Chron. και ην Sam. Εν Sam. εσωσεν μεσω της μερίδος, και εξειλατο It seemed necessary to compare together thus much of the two chapters in this place, that so the reader might see the more clearly what a great mutilation or defect there is in this part of the text in Chronicles. The principal evidence for the proof of this must arise from the inspection and comparison of the text in both places; and from thence it will appear, almost beyond a possibility of doubt, that the history in Chronicles breaks off abruptly in the middle of the 9th verse in Samuel; and recommences, in a manner equally abrupt, in the middle of the 11th verse. But if any one 13 He should be disposed to deny this defect in Chronicles, and to maintain the perfection of the text as it now stands there; he need only be desired to make out from that alone the history of the thirty-seven mighty men, which seems absolutely impossible. For as Shammah, the third general of the first series the is there omitted, the history will be so far from being found regular, that it is thrown Sam. men of Israel were gone away. into total confusion. Chron. were the Philistines that were there That there is a deficiency then of one whole verse and a part of two others here in Chronicles will, in general, be allowed. And and the omission seems manifestly owing to the resemblance of some words at the place . Sam. his hand clave unto the sword: and where the transcriber broke off and where he Chron. Sam. gathered together into a troop, went on. , נאספו שם למלחמה For having writ he cast his eye down on ni o'nuÍÐ 100N” (two of which words are very similar) and copied on from the last place; and so caused the omission [so Hallet], which has been continued ever since. Let us now consider each of these verses particularly; comparing one text with another, where the two parts accompany each other; and endeavouring to establish the true reading in the places that are corrupted. in In Samuel the 9th verse begins thus, And after him was Eleazar the son of Dodi (not Dodo) the Ahohite, i. e., next after Jashobeam, and therefore the second general of the first series. The word Samuel is writ more properly in Chronicles in the plural form, with a Yod before the pronoun; and is so expressed here in Samuel in the Complutensian Bible. The patronymic of Eleazar in Samuel is Dodi, with Dodo in the margin. The LXX (in The text here is corrupted in Samuel; the the Alexand. copy) have a version for both differences there evidently destroying the Dodo and Dodi, vios ñaтpadeλþov avrov, regular sense in Chronicles and making it vios Covσei-Covσeɩ being a various reading unintelligible. It would be endless to enufor Aovde, as appears from the Vatican merate all the constructions of the word copy. In Chronicles it is Dodo; but in the : but whether it has been thought a LXX (Vat. and Alexand. copies) Awdai, as verb active or passive, whether the sense from Awdi. But this point is determined at that some have laboured to extract from it once by 1 Chron. xxvii. 4, where we read be, that the Philistines reviled the Israelites, that as Jashobeam, the first general of the or the Israelites defied the Philistines; or first ternary, was the first officer for the first that the Israelites exposed their lives to the month in waiting upon the king, so, for the Philistines, according to others—certain it second month, was Dodi the Ahohite, doubt-is, that neither of these contradictory opiless Eleazar the son of Dodi the Ahohite nions can be the true one. For (not to (the second general of the first ternary) as insist upon on having a 1 prefixed after before observed. Eleazar the son of is, which that verb never admits after it) dropped in this last place, and the next this word contained originally some proper word is not 17 but 1 (Dodi) in the text, name of a place. and Awda in the LXX; which is an autho- This appears, not only from there being rity sufficient for determining between the such a name here in the copy of Chronicles, disagreeing copies of the verses now before us. and that name of letters very similar to the Besides, the reading here Eleazar the son word so corrupted; but also, because in of DoD the Ahohite will the more effec- Samuel itself the third word from this is, tually distinguish this hero from Elhanan ibi, which is directly relative to some place the son of DODO the Bethlehemite, who antecedently mentioned: otherwise, there stands recorded the first of the body of can be no sense in, When they defied the thirty mighty men, in Sam. 24 and Chron. 