A verse by verse Commentary on 1 Samuel 1 dealing with the birth of Samuel and his dedication by his mother Hannah who prayed for him.

1. 1 SAMUEL 1 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
The Birth of Samuel
1 There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a
Zuphite[a] from the hill country of Ephraim,
whose name was Elkanah son of Jeroham, the son
of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an
Ephraimite.
BARNES, "Ramathaim-zophim may signify “the two hills 1Sa_9:11-13 of the
watchmen,” so called from its being a post from which the watchmen looked out. But
since Zuph is the name of the head of the family, it is more probable that Zophin means
the Zuphites, the sons of Zuph (see Zophai, 1Ch_6:26), from whom the land about
Ramah was called “the land of Zuph,” 1Sa_9:5.
There is reason to believe that Elkanah - an Ephrathite, or inhabitant of Bethlehem
1Sa_17:12; Rth_1:2 and of the territory of the tribe of Ephraim 1Ki_11:26 - the father of
Samuel, represents the fifth generation of settlers in Canaan, and therefore that Samuel
was born about 130 years after the entrance into Canaan - four complete generations, or
132 years - and about 40 years before David.
CLARKE, "Ramathaim-zophim - Literally, the two high places of the watchman;
these were, no doubt, two contiguous hills, on which watchtowers were built, and in
which watchmen kept continual guard for the safety of the country and which afterwards
gave name to the place.
GILL, "Now there was a man of Ramathaimzophim, of Mount Ephraim,....
Ramathaim is a word of the dual number, and signifies two Ramahs; the city consisted
of two parts, being built perhaps on two hills, and were called Zophim; because, as the
Rabbins say, they looked one to another; or rather, because situated on eminences, there
1

2. were watchtowers in them, where watchmen were placed; or because they were
inhabited by prophets, who were sometimes called watchmen, Eze_3:17 and here is
thought to be a school of the prophets, see 1Sa_19:19 and which seems to be
countenanced by the Targum, in which the words are paraphrased thus, "and there was
one" man of Ramatha, of the disciples of the prophets; or, as others think, the sense is
this, this man was one of the Ramathites, the inhabitants of Ramah, and of the family of
Zuph, or the Zuphites, which gave the name to the land of Zuph, and the grand ancestor
of Elkanah is in this verse called Zuph, see 1Sa_9:5. According to Jerom (e), this is the
same with Arimathaea, of which Joseph was, Mat_27:57 for thus he writes,"Armatha
Sophim, the city of Helcanah and Samuel, in the Thamnitic region near Diospolis (or
Lydda), from whence was Joseph, who in the Gospels is said to be of Arimathaea;''but
Reland (f) thinks it cannot be the same that was about Lydda, which was all a champaign
country; whereas this was in the mountains of Ephraim, which must be sought to the
north of Jerusalem, and not the west, and so it follows:
of Mount Ephraim: which is added to distinguish it from other Ramahs in several
tribes, as in Benjamin, Naphtali, &c. though this may refer not to the situation of
Ramathaim, but to the country of this man, who was originally of Mount Ephraim, as
was the Levite in Jdg_19:1 who was the cause of much evil to Israel, as this was of great
good, as Kimchi observes:
and his name was Elkanah; which signifies "God hath possessed"; that is, possessed
him, or he was in possession of God; he had an ancestor of the same name, 1Ch_6:23.
This man was a Levite, one of the Kohathites, and a descendant of Korah; so that the
famous prophet Samuel was of the sons of Korah:
the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph; the
three last of these names are somewhat differently read in 1Ch_6:26, where they are
Eliab, Nahath, Zophai; and in 1Ch_6:34. Eliel, Toah, Zuph:
an Ephrathite; which appellation is to be connected, according to Kimchi, not with
Elkanah, but with Zuph; though neither of them were so called from Bethlehemjudah,
the inhabitants of which were indeed called Ephrathites from Ephratah, another name of
it; so Elimelech, and his sons Mahlon and Chilion, being of that city, were so called,
Rth_1:2 not from their being of the tribe of Ephraim, as Jeroboam of that tribe is called
an Ephrathite, 1Ki_11:26, see Jdg_12:5 for these were Levites, the descendants of
Kohath, in the line of Korah; but because they sojourned in Mount Ephraim, or dwelt
there, as Elkanah did; and it is well known that the Kohathites had cities given them in
the tribe of Ephraim, Jos_21:5.
HENRY, "We have here an account of the state of the family into which Samuel the
prophet was born. His father's name was Elkanah, a Levite, and of the family of the
Kohathites (the most honourable house of that tribe) as appears, 1Ch_6:33, 1Ch_6:34.
His ancestor Zuph was an Ephrathite, that is, of Bethlehem-Judah, which was called
Ephrathah, Ruth, Rth_1:2. There this family of the Levites was first seated, but one
branch of it, in process of time, removed to Mount Ephraim, from which Elkanah
descended. Micah's Levite came from Bethlehem to Mount Ephraim, Jdg_17:8. Perhaps
2

