VI. That the historian, who evidently intended to blacken the character of Saul, and whiten that of David, does not make the least observation himself, in the second narrative, of reference to the first.
These reasons prove, beyond doubt, that we are furnished with two relations of the same adventure. To account for the double record, and their variations, must be left to commentators, connectors, and harmonizers, who are used to compromise affairs of this nature.
David finding that with his present strength, he was unable to maintain any footing in Judea, puts himself once more under the protection of Achish, king of Gath.* Achish, who does not appear to have been a very powerful prince, seemed to consider David alone, and David at the head of a little army, as two very different persons: for he now assigned him a place named Ziklag, for a habitation, where he remained a year and four months.**
* 1 Sam. xxvii. 1-3.
** 1 Sam. xxvii. 6, 7.
As he had now a quiet residence, those who entertain an opinion of David's sanctity, would be apt to suppose he would here confine himself to agriculture, to composing psalms, and to singing them to his harp; but David found employment more suited to his genius. It is not intended here to be insinuated that he might not sing psalms, at leisure times; but his more important business was to lead his men put to plunder the adjacent country. We have the names of some nations, as they are called, but which must have been small distinct communities, like the present camps of wandering Moors and Arabs, over whom he extended his depredations: these are the Geshurites, the Gezrites, and the Amalekites.** Of these people he made a total massacre, at those places where he made his inroads; saying, very prudently, "Lest they should tell of us, saying, so did David, and so will be his manner, all the while he dwelleth in the country of the Philistines."***
After thus carefully endeavouring to avoid detection, he brings his booty home, which consisted of all which those miserable victims possessed.**** He made presents of this to his benefactor king Achis,(5)| who, demanding where he had made his incursion, was answered, against the south of Judah, &c.(6) intending by this falsity to insinuate to the king his aversion to his own countrymen, and attachment to him. "And Achish believed David, saying, he hath made his people Israel utterly to abhor him; therefore he shall be my servant for ever,"(7)
The Philistines at this time collected their forces together, to attack the Israelites. To which service Achish summoned David,(8) and met with a cheerful compliance.
** Ver. 8.
*** Ver. 9, 11.
**** Query, whether David might not compose a psalm
upon this occasion.
(5) Josephus.
(6) 1 Sam. xxvii. 10.
(7) Ver. 12.
(8) Ch. xxviii. 1.
"Surely," says David, "thou shalt know what thy servant can do."* He accordingly marched his adherents with the troops of king Achish; but when the princes of the Philistines saw a company of Hebrews in their army, they were much surprized, and questioned Achish concerning them. The account which Achish gave of them, did not satisfy the princes, who justly feared their captain might prove a dangerous auxiliary. "Make this fellow return," said they, "that he may go again to the place which thou hast appointed him, and let him not go down with us to the battle, lest in the battle he be an adversary to us: for wherewith should be reconcile himself to his master; should it not be with the heads of these men David was accordingly dismissed, very much mortified at their distrust of him.**
Here now was a signal evidence of David's righteousness! The Hebrews, according to their own testimony, understood themselves to be the favourite people of God, and David is delivered down to us as a distinguished character for piety among this peculiarly esteemed people. Yet could this very man, without any hesitation, freely join himself and company, to an army of uncircumcised idolators, marching with hostile intentions against his countrymen! His advocates indeed pretend, that had his offers been accepted, he would nevertheless have gone over to the Israelites, at the commencement of the battle: this is taking off the charge of one crime, by imputing to him another equally bad—a most base act of treachery! As, however, the Israelites, on the foundation of their own intimacy with the Deity, thought they had no more obligations to a moral conduct towards the heathens, than the Roman Catholics now imagine they have to keep faith with heretics; these advocates endeavour to preserve the piety of David's character, at the expence of what David, according to this method of arguing, did extremely well without, on all occasions; namely, honesty.***