26. Philistines, that there were THERE gathered And it seems to have been owing to the re- together to battle. And farther-according semblance of these two names, that Dodo at to the present reading in Samuel there is no first crept into the text, after Eleazar; since nominative case, nor introduction to the Eleazar is also confounded in the Vatican verb; as there regularly is in Chroedition of the LXX with Elhanan. To all nicles. Some commentators, therefore, seewhich may be added the testimony of ing the absolute necessity of making this Josephus, who calls this Eleazar vios Adelov, lib. vii., cap. 12. As to the family or local name, it has been already observed, that the son of Ahohi, and the Ahohite, signify just the same thing. The word D in Samuel should have the prefixed [so Houb., Hallet], as in Chronicles; it is placed so in the margin of the several editions, and in the text of the Complutensian. Before this, and its preceding word, we have in Chronicles the pronoun ; which does not appear in any version, and therefore probably was not original [Hallet maintains that this word was original]. The next words are very obscure, and on that account it may be proper to compare them Sam. .Chron הוא היה עם דויד בפס דמים .Sam בפלשתים בחרפס עם דוד word the name of a place, have rendered it at Horpam: but there is no such place in the Bible as Horpam; and if there were, it would neither make this passage sense, nor the two passages consistent. This then, and the beginning of the next word, have been corrupted; and the true reading is preserved in the corresponding copy of Chronicles [so Houb., Hallet], which has also two additional words before Ty, two words, which we may conclude to have been originally also in Samuel [so Hallet]; as the Ald. and Complut. editions of the LXX read there OUTOS ny μeтa David: and Josephus, speaking of this very place, has os ŋy μeta tov Baσiλews ev Apaσauw (which last word was perhaps originally Apardauw, the version of DOT DEN), lib. vii., cap. 12. As to the true name of this place, we have it in Chronicles Pasdammim [so Houb., Chron. Hallet]; or, as it is sometimes writ, Ephesdammim (1 Sam. xvii. 1); and most of the letters in the true and the corrupted word | Israelites by Moses, that One of them should are very similar, and therefore the more chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand easily mistaken. of their enemies to flight. There is no word that requires particular ; ישנו Chron. observation in the 10th verse, but עם דויד בפסדמם והפלשתים .Sam עם דוד ב חרפם בפלשתים .Chron נאספו .Sam נאספו which in the Alexand. and Vat. copies of the LXX, is rendered eкaðŋão, and in the Ald. and Complut., eñeσrрeyev, in which last sense are the Vulgate and the English I have only omitted the yod here in the version. If it be considered as the Preter proper name; which, being frequently tense, it must be the former; if the future, omitted in nouns of the plural number, it may be the latter. Josephus evidently might be so here and have shortened the takes it in the latter sense; and his words oblique stroke of the mem, as it appears from Origen's Hexapla to have been formerly written, which brings it very nearly to a pe, the daleth and resh are frequently mistaken, the samech is only distinguished from a heth by its union of the perpendicular strokes at the bottom, and the first and last letters are the very same. The next word, without doubt, was the nominative case to the verb 'DON, which immediately follows it in Samuel as well as in Chronicles; and therefore must have been in both, as we now find it in Chronicles, [so Houb., Hallet]. The sense then is, He was with David at Pasdammim. And when the Philistines were there gathered together to battle, and the men of Israel were gone away (fled) he arose, &c. are so just a paraphrase upon the passage before us, that it may not be improper to transcribe them, Μετ' αυτον (Ιεσσαιμον) ην Ελεαζαρος υιός Δωδείου, ος ην μετα του βασιλεως εν Αρασαμω. ουτος ποτε, των Ισραηλτων καταπλαγέντων το πληθος των Παλαιστ τινων και φευγοντων, μονος εμεινε και συμπεσων τοις πολεμιοις απεκτεινεν αυτών πολλους, ως υπο του αίματος προσκολληθηναι την ρομφαίαν αυτού τη δεξια, και τους Ισραηλιτας ίδοντας τετραμμενους υπ' αυτού τους Παλαιστίνους, καταβαντας απο των ορέων, διωκειν, και θαυμαστην και διαβόητον τότε νικην αρασθαι, του μεν Ελεάζαρου κτείνοντος, επομενου δε του πλήθους και σκυλεύοντος τους αναιρουμένους. Lib. vii., cap. 12. The