3. notice is taken of their being originally Ephrathites to show their alliance to David. This
Elkanah lived at Ramah, or Ramathaim, which signifies the double Ramah, the higher
and lower town, the same with Arimathea of which Joseph was, here called Ramathaim-
zophim. Zophim signifies watchmen; probably they had one of the schools of the
prophets there, for prophets are called watchmen: the Chaldee paraphrase calls Elkanah
a disciple of the prophets. But it seems to me that it was in Samuel that prophecy
revived, before his time there being, for a great while, no open vision, 1Sa_3:1. Nor is
there any mention of a prophet of the Lord from Moses to Samuel, except Jdg_6:8. So
that we have no reason to think that there was any nursery or college of prophets here
till Samuel himself founded one, Jdg_19:19, Jdg_19:20. This is the account of Samuel's
parentage, and the place of his nativity. Let us now take notice of the state of the family.
I. It was a devout family. All the families of Israel should be so, but Levites' families in
a particular manner. Ministers should be patterns of family religion. Elkanah went up at
the solemn feasts to the tabernacle at Shiloh, to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of
hosts. I think this is the first time in scripture that God is called the Lord of hosts -
Jehovah Sabaoth, a name by which he was afterwards very much called and known.
Probably Samuel the prophet was the first that used this title of God, for the comfort of
Israel, when in his time their hosts were few and feeble and those of their enemies many
and mighty; then it would be a support to them to think that the God they served was
Lord of hosts, of all the hosts both of heaven and earth; of them he has a sovereign
command, and makes what use he pleases of them. Elkanah was a country Levite, and,
for aught that appears, had not any place or office which required his attendance at the
tabernacle, but he went up as a common Israelite, with his own sacrifices, to encourage
his neighbours and set them a good example. When he sacrificed he worshipped, joining
prayers and thanksgivings with his sacrifices. In this course of religion he was constant,
for he went up yearly. And that which made it the more commendable in him was, 1.
That there was a general decay and neglect of religion in the nations. Some among them
worshipped other gods, and the generality were remiss in the service of the God of Israel,
and yet Elkanah kept his integrity; whatever others did, his resolution was that he and
his house should serve the Lord. 2. That Hophni and Phinehas, the sons of Eli, were the
men that were now chiefly employed in the service of the house of God; and they were
men that conducted themselves very ill in their place, as we shall find afterwards; yet
Elkanah went up to sacrifice. God had then tied his people to one place and one altar,
and forbidden them, under any pretence whatsoever, to worship elsewhere, and
therefore, in pure obedience to that command, he attended at Shiloh. If the priests did
not do their duty, he would do his. Thanks be to God, we, under the gospel, are not tied
to any one place or family; but the pastors and teachers whom the exalted Redeemer has
given to his church are those only whose ministration tends to the perfecting of the
saints and the edifying of the body of Christ, Eph_4:11, Eph_4:12. None have dominion
over our faith; but our obligation is to those that are the helpers of our holiness and joy,
not to any that by their scandalous immoralities, like Hophni and Phinehas, make the
sacrifices of the Lord to be abhorred, though still the validity and efficacy of the
sacraments depend not on the purity of him that administers them.
II. Yet it was a divided family, and the divisions of it carried with them both guilt and
grief. Where there is piety, it is a pity but there should be unity. The joint-devotions of a
family should put an end to divisions in it.
1. The original cause of this division was Elkanah's marrying two wives, which was a
transgression of the original institution of marriage, to which our Saviour reduces it.
Mat_19:5, Mat_19:8, From the beginning it was not so. It made mischief in Abraham's
3

