Certainly, Saul through this quarrel was de- prived of a restraining and a strengthening influ- ence. The victory, too, at Jlichmash could not be final, it was only introductory. The Philistines, with their organized force and their strong cities, could better uear such a defeat than the Israelites such a victory. What was required from the young realm was no longer a vigorous rising followed by a momentary effort, but the patient organization of a steady defence. And this, because ■ It must always be remcnibtTi'd that tbt*rc wiut a tbeolof^col question debated in these matters. Saul, tlio hcavi-ii-appointed kiii^', failed in his misuion and fell on Uilboo. There uinst therefore have been something in hia life which broutfht uix)n him the disnlcasure of J", wlio would otiierwise iiave given him victory. Tnus the Chronicler (1 Oh lOi^) gives as an luiditionaj cause 'for the king's rejection tlie fact that ho had consulted an evil spirit at Endor ; and Josephus (A nl. Vl. xiv. ») adds also aa a cause that he hod destroyed * Ahimelecti the high priest and the city of the high priests.'
it was so novel in Isr. liistory, must have severely tried the temper of trihes not yet fully weaned from their desert instincts. Intertribal jealousies, further, which jilaywl so larjje a part in that early period (of. .Ig tf-""- 8'"' 12'-' etc.), and which troubled the kinj,'dom even after David's reign had consolidated it (f.gr. 1 K 12'"), could not fail to spring up, especially since the chief belonged to one of the smaller tribes. All these things are enougti to account in a sensitive man for the deep melancholy which clouded the king's powers at the very time when those were most needed (1 S W*].
David's fame as a skilful harp player led to his being brought to the little court, where his music soothed the king's vexed mood. The charm, which made all men whom he met love the future king, laid hold on Saul, and he attached the young man pLTinanently to liis person as his armour-bearer (l(i'^"-'). 15y this time the war against Philistia had changed its ch.aracter. On their side the Pliilistines, taught liy the disaster at Michmash not to despise their foes, and probably considering the subjugation of the barren hill-country scarcely worth the trouble it cost, were content to keep open their trade-route along the coast. On his side Saul recognized the folly of attempting to besiege the five strongly fortified cities in the valley. In the new border warfare which sprang up David soon proved himself an adejit, and rose to a trusted position in the army. Recognizing his prowess, Saul gave the young captain his daughter Michal in marriage, and asked as bride gift the present of 100 Phil, foreskins — a gift significant at once of the low culture of the period and tlie character of the war (IS'--"'-). But the new Bon-in-law proved dangerouslj' strong. His deeds in the field and the personal magnetism which never forsook him, won him the love of Jonathan and the more perilous applause of the multitude. To the darkened mind of the king it seemed by no means impossible that ambition might prove too strong for gratitude anil kinship. By guile and liy open force he sought to get David into his hands. Each eHbrt failed : even his daughter deserted him and tricked his messengers, while her husband escaped (ch. 19). After that open rupture David continued to linger in the neigh- bourhood of the court, while etlbrts were made, esjiecially by the leal-hearted Jonathan, to heal the breach between Saul and tlie stoutest of his servants. But this only served to draw upon the jirince the suspicion that he had entered into a conspiracy with the .son of Jesse to dethrone the king,* — a suspicion which Jonathan was too proud in his integrity even to deny. The jiroud silence, howe\'(^r, would not appeal to so darkened a mind as Saul's hiid become. Such a position could not endure. At last David fled to Nob, northward from Jerus., and thence made his way through the country of the Philistines into the familiar South, where his own clan were sure to shelter him (ch. 21).
Saul, 'sitting under the tamarisk-tree at Gibeah,' reproached his own men as traitors because they had not betrayed the plotter, and as fools because they failed to recognize how the first result of setting up this Judahite would be the loss of power and jirestige to Benjamin. He forthwith took a fearful vengeance on the priests wlio had harboured the fugitive, by massacring almost the entire household of Ahiraelech at Nob, and then pursued the refugee in his retreat (22"'').
How far tills quarrel was the result of baseless
suspicion in the diseased mind of the king, and
how far it may have been justified by facts, must
always remain uncertain. The fulness of the
• Thi* li uitdoubtedly the roeaning and the sting of 1 S 2030t.
details which we possess, both over this period and over that in which David was hunted througli the Negeb, proves that the hairbreadth escapes of the great king before he came to the throne were a favourite subject with the early historians. But all the accounts were written from a standpoint which regarded David as the divinely appointed king over all Israel. And it is not an impossibility that the active, patriotic mind of the young soldier may have seen the need, if his country were to bo delivered, of some stronger hand upon the reins of government at that period. It is also possible that he may have been betrayed into words or acts which wrought with extra power on the morbid mind of Saul.