Charles Ellicott Commentary 2 Samuel 20

Sheba, the son of Bichri. —The English follows the ancient versions in taking Bichri as a proper name. Most recent commentators consider it as a patronymic, the Bichrite, i.e., of the family of Becher, the second son of Benjamin. He was, to this extent at least, of the same clan with Saul. He was there, at Gilgal, with the representatives of the ten tribes, and took advantage of the dispute just mentioned to renew the rebellion of Absalom.

Every man to his tents. —Compare the cry of Jeroboam as he inaugurated his rebellion (1 Kings 12:16). It was the signal of revolt.

Men of Judah clave. —David’s negotiations with Judah had now resulted in an entire reversal of the position of the tribes towards him; Judah, among whom the rebellion originated, and who had been tardy in returning to their allegiance, were now fierce in their loyalty, while Israel, who had only joined the already organized rebellion, and afterwards had first proposed the return of David, had become alienated and rebellious.

Living in widowhood. —This was the necessary result, under the system of polygamy, of what had happened. The clause may be understood as “in widowhood of life,” as in our version, or “in widowhood of the living,” i.e., while their husband was living, as in the Chaldee.

To Amasa. Thus, David begins the fulfilment of his promise of 2 Samuel 19:13. It proved an act of very doubtful expediency at this crisis.

He delayed longer. —No cause is assigned for this, and various conjectures have been made. The simplest explanation may be drawn from the fact that, in 2 Samuel 20:8, Amasa is met on his return at Gibeon. He had therefore gone well beyond the boundaries of Judah into Benjamin, and had taken more time as a result of exceeding his instructions. This fact suggests great doubt about his suitability for the position David had promised him. Joab appears to insinuate (in 2 Samuel 20:11) that Amasa was not truly loyal.