4. family, and Jacob's, and here in Elkanah's. How much better does the law of God
provide for our comfort and ease in this world than we should, if we were left to
ourselves! It is probable that Elkanah married Hannah first, and, because he had not
children by her so soon as he hoped, he married Peninnah, who bore him children
indeed, but was in other things a vexation to him. Thus are men often beaten with rods
of their own making.
JAMISON, "2. That which followed upon this error was that the two wives could not
agree. They had different blessings: Peninnah, like Leah, was fruitful and had many
children, which should have made her easy and thankful, though she was but a second
wife, and was less beloved; Hannah, like Rachel, was childless indeed, but she was very
dear to her husband, and he took all occasions to let both her and others know that she
was so, and many a worthy portion he gave her (1Sa_1:5), and this should have made
her easy and thankful. But they were of different tempers: Peninnah could not bear the
blessing of fruitfulness, but she grew haughty and insolent; Hannah could not bear the
affliction of barrenness, but she grew melancholy and discontented: and Elkanah had a
difficult part to act between them.
(1.) Elkanah kept up his attendance at God's altar notwithstanding this unhappy
difference in his family, and took his wives and children with him, that, if they could not
agree in other things, they might agree to worship God together. If the devotions of a
family prevail not to put an end to its divisions, yet let not the divisions put a stop to the
devotions.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 1:1. Ramathaim-zophim — The latter word means watchers,
or watchmen, and the former the Ramahs. The place is called Ramah, (1 Samuel
1:19,) and seems to have been a village situated on two hills, which, on account of
their elevation, commanded extensive prospects, and were proper places from which
to make observations. Probably there might be a watch-tower and sentinels placed
in each. Of mount Ephraim — This is added to distinguish this from other places,
which had the name of Ramah in other tribes, particularly in that of Benjamin,
Joshua 18:25. An Ephrathite — That is, one of Beth-lehem-judah, by his birth and
habitation, though by his origin a Levite.
COKE, "1 Samuel 1:1. A certain man of Ramathaim-zophim— This might be
translated, the Ramahs of the guards; possibly because the village was divided into
two parts, situated each upon a hill, where there might be a watch-tower, and
centinels placed. Various other reasons are given for the name; for which see
Buddaeus, Hist. 5: tom. 2. By comparing the words in this verse with those in 1
Chronicles 23:32; 1 Chronicles 23:32 and the following, it appears, that Elkanah
was of the tribe of Levi and of the family of Kohath, and consequently was not a
priest, as some have supposed, much less the high-priest. See Selden de Success. in
Pontif. lib. 1: cap. 18.
4

5. COFFMAN, "ELKANAH AND HIS TWO WIVES
"There was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim of the hill country of Ephraim,
whose name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of
Zuph, an Ephraimite. He had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the
name of the other Peninnah. And Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no
children."
"Now this man used to go up year by year from his city to worship and to sacrifice
to the Lord of hosts at Shiloh, where the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were
priests of the Lord. On the day when Elkanah sacrificed, he would give portions to
Peninnah his wife and to all her sons and daughters; and although he loved Hannah,
he would give Hannah only one portion, because the Lord had closed her womb.
And her rival used to provoke her sorely, to irritate her, because the Lord had
closed her womb. So it went on year by year; as often as she went up to the house of
the Lord, she used to provoke her. Therefore Hannah wept and would not eat. And
Elkanah, her husband, said to her, "Hannah, why do you weep? And why do you
not eat? And why is your heart sad? Am I not more to you than ten sons"?"
"Rama-thaim-Zophim". There were not less than eight places called "Ramah"
mentioned in the O.T., most of then within five or ten miles of Jerusalem.[1] There is
not enough information to determine exactly which location was referred to here.
"Elkanah ... an Ephraimite." Elkanah was an Ephraimite only in the sense that he
lived in the hill country of Ephraim. He was most certainly a Levite as positively
indicated in the account of his ancestry given in 1 Chronicles 6:33. Furthermore, as
Keil pointed out, the very name "Elkanah" identifies him as a Levite. "All of the
Elkanahs mentioned in the O.T. (with a single exception) can be proved to have
been Levites."[2] R. Payne Smith stressed the fact that, "`Elkanah' was a name
commonly used among the Kohathites, to which division of the sons of Levi Samuel
belonged."[3]
The fact of Elkanah's being called in this passage "an Ephraimite" merely means
that, like all Levites, he was attached to the tribe of Ephraim in and legal matters.
"Elkanah is called an Ephraimite, because, as far as his standing was concerned, he
5

