Page:03.BCOT.KD.HistoricalBooks.B.vol.3.LaterProphets.djvu/205

 to obtain a friendly reception from Saul (cf. 1Sa 29:4). In consequence of this remonstrance, Achish requested David to return with his warriors to Ziklag. On this return march (“as he went to Ziklag,” cf. with בּלכתּו the ללכת of 1Sa 29:11), and consequently before the battle in which Saul lost his life (Berth.), and not after Saul's great misfortune, as Ewald thinks, the Manassites whose names follow went over to David. The seven named in 1Ch 12:20 were “heads of the thousands of Manasseh,” i.e., of the great families into which the tribe of Manasseh was divided, and as such were leaders of the Manassite forces in war: cf. Num 31:14 with Exo 18:25, and the commentary on the latter passage.

Verse 21
These We take והמּה to refer to the Manassites named in 1Ch 12:20, like the והמּה of 1Ch 12:1 and the הם אלּה הם eht of 1Ch 12:15. Bertheau, on the contrary, thinks on various grounds that המּה refers to all the heroes who have been spoken of in vv. 1-20. In the first place, it was not the Manassites alone who took part in the conflict with Amalek, for David won the victory with his whole force of 600 men (1Sa 30:9), among whom, without doubt, those named in vv. 1-18 were included. Then, secondly, a clear distinction is made between those who gave in their adhesion to and helped David at an earlier period (1Ch 12:1, 1Ch 12:7, 1Ch 12:22), and those who came to him in Hebron (1Ch 12:23). And finally, the general remark in 1Ch 12:22 is connected with 1Ch 12:21 by the grounding כּי, so that we must regard 1Ch 12:21 and 1Ch 12:22 as a subscription closing the preceding catalogues. but none of these arguments are very effective. The grounding כי in 1Ch 12:22 does not refer to the whole of 1Ch 12:21, but only to the last clause, or, to be more accurate, only to בּצּבא, showing that David had an army. The second proves nothing, and in the first only so much is correct, that not merely the seven Manassites named in 1Ch 12:20 took, part in the battle with Amalek, but also the warriors who had formerly gone over to David; but from that there is not the slightest reason to conclude that this is expressed by והמּה. It is manifest from the context and the plan of the register, that וגו עזרוּ והמּה can only refer to those of whom it is said in 1Ch 12:20 that they went over to David as he was returning to Ziklag. If 1Ch 12:21 and 1Ch 12:22 were a subscription to all the preceding registers, instead of והמּה another expression which would separate the verse somewhat more from that immediately preceding would have been employed, perhaps כּל־אלה. helped David הגּדוּד על, against the detachment of Amalekites, who during David's absence had surprised and burnt Ziklag, and led captive the women and children (1Sa 30:1-10). This interpretation, which Rashi also has (contra turmam Amalekitarum), and which the Vulgate hints at in its adversus latrunculos, rests upon the fact that in 1Sa 30:8, 1Sa 30:15, the word הגּדוּד, which in