The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Samuel — Section 170

king, and yet no one proposed either himself or any other person to he king, but referred the determination entirely to God" (Scott). 2. In making choice of S;iuf, Samuel believed that he would. be acceptable to the people, and fol/ii the purpose for which they had desired a king, in saving them out of the hand of the Philistines (eh. ix. 17) and the children of Ammon (eh. xii. 12); and he appears to have expected that he would be faithful to the principle of the theocracy, and rule in obedience to the Divine will. He did all that lay in his power that this expectation· might be realised ; he entertained a strong affection for Saul; and it was only when the latter proved utterly unfaithful to his trust that he reluctantly and sorrowfully abandoned him to his fate. 3. His choice was directed by a higher wisdom than his own, which saw the end from the beginning. Whilst the Divine King of Israel sanctioned what was good in their desire, he fulfilled it in such a manner as to con- vince them of what was evil in it, and to accomplish far-reaching purposes which the "lrophet himself did not foresee. " The ken your world is gifted with descends In the everlasting justice as low down . As eye doth in the sea, which though it mark The bottom from the shore, in the wide main Discerns it not; and, nevertheless, it is, But hidden by its deepness" (Dante, 'Purg.'). " Saul is not selected by them, but given to them; whom they adopt and embrace ,they know not why; and who, whether or not he is able to guide and govern them, proves to be. a faithful representative of their own state of mind, a very type and embodiment of that character and those habits of mind which they themselves are exhibiting" (Maurice). "The theocratic principle was more fully developed in the reaction than could have happened had the king been truly pious, so that we may say that Saul was chosen by God, because in his omniscience he foresaw that he would not tum to him with his whole heart. Saul and David are in necessary connection. On the threshhold of royalty God first shows in Saul what the king of Israel is with- out.him; then in David what the king is with him. Both are types or representatives. The events which befell them are actual prophecies, which first of all possed into fulfilment in the l1istory of the Israelitish monarchy, and then through the whole history of the world" (Hengstenberg). The following chopters record the develop- ment of the successive stages of the Divine method according to which the popular desire was gratified and corrected. The man destined for king was- I. FITTED BY PECULIAR QUALIFICATIONS (vers. 1, 2). Notice-I. His family relationship. He was the son of Kish, of the family of Matri (eh. x. 21), of the tribe of Benjamin; his cousin (or perhaps uncle-1 Chron. viii. 33) being Abner, afterwards II the captain of his host" ( eh. xiv. 51) ; his name-Saul =asked-being "an omen of his history." Kish was a man of wealth and good social position, a fact which would gain for his son general respect; he 11ppe11rs to have been an a:ffection11te father ( ver. 5; eh. x. 2) ; and he resided at Gibeah ( eh. x. 26), 11 11 hill," formerly a place of notorious profligacy (Judges xix.), and subsequently the seut of Saul's government, but was buried at Zelah (2 Sam. xxi. 14). Of him nothing more is known. Benjamin was the smallest of the tribes of Israel (ver. 21), but the most warlike of them (Gen. :xli:x. 27). The selection of a king from it, therefore, woulrl not be likely to excite the jealousy of the other tribes, whilst he would doubtles~ prove an able leader of their armies. There wus in Saul "the strange union of fierceness and of gentleness which rnn, as hereditary qualities do often run, through the whole. history of that frontier clan 11 (Stanley). 2. His personal appearance. He was in the prime of manhood, and of lofty stature and great warlike beauty (ver. 2; eh, x. 23, 24). 11 Great stress is laid upon this, because his distinguished stature, with the impression of bodily prowess which it conveyed, helped much to recommend him to the.choice of the people. When, after a long peace, there was no man of distin- guished renown among them, 11nd when in battle mnch less depended upon the miF- t11ry Bkill than upon the bodily prowess of the chief in single combats, or in the partial. actions with which most battles commenc~:I it wa~ natural enough that the people should take pride in the gigantic proportions of their leader, llS calculated  168 THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. [en. 1x. 1-27