6. belonged to the tribe of Ephraim, just as the Levite in Judges 17:7 is described as
belonging to the tribe of Judah."[4]
"Hannah." This name in the Douay Version is "Anna." According to Henry
Preserved Smith it means "grace," and Peninnah means "coral."[5] Barnes gave the
meaning of Peninnah as "pearl," and declared that it means the same thing as
"Margaret."[6] F. K. Farr gave the meaning of "Elkanah" as "possessed of
God,"[7] a name especially appropriate for a Levite, because the Levites were in a
special sense God's possession.
"He had two wives." It must not be thought that because so many examples of
polygamy are found among the heroes of the O.T. that God ever approved of it. It
was never the will of God (Matthew 19:3-9), and the example here in the case of
Elkanah is another instance of the unhappiness and strife that normally resulted
from the possession of two or more wives.
Now this man used to go up year by year to worship at Shiloh. Louise Pettibone
Smith misconstrued this passage to mean that, "This pilgrimage only once a year
shows that this had nothing to do with the later law of the three national festivals
(Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles)."[8] Such a view is founded on the outmoded
and discredited theory of a LATE DATE of the Pentateuch. As Willis declared,
"There are indications that this may have been one of the three national festivals
mentioned in Exodus 34:18-24 and Deuteronomy 16:16."[9] In fact, no other annual
festivals of the Jews existed in those times except the three feasts which were just
mentioned. We agree with Willis that the particular festival that Elkanah attended
was probably that the Feast of Tabernacles.
"To sacrifice to the Lord of Hosts." "This name of God, with variations, is found
260 times in the O.T., but this is the first mention of it."[10] Scholarly disputes over
whether the title means "heavenly hosts such as the stars," "the hosts of angels,"
"the hosts of the armies of Israel," or "the hosts of all human armies" are of little
interest, because God is the "Lord of all hosts." The Good News Bible and the NIV
both rendered it "Lord Almighty"; but James Moffatt and the Douay Version of the
Old Testament wisely let it stand as "Lord of Hosts," "Jehovah Sabaoth."
6

7. "At Shiloh" Joshua had removed the ark from Gilgal to Shiloh, a town in his own
tribe of Ephraim, located about ten miles south of Shechem. (Joshua 18:1).
"Where Eli, Hophni, and Phinehas were priests of the Lord." Eli had not retired at
that time as High Priest, but he had abandoned much of the duties of his office to his
unscrupulous, immoral sons.
"He would give Hannah only one portion, because the Lord had closed her womb."
The sacrificial meal which Elkanah's household enjoyed at Shiloh was evidently a
peace-offering. Payne defended the ASV rendition here as being at least "possible,"
adding that, "The Hebrew text, though obscure, at least suggests `worthy' or
`double' portion; and such an act by Elkanah would partially explain Peninnah's
conduct."[11]
Worshippers were permitted to feast on the peace-offerings after the priests had
taken their portion, and the event mentioned here was that of parceling out the food
to individuals. Peninnah with her children received many portions, and despite
Elkanah's love for Hannah, she would normally have received only one portion as
the RSV text states it.
Hannah's weeping was evidently precipitated by Peninnah's jealous and unfeeling
conduct as she taunted Hannah, especially on those occasions of the annual worship
at Shiloh. Difficulties in the Hebrew text here have led some to suppose that Hannah
on the particular occasion mentioned here interrupted her meal to enter the
tabernacle for prayer. This, it seems, might be supported by 1 Samuel 1:18, where it
mentions Hannah's eating immediately after the account of her prayer.
ELLICOTT, "(1 Samuel 1:1-8) The Home Life of the Family of the future Prophet-
judge of Israel. (1 Samuel 1:9-28) Interview of Hannah with Eli—Birth and
Dedication of Samuel.
7

8. Somewhere about the year 1140 B.C. (or, as some suppose, thirty years earlier), the
Levitical family of Elkanah, of the house of Kohath, lived in Ramathaim-zophim, a
little city of Benjamin, built on the slopes of Mount Ephraim. The supposed date of
the Trojan War coincides with this period of Jewish history. We may then fairly
assume that the events related in the Homeric epic took place during the time
treated of in these Books of Samuel.
Verse 1
(1) Now there was a certain man.—Literally, And there was, &c. These introductory
words do not signify that this history is the continuation of the Book of Judges or of
any preceding writing. It is a common historical introductory formula. We find it at
the commencement of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Kings, Esther, Ezra, Ezekiel, &c. The
circumstances under which this record was probably compiled are discussed
elsewhere.
Of Ramathaim-zophim.—The name Ramathaim—literally, The Two Ramahs—is
the dual of the well-known Ramah, the appellation by which this city is usually
known. The old city was, no doubt, built on two hills, which looked one on the other:
hence perhaps the name Zophim, the watchers. Possibly at an early date watch-
towers or outlooks, to enable the citizens to guard against surprise, were built on the
summit of these hills. Either of these suppositions would account for the suggestive
name by which Ramah was once known, the “Ramahs of the Watchers.”
Others would connect the appellation “Zophim” with the family of Zuph, from
whom Elkanah descended. (See 1 Chronicles 6:35, and 1 Samuel 9:5, where the land
of Zuph is mentioned.) An interesting. though fanciful, derivation refers Zophim,
watchers, to the “prophet-watchmen” of the house of Israel, as Ramah in after years
was a school of the prophets.
On the whole, the simplest and least strained explanation is the one given above,
which refers the name to the hills so placed that they watched one another, or better
8

