statement of the elders of Jabesh (ver.3) was evidently intended to mislead Nahash.

This is evidently the meaning, and not that conveyed in our Authorised Version.

Curiously enough, Keil seems to have overlooked that the Hebrew word here used is that for "terror," or

"awe," not fear. The sacred text ascribes the origin of this terror to the agency of Jehovah - not in the sense

of a miracle, but because it always traces up effects to Him as their first cause.

It almost appears as if we here met the first traces of a separation of the people into Israel and Judah.

Similarly 17:52; 18:16; 2 Samuel 2:9; 3:10; 5:1-5; 19:41, etc.; 20:2, 4.

Some writers have imagined that Saul was anointed a second time. But for this there is no warrant in the

It is thus that I understand 1 Samuel 12:2: "And, behold, my sons, they are with you."

That Samuel did not blame Israel for wishing a king, but for the views and motives which underlay their

application, appears (as Hengstenberg has shown) from the circumstance that when the people are

repentant (ver. 19), he does not labor to make them recall what had been done, but only to turn unto the

Lord (vers. 20-25).

In the list of the judges mentioned by Samuel we find the name of Bedan (ver. 11). In all probability this is

a copyist's mistake for Barak.

That is - the months of May and June.

We have ventured to suggest this explanation of the miraculous occurrence, because it meets all the

requirements of the case, and because, even during the preparatory dispensation of the Old Testament,

miracles were not mere exhibitions of power without moral purpose or meaning. At the same time, we fully

and frankly accept the fact that in Biblical times, and till after the outpouring of the Holy Ghost, personal

interposition on the part of God - miracle and prophetic inspiration - was the rule, not the exception, in God's

dealings with His people.

Accordingly the commencement of Saul's reign was dated from Gilgal. Hence 1 Samuel 13:1 had opened,

as the history of all other kings (comp. 2 Samuel 2:10; 5:4; 1 Kings 14:21; 22:42; 2 Kings 8:26; etc.), with the

statistical data of his age at the commencement, and the duration of his reign. But unfortunately the numeral

letters have wholly fallen out of the first, and partia lly out of the second clause of ver. 1, which, as they

stand in our present Hebrew text, may be thus represented: "Saul was... years old when he was made king,

and he reigned two... years over Israel." All other attempts at explanation of this verse - notably that of our

Authorised Version - are incompatible with the Hebrew and with history. According to Jewish tradition

(Jos., Antiq., 6. 14, 9), Saul reigned for forty years. This is also the time mentioned by St. Paul (Acts 13:21).

There is no sufficient reason for the view of certain critics that the "original narrative" is here resumed from

10:16. In fact, if such were the case, we would require some explanation of the phrase: "Saul chose him three

thousand men of Israel" (13:2). Whence and where did he choose them, if not from the assembly at Gilgal?

Certainly, more unlikely circumstances for this could not be found than those in which Saul is left in 10:16,

when, so far from selecting three thousand men, he ventures not to confide the secret of his elevation even

to his uncle!

I have put this hypothetically, for I feel by no means sure that it was not the other Gilgal. The argument of

Keil, that in that case Saul would. have had to attack the Philistines at Michmash before reaching Gibeah

(ver. 15), is not convincing, since there was a road to the latter place to the west of Michmash. On the other

hand, however, the Gilgal near Jericho was no doubt a more safe place of retreat where to collect an army,