first word in the 11th verse has the Yod omitted again, as appears by the end of the preceding verse, and many other places; the Complut. edition reads here Here is another argument against the present reading in Samuel, arising from the words, when they defied the Philistines; INI. No other word in the first part of since we can hardly suppose, that the Israelites were so hardy, as first to defy their dreadful enemies; and, upon the appearance of a party of them, shamefully to get up into the mountains, and fly from them without a battle. Wherefore, that they did not defy the enemy they dreaded, is probable; but that they fled from them upon their appearance, is certain. And yet we find in the next verse, there was then among them one hero, who maintained his ground against this party of the Philistines; and not only maintained his ground, but obliged the party to retire with great loss. this verse has any difficulty, except b After this proper name the passage in But we must remember, that the sacred Chronicles takes place again, and goes on historian, who was fully sensible how sur- with its corresponding passage in Samuel. prizing this event would appear in after The word in Samuel is omitted in Chrotimes, takes care to inform us in the follow- nicles, possibly because it had been writ but ing words that the hand of the Lord was the third word before, as the text now stands with Eleazar, and that the chief author of in the latter. The next variation is, that the great deliverance wrought that day was Dy in Samuel is in Chronicles; the Lord: the Lord, who had assured the which two words resemble each other so much in the number and nature of their constituent letters, though a little transposed, that it may be presumed from thence they were originally the very same word: and doubtless were so, as the two texts evidently treat of the same action in the same place. many of the Philistines. This being another relation of a surprising nature, and somewhat similar to the preceding, the historian here also observes, that the hand of the Lord was with Shammah, the brave instrument of this defeat of the Philistines; and that the great deliverance that day was wrought by the Lord. in copies of which version uniformly so render it, και εποίησε κυριος σωτηρίαν μεγάλην. Το these several reasons it may be added, that cannot be the Hiphil future from ve, because that would be , as in Psalm cxvi. 6; and lastly, if it had been thus expressed, it could not have been the original word, as it makes no sense with the words following: for the version would be then, and the Lord saved a great deliverance. In Samuel the word is ', pakov, lente; in Chronicles, kpilwv, hordeo. The last word is writ almost universally without a The only remaining difference is, that Vau, and therefore probably was so writ here in Chronicles is corrupted from originally; and then there can be no doubt, Samuel [so Hallet]. This appears, not but that the two words Dy and , only from its being in the correct verse consisting of the very same number of letters, of Samuel; but because this and the three and of the very same letters, except a for a following words are exactly the same in the 7, and occurring in the same part of the 10th as in this 12th verse of Samuel: and, history in two different copies, were ori- that the word here in Chronicles was originally the same word. (That such a trans-ginally also the same (as the three that position or dislocation of letters has been follow it are) is plain from the LXX, all the made elsewhere, see Ezra ii. 46, o; which is in Neh. vii. 48. In Gen. xi. 31 we have, exierunt, instead of N, eduxit, as in the Samaritan version and LXX. In 1 Sam. ii. 3, was read by the LXX, who have rendered it κa Ocos; and so in Job xiii. 15; to which may be added, from 2 Sam. xxiii. 1, DN or DN, for which the LXX seem to have read or, by rendering the word twice in this verse TOTOs, as usual.) And as the piece of ground The proper English version then of these mentioned in these two chapters is said to several verses is, And after him was Eleazar, be full of lentiles or barley, it is more pro- the son of Dodi [Hallet, Dodo], the Ahohite, bable it was the latter, on account of the one of three mighty men ; he was with David greater use and plenty of barley. The copy at Pasdammim. And when the Philistines in Chronicles differs also in reading : but were there gathered together to battle, and either of the two numbers of that verb is the men of Israel were