9. still, to the watch-towers built at an early date on the two summits.
Ramah lay among the mountains of Ephraim, which extended into the territory of
Benjamin, in which tribe the city of Ramah lay.
His name was Elkanah.—Elkanah, the father of the future prophet-judge, was a
Levite of the family of Kohath (compare the genealogy given here with 1 Chronicles
6:22). He is here termed an Ephrathite: that is, an Ephraimite, because, as far as his
civil standing was concerned, he belonged to the tribe of Ephraim.
Some have found a difficulty in reconciling the Levitical descent of Samuel with his
dedication to the Lord by his mother, supposing that in the case of a Levite this
would be unnecessary; but the dedication of Samuel, it should be remembered, was
a life-long one, whereas the Levitical service only began when the Levite was
twenty-five years old; and even then the service was not continuous.
WHEDON, " 1. Ramathaim-Zophim — The name means, the double height of the
watchers, and was probably so called because of two heights on which the city stood,
or with which it was in some way associated. Some scholars are inclined to identify
it with the modern Soba, some seven miles west of Jerusalem; but their opinion is
based on the assumption that it is the same city where Saul was anointed, (1 Samuel
9:6,) an assumption that has no sufficient support. A comparison of this verse and 1
Samuel 1:3 with 1 Samuel 1:19 and with 1 Samuel 2:11, makes it certain that
Ramathaim-Zophim is the same as Ramah, but a fuller form of the name. Ramah
was situated about five miles north of Jerusalem, and was not only the birthplace of
Samuel, but his home through life, (1 Samuel 7:17,) and the place of his death and
burial. 1 Samuel 25:1. The Hebrew name of this place, as well as its modern Arabic
name er-Ram, means the height, and this may explain the appended name Zophim,
which means watchers, for the heights of Ramah would afford a fitting station for
watchmen, who could from its heights command a wide prospect on every side, and
see at a great distance any signal of danger or alarm that might be given. Compare
“the field of Zophim on the top of Pisgah.” Numbers 23:14. Others think that
Zophim was the name of the country round Ramah, called after Zuph, one of
Elkanah’s ancestors. Hence “land of Zuph” in 1 Samuel 9:5.
9

10. Mount Ephraim — See note on Judges 17:1.
Son of Jeroham — A comparison of this genealogy with 1 Chronicles 6:34-35, shows
that Elkanah (and therefore Samuel) was a descendant of Levi through Kohath. No
other special notice is taken of Samuel’s Levitical descent, because his work and
authority as Reformer and Judge in Israel were not owing to this fact, but, rather, to
his special divine call from the Lord.
An Ephrathite — Grammatically, this word is in apposition with a certain man, that
is, Elkanah. He was reckoned as to his civil standing with the tribe of Ephraim, for
the Levites, having been set apart to the service of the sanctuary, had no separate
portion of the Promised Land assigned to them, (Joshua 14:4,) but were reckoned to
the tribes in which they had their homes. Ten cities were allotted to the children of
Kohath, in the tribes of Ephraim, Dan, and Manasseh. Joshua 21:5.
HAWKER, "This Chapter opens with an account of Samuel's family; of his father
Elkanah, and his mother Hannah, particularly. The distress of his mother, by
reason of her being childless; the temptation of her adversary on this score: her
earnest prayer to God; Eli the Priest taking notice of her fervor in prayers and
mistaking for drunkenness, what he saw of her wrestling in prayer with God,
reproves her; Hannah satisfies Eli, and obtains his good wishes, that the Lord might
hear and answer her petition: Hannah is blessed of God, with a son, and Samuel is
born; offerings are made in consequence thereof, to the Lord, in Shiloh. These are
the principal things contained in this Chapter.
1 Samuel 1:1
(1) ¶ Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and
his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the
son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:
Perhaps the pedigree of Samuel is here noticed, by way of manifesting the particular
tribe of Israel, to which he belonged.
TRAPP, "1 Samuel 1:1 Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of
mount Ephraim, and his name [was] Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu,
the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:
Samuel was in the number of those few in Scripture, that lived and died with glory.
His birth, life, and acts take up a great part of this book, which seemeth to have
been written by some disciple of his, who, in honour of his master, called it by his
10

