Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - 1 Samuel 15:4 - 15:4

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - 1 Samuel 15:4 - 15:4


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Saul summoned the people to war, and mustered them (those who were summoned) at Telaim (this was probably the same place as the Telem mentioned in Jos 15:24, and is to be looked for in the eastern portion of the Negeb). “Two hundred thousand foot, and ten thousand of the men of Judah:” this implies that the two hundred thousand were from the other tribes. These numbers are not too large; for a powerful Bedouin nation, such as the Amalekites were, could not possibly be successfully attacked with a small army, but only by raising the whole of the military force of Israel.

1Sa 15:5

He then advanced as far as the city of the Amalekites, the situation of which is altogether unknown, and placed an ambush in the valley. וַיָּרֶב does not come from רִיב, to fight, i.e., to quarrel, not to give battle, but was understood even by the early translators as a contracted form of וַיַּאֲרֵב, the Hiphil of אָרַב. And modern commentators have generally understood it in the same way; but Olshausen (Hebr. Gramm. p. 572) questions the correctness of the reading, and Thenius proposes to alter בַּנַּחַל וַיָּרֶב into מִלְחָמָה וַיַּעֲרֹךְ. נַחַל refers to a valley in the neighbourhood of the city of the Amalekites.

1Sa 15:6-7

Saul directed the Kenites to come out from among the Amalekites, that they might not perish with them (אֹסִפְךָ, imp. Kal of אָסַף), as they had shown affection to the Israelites on their journey out of Egypt (compare Num 10:29 with Jdg 1:16). He then smote the Amalekites from Havilah in the direction towards Shur, which lay before (to the east of) Egypt (cf. Gen 25:18). Shur is the desert of Jifar, i.e., that portion of the desert of Arabia which borders upon Egypt (see at Gen 16:7). Havilah, the country of the Chaulotaeans, on the border of Arabia Petraea towards Yemen (see at Gen 10:29).

1Sa 15:8-9

Their king, Agag, he took alive (on the name, see at Num 24:7), but all the people he banned with the edge of the sword, i.e., he had them put to death without quarter. “All,” i.e., all that fell into the hands of the Israelites. For it follows from the very nature of the case that many escaped, and consequently there is nothing striking in the fact that Amalekites are mentioned again at a later period (1Sa 27:8; 1Sa 30:1; 2Sa 8:12). The last remnant was destroyed by the Simeonites upon the mountains of Seir in the reign of Hezekiah (1Ch 4:43). Only, king Agag did Saul and the people (of Israel) spare, also “the best of the sheep and oxen, and the animals of the second birth, and the lambs and everything good; these they would not ban.” מִשְׁנִים, according to D. Kimchi and R. Tanch. , are לבטן שׁניים, i.e., animalia secundo partu edita, which were considered superior to the others (vid., Roediger in Ges. Thes. p. 1451); and כָּרִים, pasture lambs, i.e., fat lambs. There is no necessity, therefore, for the conjecture of Ewald and Thenius, מַשְׁמַנִּים, fattened, and כְּרָמִים, vineyards; nor for the far-fetched explanation given by Bochart, viz., camels with two humps and camel-saddles, to say nothing of the fact that camel-saddles and vineyards are altogether out of place here. In “all that was good” the things already mentioned singly are all included. הַמְּלָאכָה, the property; here it is applied to cattle, as in Gen 33:14. נְמִבְזָה = נִבְזֶה, despised, undervalued. The form of the word is not contracted from a noun מִבְזֶה and the participle נִבְזֶה (Ges. Lehrgeb. p. 463), but seems to be a participle Niph. formed from a noun מִבְזֶה. But as such a form is contrary to all analogy, Ewald and Olshausen regard the reading as corrupt. נָמֵס (from מָסַס): flowing away; used with reference to diseased cattle, or such as have perished. The reason for sparing the best cattle is very apparent, namely selfishness. But it is not so easy to determine why Agag should have been spared by Saul. It is by no means probable that he wished thereby to do honour to the royal dignity. O. v. Gerlach's supposition, that vanity or the desire to make a display with a royal slave was the actual reason, is a much more probable one.