4. One incident alone of his solitary shepherd life s come down to us— his conflict with the lion and B bear in defence of his father's flocks (1 Sam. xrii, , 85). But it did not stand alone. He was already town to Saul's guards for his martial exploits, prob- ily against the Philistines (xvi, 18), and when he ddenly appeared in the camp his elder brother im- ediately guessed that he had left the sheep in his dor to see the battle (xvii, 28). To this new aspect his character we are next introduced. B.G. 1068. The scene of the battle is at Ephes-dammim (q. v.), the frontier hills of Judah, called probably from this ' similar encounters ''the bound of blood." Saul's my is encamped on one side of the ravine, the Phi- jtines on the other ; the watercourse of Elah, or " the erebinth," runs between them. A Philistine of gir mtic stature, and dothed in complete armcnr. insults le comparatively defenceless Israelites, among whom le king alone appears to be well armed (xvii, 88; )mp. xiii, 20). No one can be found to tt^e up the lallenge. At this juncture David appears in the unp, sent by his father with ten loaves and ten slices r cheese to his three eldest brothers, fresh fix>m the ieepfolds. Just as he comes to the circle of wagons rhich formed, as in Arab settlements, a rude fortifica- lon round the Israelite camp (xvii, 20), he hears the rell-known shout of the Israelite war-cry (comp. Num. xiii, 21). The martial spirit of the boy is stirred at be sound ; he leaves his provisions with the baggage- utfter, and darts to jom his brothers (like one of the oyal messengers) into the midst of the lines. Then e hears the challenge, now made for the fortieth time -sees the dismay of his countrymen — hears of the re- tard proposed by the king— goes with the impetuosity f youth from soldier to soldier talking of the event, in pite of bis brother's rebuke — he is introduced to Saul -ondertakes the combat His victory over the gigan- ic Philistine b rendered more conspicuous by his own linunutive stature, and by the simple weapons with rbich it was accomplished — not the armor of Saul, vhich he naturally found too large, but the shepherd's ling, which he always carried about with him, and he five polished pebbles which he picked up as he ^ent from the watercourse of the valley, and put in lis shepherd's wallet Two trophies long remained )f the battle— one, the huge sword of the Philistine, JThich was hung up behind the ephod in the Tabema- ue at Nob (1 Sam. xxi, 9) ; the other the head, which ae bore away himself and which was either laid up at ^ob, or subsequently at Jerusalem. See Nob. Psalm ixliv, though by its contents of a much later date, is f»y the titie in the Sept. "against Goliatii." But there is also a psalm, preserved in the Sept. at the end M the Psalter, and which, though probably a mere adapution from the history, well sums up this early period of his life:
•*'J**H.^ ***« P*^« of David's own writing (?) (iit6ypa4,<n et» Aaind), ud oatslde the namber, when he fought the single
combat with OoUath.'* ^^ I wms iroaU amongat my btethiea, and the voongest in my father's house. I was feeding my father's sheep. My hands made a harp, and my fingerB fitt^ a psattery. And who shall tell it to my Lord? Ue Is the Lord, he heareth. He sent his messenger (angel ?), and took me from my father's flocks, and anointed me with the oil of his anointing. Mv brethren were heautifal and tall, bnt the Lord was not well pleased with them. I went ont to meet the Philistine, and he cursed me by his Idols. But I drew his own sword and beheaded him, and took away the reproach- from the chUdren of Israel."
David's susceptible temperament, joined to his devo- tional tendencies, must, at a very early age, have made him a fSavorite pupil of the prophets, whose pe- culiar mark was the harp and the psalm (1 Sam. x, 1- 12, and xix, 20-24 ; see also 2 Khigs iii, 16).
There is no small difficulty in reconciling the rec- ommendation of David to Saul as a skilful ^ayer and warrior in 1 Sam. xvi, 14-23, with the account in the following chapter of David's appearance in the camp of Saul, and his introduction to that monarch in con- sequence of his victory over Goliath. Both narratives i^parently give the account of David's/rs< introduc- tion to Saul, and yet it is not possible to combine them into one. Some would transpose the latter part of the 16th chap, so as to make it follow after xviii, 9 (Hen- ley, Bib. Crit. i, 882); but it is not easy to see what is gained by this ; for if David was known to Saul, and accepted into Saul's serviee as there narrated, how could Saul send for him to his father's house, and re- ceive him as a perfect stranger, as narrated in xvi, 14-20 ? On the other hand, if David came before the notice of Saul under the circumstances mentioned in this 16th chapter, and was received into his favor and service as there narrated (21-28), how could the facts recorded in the 17th chapter, especially those in verses 81-87, and 55-68, have occurred ? The Vatican MS. of the Sept. rejects xvii, 12-81, 55-58, and xviii, 1-5, as spurious ; and this Kennicott approves as the true so- lution of the difficulty (see his discussion of the ques- tion, Dittert. <m (he Hebrew Tesd, p. 418-482, 554-558). What gives some plausibility to this is, that ver. 82 naturally connects with ver. 11, and all between has very much the aspect of an interpolation. At the same time, it can hardly be permitted on such grounds to reject a portion of Scripture which has all other ev- idence, external and internal, in its &vor. The old solution of the difficulty, that as David, after his first introduction to Saul, did not abide constantiy with him, but went and came between Saul and his father's house (xvii, 15), he may have been at home when the war with the Philistines broke out ; and as Saul's dis- temper was of the nature of mania, he very probably retained no recollection of David's visits to him while under it, but at each new interview regarded and spoke of him as a stranger — still leaves unexplained the fact of Abner's ignorance of David's person, which appears to have been as complete as that of the king, and the &ct of David's professing ignorance of warlike weap- ons, though he had been for some time Saul's armor- bearer. This last difficulty may be alleviated by the consideration that the statement in xvi, 21 may be proleptioal; or David, though Saul's armor -bearer, may have had so litUe practice in the use of armor as to prefer, in such a crisis, trusting to the weapons with which he was fSuniliar. The best adjustment of these passages, however, is to transpose the account in xvi, 14-28, so as to bring it in between xviii, 4 and 5, and to regard the statement in xviii, 2, of David's perma- nent residence at court after Goliatii's slaughter as re- ferring merely to an attachment to the royal person as a general thing and for the present. On the breaking out of Saul's hypochondria, David may naturally have returned home.