11. name. Like Anna Comnena, daughter of Alexius Comnenus the Emperor, wrote the
history of her father’s deeds and called it Alexias.
Ver. 1. Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim.] Called also Ramah,
and Arimathaea. The Hebrews (a) say it was a school of prophets, who are
frequently in Scripture called Zophim, that is, watchmen, and that Elkanah himself
was a prophet, as being of the sons of Korah, who are called prophets. See 1
Chronicles 6:22; 1 Chronicles 6:27; 1 Chronicles 6:33, compared with those titles of
Psalms "to" or "of the soils of Korah." Of that gainsaying "sinner against his own
soul," came Samuel, Homo ille virtute simillimus.
An Ephrathite.] So called, because he dwelt in the tribe of Ephraim, as 12:5; likeas
those Jews are called Cretes and Arabians, Elamites and Parthians, &c., [Acts
2:9-10] because they sojourned in those countries.
CONSTABLE, "I. ELI AND SAMUEL 1:1-4:1A
First Samuel begins by contrasting Israel's last two judges (Eli: a failure; and
Samuel: a success) and then Israel's first two kings (Saul: a failure; and David: a
success).
The first major section of Samuel sharply contrasts obedience and disobedience to
the will of God as God expressed that for Israel in the Mosaic Covenant. This
contrast is clear in all seven major sections of 1 and 2 Samuel. The events in this
section took place during Eli's 40-year judgeship (1 Samuel 4:18; 1 Samuel
1144-1104 B.C.). [Note: Eugene H. Merrill, "Paul's Use of 'About 450 Years' in Acts
13:20," Bibliotheca Sacra (July-September 1981):247, dated Samson's death about
1085 B.C.] First Samuel overlaps Judges chronologically.
Verse 1-2
The problem 1:1-2
Samuel's parents lived near Ramathaim-zophim (lit. two heights, elsewhere called
Ramah, e.g., 1 Samuel 1:19, lit. height) in Ephraim in central Canaan. There was
also a Ramah in the territory of Benjamin farther to the south (Judges 19:13; et al.),
and one in Naphtali to the north (Joshua 19:29; Joshua 19:36). Samuel's father,
Elkanah, was an Ephraimite by residence but a Levite by birth (1 Chronicles
11

12. 6:33-38). Ramah was not one of the Levitical towns in Ephraim. Elkanah's residence
raises initial questions about his commitment to the Mosaic Law. Was he really
where he should have been, and does this indicate that the will of God may not have
been very important for him (cf. Judges 17:7-13)? In the story that follows it is
Hannah (lit. grace) rather than Elkanah (lit. God created) who emerges as the
person of outstanding faith. Hannah's problem was that she was barren (1 Samuel
1:2).
In the Hebrew Bible the description of Samuel's father and Samson's father are
almost identical (cf. Judges 13:2). The Holy Spirit may have written this to remind
us of the unusual Nazirite status of both judges.
Verses 1-10
A. The Change from Barrenness to Fertility 1:1-2:10
In the first subsection (1 Samuel 1:1 to 1 Samuel 2:10), we have the joyful story of
Samuel's miraculous birth and his mother's gratitude to God for reversing her
barrenness and making her fertile. The significance of this story is not only that it
gives us the record of how Samuel was born and that his mother was a godly
woman. It also shows how God, in faithfulness to His promise to bless those who put
Him first (Deuteronomy 28), did so even for a despised woman in Israel (cf. Rahab
and Ruth). He brought blessing to all Israel because of her faith.
Verses 1-28
1. Hannah's deliverance ch. 1
"1 Samuel 1 is presented as a conventional birth narrative which moves from
barrenness to birth. Laid over that plot is a second rhetorical strategy which moves
from complaint to thanksgiving. With the use of this second strategy, the birth
narrative is transposed and becomes an intentional beginning point for the larger
Samuel-Saul-David narrative. Hannah's story begins in utter helplessness (silence);
it anticipates Israel's royal narrative which also begins in helplessness. As Hannah
moves to voice (2,1-10), so Israel's narrative moves to power in the historical
process. Both Hannah's future and Israel's future begin in weakness and need, and
move toward power and well-being. The narrative of 1 Samuel 1 functions to
introduce the theological theme of 'cry-thanks' which appears in the larger
narrative in terms of Israelite precariousness and Yahweh's powerful providence.
Our chapter corresponds canonically to 2 Samuel 24 which portrays David in the
end (like Hannah) as a needy, trusting suppliant. The two chapters, witnesses to
vulnerable faith, together bracket Israel's larger story of power." [Note: Walter
12