fled; he arose, and right; because D, being a noun of mul-smote the Philistines, until his hand was titude, may be connected with a verb plural; weary, and his hand clave unto the sword: as the noun was in Samuel verse the 9th. and the Lord wrought a great deliverance that In the two next corresponding verses the day; and the people returned after him only LXX being uniformly singular in the several to spoil. And after him was Shammah, the verbs, that is a plain proof, that the plural son of Agee, the Hararite: and the Phiverbs in the present text of Chronicles listines were gathered together at Lechi should be singular, as in Samuel. The alte- [Hallet, to battle], where was a piece of ration of them to plurals seems to have been ground full of barley, and the people fled owing to the preceding omission of one of from before the Philistines. But he placed the mighty men; whose existence some transcriber was desirous to support, by making two persons concerned in this action instead of one. himself in the midst of the field (of barley) and saved it, and smote the Philistines; and the Lord wrought a great deliverance. Ged.-9 Next to him, and one of the first three worthies, was But the original history could speak but of one in this place, and that evidently was Eleazar Ben-Dodi, an Ahohite. He was Shammah, the third general of the first with David, at Phasdamim [pp. 1 Chron. ternary of whom a wonderful instance of xi. 13]; where, the Philistines being asheroism is here recorded, that he stood alone sembled to battle, and the men of Israel against a party of the Philistines, in a field giving way; (10) he resisted and smote the of barley, and saved the barley and destroyed Philistines, until his hand (which had stuck to the sword) was weary: and, by him, that | tinguished persons of the whole. The round day, the LORD wrought a great deliverance: number thirty is put for thirty-seven. the people only followed him to the spoil. (11) Next to him, was Booth.-13 And those three chiefs of the thirty went, and came down to David to the Shamah Ben-Agah, an Hararite: who, rock, to the cave of Adullam and the Phiwhen the Philistines had assembled at Lehi listines were encamped in the valley of (where was a spot of ground full of lentils), | Rephaim. and when the people were fleeing from the Ken. Philistines, placed himself in the midst of 1 Chron. xi. 15; 2 Sam. xxiii. 13. thus, by him, the LORD wrought a great .Chron וירדו שלושה מן השלושים: the field, (12) and smote the Philistines מהשלשים .Sam וירדו שלשים .Chron ראש ומתנה .Sam ראש ויבאו אל קציר אל דוד עדלם .Chron אל מערת וחית .Sam אל מערת עדלם .Chron פלשתים חנה בעמק רפאים : .Sam פלשתים חנה בעמק רפאים : deliverance. : Ver. 13. τρεις απο των τρια Chron. Kai kaтeßŋσav ol тpels EK TWV тpiα- και Sam. ειν. That the word oh, thirty, in Samuel should have been o, three, as it is in the margin here and in the text in Chronicles, will readily be allowed ; not merely because וַיָּבֹאוּ אֶל־קָצִיר אֶל־דָּוִד אֶל־מְעָרַת עֶדְלָם וְחַיַּת פְּלִשְׁתִּים חֹנָה בְּעֵמֶק שלשה קרי καὶ κατέβησαν τρεῖς ἀπὸ τῶν τριάκοντα, καὶ κατέβησαν εἰς Κασὼν πρὸς Δαυὶδ εἰς τὸ σπήλαιον Οδολλάμ· καὶ τάγμα τῶν ἀλλοφύλων, καὶ παρενέβαλον ἐν τῇ κοιλάδι Ραφαΐν. Au. Ver.-13 And three of the thirty chief [or, the three captains over the thirty] went down, and came to David in the harvest-time unto the cave of Adullam: and the troop of the Philistines pitched in the valley of Rephaim. it is so in the margin and text, but because it is impossible the historian should say, And thirty out of the thirty went down. The Complutensian Bible has, three, here in the text of Samuel, and all the versions agree in saying, three of the thirty: and, if anything could be yet wanting to complete this evidence, there is the evidence of the text in Samuel against itself. For though here, at the beginning of the history of this exploit, performed by these men, they are called thirty; yet at the end of it, in ver. 17th, they are called no, three,these things did THREE of the mighty men. The next point then must be, Who those mighty men were, and of what rank among the thirty-seven heroes. The words o Ged.-13 Those three (the chief of the thirty) had gone down to David, unto the rock [p. p. 1 Chron. xi. 15; so Houb., Ken.] at the cave of Adulam; when the Philistines do not appear to have been were encamped in the vale of Rephaim. The chief of the thirty; i. e., the most dis rightly translated in any ancient version. They begin the exploit of the three heroes, |