² tc The present translation follows the MT; a few Hebrew mss along with the LXX and Syriac read “Edom” (cf. 2 Sam 8:14 and 1 Chr 18:11). Many modern English versions read “Edom” here (e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).

¹ tc Here Ahimelech is called “the son of Abiathar,” but NCV, CEV, and REB reverse this to conform with 1 Sam 22:20. Most recent English versions (e.g., NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT) retain the order found in the MT.

¹ tc Codex Leningrad (B19A), on which BHS is based, has here “messengers” (הַמַּלְאכִים, hammal’khim), probably as the result of contamination from the occurrence of that word in v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">4. The present translation follows most Hebrew mss and the ancient versions, which read “kings” (הַמֶּלָאכִים, hammela’kim).

¹ sn Here the narrative resumes the battle story that began in Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">11:1 (see Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">11:25). The author has interrupted that story to give the related account of David’s sin with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah. He now returns to the earlier story and brings it to a conclusion.

¹ tn Part of the Greek tradition wrongly understands Hebrew מַלְכָּם (malkam, “their king”) as a proper name (“Milcom”). Some English versions follow the Greek here, rendering the phrase “the crown of Milcom” (so NRSV; cf. also NAB, CEV). TEV takes this as a reference not to the Ammonite king but to “the idol of the Ammonite god Molech.”

² tc Here and in v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">27 the translation follows 4QSam^a ויצפר (vayyitspar, “and he pressed”) rather than the MT וַיִּפְרָץ (vayyiprats, “and he broke through”). This emended reading seems also to underlie the translations of the LXX (καὶ ἐβιάσατο, kai ebiasato), the Syriac Peshitta (we’alseh), and Vulgate (cogeret eum).

¹ tn Here and elsewhere (vv. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">7, 12, 15a, 17, 19) the woman uses a term which suggests a lower level female servant. She uses the term to express her humility before the king. However, she uses a different term in vv. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">15b-16. See the note at v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">15 for a discussion of the rhetorical purpose of this switch in terminology.

² tc The translation follows the Qere and many medieval Hebrew mss in reading וְהַלֶּחֶם (vÿhallekhem, “and the bread”) rather than וּלְהַלֶּחֶם (ulÿhallekhem, “and to the bread”) of the Kethib. The syntax of the MT is confused here by the needless repetition of the preposition, probably taken from the preceding word.

¹ tn The translation understands the verb in a desiderative sense, indicating the desire but not necessarily the completed action of the party in question. It is possible, however, that the verb should be given the more common sense of accomplished action, in which case it means here “Why have you cursed us?”

⁵ tc Against the MT, this word is better read without the definite article. The MT reading is probably here the result of wrong word division, with the letter ה (he) belonging with the preceding word שָׁם (sham) as the he directive (i.e., שָׁמָּה, samah, “to there”).

³ tn Either the word “shekels” should be supplied here, or the Hebrew word מִשְׁקַל (mishqal, “weight”) right before “bronze” is a corrupted form of the word for shekel. If the latter is the case the problem probably resulted from another occurrence of the word מִשְׁקַל just four words earlier in the verse.

³ tn In this poetic narrative context the prefixed verbal form is best understood as a preterite indicating past tense, not an imperfect. (Note the perfect verbal form in the parallel/preceding line.) The verb בָּעַת (ba’at) sometimes by metonymy carries the nuance “frighten,” but the parallelism (note “engulfed” in the preceding line) favors the meaning “overwhelm” here.

¹ tn Heb “within” or “[from] within.” For a discussion of the use of the preposition בְּ (bet) here, see R. B. Chisholm, “An Exegetical and Theological Study of Psalm 18/2 Samuel 22” (Th.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1983), 163-64.

² tn Or “in his anger.” The noun אַף (’af) can carry the abstract meaning “anger,” but the parallelism (note “from his mouth”) suggests the more concrete meaning “nose” here (most English versions, “nostrils”). See also v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">16, “the powerful breath of your nose.”

³ tc It is preferable to read here Hebrew מָשׁוּחַ (mashuakh) with many Hebrew mss, rather than מָשִׁיחַ (mashiakh) of the MT. Although the Syriac Peshitta understands the statement to pertain to Saul, the point here is not that Saul is not anointed. Rather, it is the shield of Saul that lies discarded and is no longer anointed. In ancient Near Eastern practice a warrior’s shield that was in normal use would have to be anointed regularly in order to ensure that the leather did not become dry and brittle. Like other warriors of his day Saul would have carefully maintained his tools of trade. But now that he is dead, the once-cared-for shield of the mighty warrior lies sadly discarded and woefully neglected, a silent but eloquent commentary on how different things are now compared to the way they were during Saul’s lifetime.

² tn The Hebrew text is difficult here. The MT reads לַחַיָּה (lachayyah), which implies a rare use of the word חַיָּה (chayyah). The word normally refers to an animal, but if the MT is accepted it would here have the sense of a troop or community of people. BDB 312 s.v. II. חַיָּה, for example, understands the similar reference in v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">13 to be to “a group of allied families, making a raid together.” But this works better in v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">13 than it does in v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">11, where the context seems to suggest a particular staging location for a military operation. (See 1 Chr 11:15.) It therefore seems best to understand the word in v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">11 as a place name with ה (he) directive. In that case the Masoretes mistook the word for the common term for an animal and then tried to make sense of it in this context.

¹ tc The MT here reads “the Ashurite,” but this is problematic if it is taken to mean “the Assyrian.” Ish-bosheth’s kingdom obviously was not of such proportions as to extend to Assyria. The Syriac Peshitta renders the word as “the Geshurite,” while the Targum has “of the house of Ashur.” We should probably emend the Hebrew text to read “the Geshurite.” The Geshurites lived in the northeastern part of the land of Palestine.

¹ tn The Hebrew verb נַעֲלָה (na’alah) used here is the Niphal perfect 3rd person masculine singular of עָלָה (’alah, “to go up”). In the Niphal this verb “is used idiomatically, of getting away from so as to abandon…especially of an army raising a siege…” (see S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel, 244).

¹ tn Heb “and may they whirl over.” In the Hebrew text the subject of the plural verb is unexpressed. The most likely subject is Abner’s “shed blood” (v. Kir+Heres+AND+book%3A10&tab=notes" ver="">28), which is a masculine plural form in Hebrew. The verb חוּל (khul, “whirl”) is used with the preposition עַל (’al) only here and in Jer 23:19; 30:23.

¹ tn Heb “the bridle of one cubit.” Many English versions treat this as a place name because the parallel text in 1 Chr 18:1 reads “Gath” (which is used by NLT here). It is possible that “the bridle of one cubit” is to be understood as “the token of surrender,” referring to the Philistine’s defeat rather than a specific place (cf. TEV, CEV).