13. Brueggemann, "1 Samuel 1 : A Sense of a Beginning," Zeitschrift für die
Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 102:1 (1990):48.]
LANGE, "I. Samuel’s parents, the Ephrathite Elkanah and the childless Hannah. 1
Samuel 1:1-8
1Now [om. Now[FN1]] there was a certain [om. certain] man of Ramathaim-
zophim,[FN2] of Mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham,
the son of 2 Elihu, the son of Tohu, the Son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. And he had two
wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; and
Peninnah 3 had children, but [and] Hannah had no children. And this man went up
yearly out of [from] his city to worship and to sacrifice unto the Lord [Jehovah] of
hosts [Hosts] in Shiloh. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of
the Lord, were there [And there the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, 4were
priests of Jehovah[FN3]]. And when the time was that Elkanah offered, Hebrews 5
gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions; but unto
Hannah he gave a worthy [double[FN4]] portion, for he loved Hannah, but [and]
6the Lord [Jehovah] had shut up her womb. And her adversary also [om. also]
provoked her sore [ins. also], for [om. for] to make her fret because[FN5] the Lord
[Jehovah] 7had shut up her womb. And as he did so [And so it happened[FN6]] year
by year; when she went up to the house of the Lord [Jehovah], so she [she thus]
provoked 8 voked her, therefore [and] she wept and did not eat. Then said Elkanah
her husband [And Elkanah her husband said] to her, Hannah, why weepest thou?
and why eatest thou not? and why is thy heart grieved? am not I better to thee than
ten sons?
II. Hannah’s Prayer far a Son. 1 Samuel 1:9-18 a
9So [And] Hannah rose up after they [she[FN7]] had eaten in Shiloh, and after they
[she] had drunk. Now [And] Eli the priest sat upon a [the] seat by a [the] post 10 of
the temple [Sanctuary[FN8]] of the Lord [Jehovah]. And she was in bitterness of 11
soul, and prayed unto the Lord [Jehovah], and wept sore. And she vowed a vow,
and said, O Lord of hosts [Jehovah of Hosts], if thou wilt indeed look on the
affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thy handmaid, but
[and] wilt give unto thine handmaid a male-child, then I will give him unto the Lord
[Jehovah] all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his 12 head.
And it came to pass, as she continued praying before the Lord [Jehovah], 13that Eli
marked her mouth. Now [And] Hannah, she [om. she[FN9]] spake in her heart; only
13

14. her lips moved, but her voice was not heard; therefore [and] Eli 14 thought she had
been [was] drunken. And Eli said unto her, How long wilt thou 15 be drunken? put
away thy wine from thee. And Hannah answered and said, No, my lord, I am a
woman of a sorrowful spirit; I have drunk neither wine nor strong 16 drink, but
have poured out my soul before the Lord [Jehovah]. Count not thine handmaid for
a daughter of Belial [dissolute woman[FN10]]; for out of the abundance 17 of my
complaint and [ins. my] grief have I spoken hitherto. Then [And] Eli answered and
said, Go in peace; and the God of Israel grant thee [om. thee] thy18a petition that
thou hast asked of him. And she said, Let thine handmaid find grace in thy sight
[thine eyes].
III. Samuel’s Birth. 1 Samuel 1:18-20
18b So [And] the woman went her way and did eat, and her countenance was no 19
more sad.[FN11] And they rose up in the morning early, and worshipped before the
Lord [Jehovah], and returned and came to their house to Ramah. And Elkanah 20
knew Hannah his wife; and the Lord [Jehovah] remembered her. Wherefore [And]
it came to pass, when the time was come about, after Hannah had [that Hannah]
conceived, that she [and] bare a Song of Solomon, and called his name Samuel,
saying, Because [For, said she,] I have [om. have] asked him of the Lord [Jehovah].
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL[FN12]
I. Samuel’s Parents. 1 Samuel 1:1-8
1 Samuel 1:1-2. And there was a man of Ramathaim-zophim.—Here an account is
given of Samuel’s genealogy and birth-place.
There is no sufficient ground for adopting (as Thenius does) the reading of the Sept.
MS. R. (Vat.) ‫ָה‬‫י‬ָ‫ה‬ ‫יש‬ ִ‫א‬ [there was a man] instead of ‫ישׁ‬ ִ‫א‬ ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ְ‫ַי‬‫ו‬ [and there was a man],
since this latter does not affect the independence of the Books of Samuel; for the ‫ו‬
[and] does not indicate attachment to something preceding, the continuation of the
14

