“Thou comest to me with a sword and with a spear, but I come unto thee in the name of Jehovah of hosts, whom thou hast defied.  This day will He deliver thee into mine hand, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that this assembly (hqhl = Israel) may know that Jehovah saveth not with sword and spear, for the battle is His.”  This approaches to the religious language of the post-Deuteronomic time.  According to 2Samuel xxi. 19, Goliath of Gath, whose spear-shaft was as thick as a weaver’s beam, 1 fought in the

******************************************** 1.  This expression occurs in I Samuel xvii., and shows this legend to be dependent on 2Samuel xxi. xxiii., a collection of anecdotes about heroes from the Philistine wars of David in the genuine short popular style.  Cf., on 1Chronicles xii., supra, p. 173. ********************************************

wars, not in Saul’s time, but in that of his successor, and was killed, not by a shepherd boy but by a warrior of Bethlehem named Elhanan.

The theme of David and Jonathan has no doubt a historical basis, but for us it is found only in second-hand versions.  The story of the farewell (chapter xx.) must be placed in this category.  Yet it appears to point back to an earlier basis, and the earlier story may very possibly have belonged to the connection of the original work.  For the shooting of the arrow could only have a meaning if it was impossible for the two friends to have an interview.  But as the story goes, they come together and speak out freely what they have in their hearts, and so the dumb signal is not only superfluous, but unintelligible and meaningless.  But if the most characteristic trait of the whole story does not fit into it as it now stands, that is just saying that the story has not come down to us in its true form.  Originally Jonathan only discharged the arrow, and called to his boy where it lay; and David, hid in the neighbourhood of the shooting range, heard in the call to the boy the preconcerted signal.  In calling that the arrow was nearer him or beyond him, Jonathan was apparently telling the boy, but in reality telling his friend, to come towards him or go farther away from him.  The latter was the case, and if so, the friends could not enter into conversation; the tearful farewell then disappears, and the sentimental speeches spoken before it in the same style, in which Jonathan virtually admits that his father is right, and yet decidedly espouses David’s cause, disregarding the fact that David will deprive him of his inheritance. 2