Samuel, BOOKS OF. The Book of Samuel (for it is in reality but one) forms the third in the series of the four 'former prophets,' being preceded by Joshua and Judges, and followed by the (also undivided) Book of Kings. In the LXX. it appears as two books, entitled respectively A and B 'of kings,' or rather 'of kingdoms' (basileion); this, through the Vulgate (Jerome preferred 'Regum' to 'Regnorum'), is the source of the corresponding division in the authorised version, and of the alternative titles, 'otherwise called the first (or second) Book of Kings.' In Coverdale's version the title of 1 Sam. runs: 'the first boke of kynges, otherwise called the first boke of Samuel.' In the Revised Version the alternative title is dropped. In printed editions of the Hebrew Bible since Bomberg's time the Hebrew text has also shown the division of Samuel into two books, the first covering the period of Samuel and Saul, the second that of David. A more natural division would have been into three, the partitions being marked by 1 Sam. xiv. 52, 2 Sam. viii. 18, and 2 Sam. xxiv. 25, or rather by 1 Kings, ii. 46, respectively. Of the sections thus indicated the third presents fewest difficulties to the critic. It is held to extend from 2 Sam. ix. 1 to 1 Kings, ii. 46, and—apart from 2 Sam. xxi.-xxiv., which constitutes an appendix to the main narrative, of miscellaneous contents—it is a quite continuous piece of history, showing in a singularly vivid way how it was that Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah, failing in turn to secure the succession, cleared the way for Solomon. It was, obviously and admittedly, written at a date comparatively near the events to which it relates. Thenius attributes it to a quite contemporary writer, and Klostermann even names Ahimaaz, the son of Zadok, as the probable author. The second section (1 Sam. xv. 1-2 Sam. viii. 18), containing the history of David from the time when he was first brought to court down to that of his elevation to the throne of all Israel, and his victory over all external foes, is somewhat more complex in its structure. A clue to its analysis is sought by most recent critics in the twofold account of the manner in which David was first brought into close personal relations with Saul. The first and earlier (xvi. 14-23) represents him as already of mature age, a mighty man of valour, and practised in affairs, as well as a gifted musician, when, on account of his skill with the harp, he is introduced into Saul's service after his malady had begun to show itself; here he soon becomes the king's armour-bearer. In the second and later account (xvii. 1-xviii. 5), which appears in a considerably shorter form in the LXX. (see R. V. marg.), he is a shepherd lad, inexperienced either in war or in affairs, who first attracts the king's attention by his heroic encounter with Goliath. The earlier of the two narratives—of Saul's growing fear and jealousy of David, the flight of the latter, his wanderings to Adullam,
Keilah, the Negeb, and the Wilderness of Judah, Saul's last struggle with the Philistines, David's elevation to the throne, first of Judah and then of all Israel, the transference of his capital to Jerusalem, his victories over the Philistines, Moabites, Arameans, Ammonites, and Edomites—finds its continuation (approximately) in xviii. 6-8, 12a, 16, 20-29a, xix. 8-10, 11-17, xxi. 2-7, xxii., xxiii. 1-18, xxv., xxvii. 1-6, xxviii. 1-2, xxix., xxx.; 2 Sam. ii.-v., viii. The analysis of the first section (1 Sam. i. 1-xiv. 52) begins with the narration (again twofold) of the steps which led to Saul's elevation to the throne (see SAMUEL). The earlier account is contained in ix. 1-x. 16, x. 27b (LXX.), xi. 1-11, 15, xiii. 2-xiv. 51; the later (substantially) in 1 Sam. vii. 2-viii. 22, x. 17-27a, xi. 12-14, xii. 1-25. Closely related to the former (and in any case earlier than the latter) are 1 Sam. i.-iii. (with the exception of ii. 27-36 and Hannah's song) and 1 Sam. iv. 1-vii. 2.
According to the Talmud, 'Samuel wrote his own book'; Abrabanel attributes it to Jeremiah; but the Christian church has no definite tradition on the subject. The attempt systematically to analyse the composition of Samuel was first made by Gramberg (1830), who saw in it two parallel narratives editorially combined. Similar essays were afterwards made by Stähelin, Schrader, and Bruston. The criticism, both 'lower' or textual, and 'higher' or literary-historical, of the Book of Samuel was raised to a new level of scientific precision and accuracy by Wellhausen (in his Text der Bücher Samuelis, 1871, in his analysis of the 'former prophets' in Bleek's Erläuterung, 1878, and in Die Composition des Hexateuchs u. der histor. Bücher, 1889). He pointed out the literary unity of the narratives in 2 Sam. ix.—1 Kings ii. (apart from 2 Sam. xxi.-xxiv.) and its early date, and also disentangled the main thread of 1 Sam. xiv. 52—2 Sam. viii. 18, which represents a form of the tradition that must have been committed to writing comparatively soon. The older narrative in the first section he also regarded as early. In some early form, which almost certainly included some matters which have since been dropped, but of course did not contain the additions of a later age, these three sections were brought together into one great continuous historical work, corresponding to the present series, Judges, Samuel, Kings, before the reign of Josiah. The whole work afterwards underwent a Deuteronomistic redaction, which, however, from the nature of the material, was not so systematic and thorough in the case of Samuel as it was in those of Judges and Kings. The division into these three books was made by the Deuteronomist; and it was not till after this had taken place that the miscellaneous collection of passages (some of them very ancient) which now forms the last four chapters of Samuel, and breaks the original continuity, was introduced. Among the passages that help to fix the date of the final redaction of Samuel are 1 Sam. ii. 27-36, which Wellhausen considers to be pre-exilic, but not earlier than Josiah's reign, and the whole of the later form of the history of Saul's elevation to the throne (see SAMUEL), which in his opinion cannot have been written before the fall of the Judean monarchy. Budde's work on the structure and sources of Judges and Samuel (1890) is in substantial agreement with the conclusions of Wellhausen; Budde, however, is inclined to assign an earlier date for the 'Mizpah' passages (1 Sam. vii. 2 et seq., &c.), and to put them on a level with the E of the Pentateuch.
For the exposition of Samuel, see the commentaries of Thenius (1842; 2d ed. 1864), Keil (1864; Eng. trans.), Klostermann (1887), Kirkpatrick (in Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, 1881, and in Smaller Cam- bridge Bible for Schools, 1889); and especially for textual criticism, the very excellent work of Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel (1890).