Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Samuel 26:1

"And the Ziphites came unto Saul to Gibeah, saying, Doth not David hide himself in the hill of Hachilah, which is before the desert?" — 1 Samuel 26:1 (ASV)

The Ziphites came to Saul. — There is grave difficulty connected with the account contained in this chapter. Is it another account of the incident told in 1 Samuel 24 and 1 Samuel 26, by a different narrator? This is the opinion of some respected modern commentators: for instance, Ewald and the Bishop of Bath and Wells in the Speaker’s Commentary. The question at issue is this: In this First Book of Samuel, in 1 Samuel 23:24 and 1 Samuel 23:26, we have two accounts of David sparing his great adversary's life, under what appear at first sight to be very similar circumstances.

For instance, in both these occurrences:

1. It is the same people, the Ziphites, who call Saul’s attention to David’s presence in their neighbourhood.
2. In both, Saul comes from Gibeah with the same number of men: 3,000.
3. The general bearing of the incident is identical in both—namely, the persuasions of David’s followers to induce their leader to take Saul’s life when Saul was in his power (persuasions resisted by the noble-minded chieftain); David’s taking of something personal from the sleeping king as proof that the royal life had been in his hands; and the sequel, which describes Saul’s heartfelt, temporary repentance for the past.

But here the resemblance ends. The circumstances of the night raid by David and his companions into the camp of the sleeping Saul are, when examined closely, so entirely different from the circumstances of Saul's midday siesta in the En-gedi cavern, where David and his band were dwelling, that it is truly impossible to assume they are versions of the same incident. We conclude, therefore, with some certainty, that the accounts in 1 Samuel 23:24 and 1 Samuel 23:26 refer to two distinct and separate events. This is also the view of Keil, Erdmann, and Lange; Dean Payne Smith in the Pulpit Commentary, Wordsworth; and others. Bishop Hervey, in the Speaker’s Commentary, however, is supported in his hypothesis (that the two accounts refer to only one incident) by Ewald, De Wette, and others. In the course of this exposition, the more striking agreements and divergences will be discussed.

There remains, however, a still graver question to consider. Its gravity and difficulty persist whether we assume, as we propose to do, that twice during David's outlaw life the king’s life was in his power, or that only once David stood over the sleeping king, sword in hand, with the two accounts referring to that single event. The question is this: For what purpose did the compiler of the First Book of Samuel insert chapter twenty-six into his narrative? For in this chapter, either the old story of 1 Samuel 23:24 is repeated with certain variations, or an incident similar to one already detailed is repeated at great length.

No perfectly satisfactory reply can be given to this important question. The purpose of one such account in a narrative of the early life of the great founder of Israelite greatness is clear. But we may well ask why a second narrative of a similar incident was inserted in a book where conciseness is usually so carefully observed.

All we can suggest is that everything that contributed to the glory of Israel's favourite hero was of the deepest interest to the people. The surpassing nobility and generosity of David's magnanimity toward his deadly foe were considered worthy of these detailed accounts, even in the necessarily brief compilation by the inspired writer of the history of that time.