For Children of Israel), and claim descent from King Saul (whom they call by the Mahommedan corruption through a son whom they ascribe to him, called Jeremiah, who again had a son called Afghana.
It combines amid diverse material a hero of Bethlehem and rival of Saul with the idea of a conqueror of this district; it introduces peculiar traditions of the ark and sanctuary, and it associates David with Hebron, Calebites and the wilderness of Paran 3 The books of Samuel and Kings have become, in process of compilation, the natural sequel to the preceding books, but the conflicting features and the perplexing differences of standpoint recur elsewhere, and the relationship between them suggests that similar causes have been operative upon the compilation.
I.), is marked by the absence both of religious feeling and of allusions to his earlier experiences with Saul which David might have been expected to make.
At all events the first of a series of annalistic notices of the kings of Israel ascribes to Saul conquests over the surrounding peoples to an extent which implies that the district of Judah formed part of his kingdom (I Sam.
An attempt on the part of Saul to exterminate the clan is mentioned in 2 Sam.
When the narratives describe the life of the young David at the court of the first king of the northern kingdom, when the scenes cover the district which he took with the sword, and when the brave Saul is represented in an unfavourable light, one must allow for the popular tendency to idealize great figures, and for the Judaean origin of the compilation.
It is significant that Saul in his last unavailing struggle against the overwhelming forces of the Philistines sought through the medium of a sorceress for an interview with the deceased prophet Samuel.
The chief members of the Ibn Tibbon family were (I) JUDAH BEN SAUL (1120-1190), who was born in Spain but settled in Lunel.
But this passage is the sequel to the rejection of Saul in xv., and Samuel's position agrees with that of the late writer in vii., viii.
Here, however, much complication arises from the combination of traditions of distinct origin: independent records of Saul having been revised or supplemented by writers whose interest lay in David.