (’el) begin with the letter alef.
72. 6 Heb “come to”; , “gone in to”; “been intimate with”; “sleep with.”
73. 7 This accusation against Abner is a very serious one, since an act of sexual infringement on the king’s harem would probably have been understood as a blatant declaration of aspirations to kingship. As such it was not merely a matter of ethical impropriety but an act of grave political significance as well.
74. 8 Heb “I do.”
75. 9 Heb “brothers.”
76. 10 Heb “and you have laid upon me the guilt of the woman today.”
77. 11 Heb “So will God do to Abner and so he will add to him.”
78. 12 Heb “has sworn to David.” The , with the exception of the recension of Origen, adds “in this day.”
79. 13 Heb “he”; the referent (Ish-bosheth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.