15. Book of Judges, but ‫י‬ ִ‫ה‬ְ‫ַי‬‫ו‬ [and there was] stands here, as it often does at the
beginning of a narrative, as historical introductory formula, Joshua 1:1; Judges 1:1;
Ruth 1:1; 2 Samuel 1:1; 1 Kings 1:1; Esther 1:1; Ezra 1:1; Ezekiel 1:1; Jonah 1:1.
The father of Samuel was a man of Ramathaim-zophim in the hill-country of
Ephraim, named Elkanah. The place Ramathaim (‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫ת‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָֽ‫ר‬ָ‫)ה‬ is doubtless the same that
is called in 1 Samuel 1:3 “his city,” and afterwards in 1 Samuel 1:19; 1 Samuel 2:11
by the shorter name Ramah (‫ה‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ר‬ָ‫,)ה‬ whence it appears that it was not merely the
family-residence, but also Elkanah’s abode, where he had “his house.” The full
name Ramathaim-zophim is found here only. The dual “Two-hills” points to the site
of the place as on the sides or summits of two hills. It is the birth-place of Samuel ( 1
Samuel 1:19); the same Ramah in which he had his house ( 1 Samuel 7:17), the
central point of his labors ( 1 Samuel 8:4; 1 Samuel 15:34; 1 Samuel 16:13; 1 Samuel
22-19:18 ) and his abode as long as he lived, and where he was buried ( 1 Samuel
26:1; 1 Samuel 28:3). But this Ramah of Samuel, according to Pressel’s clear
statement in Herzog (R-E. s. v. Rama), is most probably identical with the Ramah in
the tribe of Benjamin ( Joshua 18:25); for the statement of Josephus (Ant8, 12, 3)
that Ramathon,[FN13] which = ‫ם‬ִ‫י‬ ַ‫ת‬ ָ‫מ‬ ָ‫ר‬ [Ramathaim] and is therefore doubtless the
Ramah of Samuel, was forty Stadia from Jerusalem, and that of Eusebius
(Onomast. s. v. ’Αρμαθὲμ) that it was somewhat farther north in a line from
Jerusalem towards Bethel, carry us into the territory of Benjamin. If it be urged
against this view that, according to Judges 4:5 and this passage, Ramah of Samuel
was in the mountains of Ephraim, and therefore in the Tribe-territory of Ephraim,
it is to be observed on the other hand that the mountains of Ephraim stretch into the
Tribe of Benjamin, and not only include its northern mountains, but extend towards
Jerusalem and unite with the mountains of Judah. The Ramah of Samuel lay in
Benjamin near Gibeah, Saul’s home, and Mizpah. The addition zophim (‫ים‬ ִ‫)צוֹפ‬
distinguishes it from the other places of the same name, and indicates the district
(the land of Zuph 1 Samuel 9:5) in which it lay, whose name is to be derived from
the family of Zuph or Zophim from whom Elkanah descended (comp. 1 Chronicles
6:11; 1 Chronicles 6:20). Since, according to this, Zophim indicates a region, which
took its name from the descendants of Zuph, the place Sôba, which has lately been
discovered west of Jerusalem, cannot be the Ramah of Samuel, as Robinson and
Ritter suppose (see Then. sächs, exeget. Studien, II:134 sq, and Ewald, Gesch.
II:595). It is rather to be sought in the site of the present Er-Ram between four and
five (Eng.) miles, as Josephus states, from Jerusalem on the summit or side of a
conical mountain on the road from Jerusalem to Bethel. When Saul (in 1 Samuel
9:5) comes into the “ land of Zuph,” he straightway finds Samuel in “this city.” That
15

16. “this city,” Samuel’s abode, is identical with Ramathaim-zophim here is beyond
doubt. But against the view that it, together with the region “Zuph,” belonged to
Benjamin, and in support of the view that it is different from Ramah of Benjamin,
and lay in the territory of Ephraim, the principal consideration adduced is Saul’s
route ( 1 Samuel 9:4 to 1 Samuel 10:2): on the return from Ramah to Gibeah, Saul,
it is said, certainly took the directest road; but, according to 1 Samuel 10:2-5, he
first crossed the border of Benjamin ( 1 Samuel 10:2), and then came into the
neighborhood of Bethel ( 1 Samuel 10:3), which lay close to the border of Benjamin
and Ephraim; according to this, Ramah of Samuel was situated north of Bethel in
Ephraim not far from Gibeah ( 1 Samuel 1:20) but near Shiloh ( 1 Samuel 1:24), for
if it had been far from Shiloh, the animals for offering would not have been carried
from home. So Then. on 1 Samuel 9:5, p34. But the assumption that Saul went the
directest way to Gibeah is not certain. In 1 Samuel 1:3, remarks Winer correctly
(W-B. s. v.), nothing is said really of the neighborhood of Bethel, but only that Saul
should meet men who were going to Bethel, from what direction we know not. And
Ramah of Benjamin was so near Shiloh, that there was no need[FN14] to drive
thither the animals which could not easily be purchased on the spot.[FN15] The
other geographical term ‫י‬ ִ‫ת‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ‫פ‬ ֶ‫א‬ “Ephraimite” (which must not be connected with ‫צוּף‬
(Luth.) in which case it would have been ‫י‬ ִ‫ת‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ‫פ‬ ֶ‫א‬ָ‫)ה‬ certainly describes Elkanah as an
Ephraimite, who belonged not only to the mountains, but also to the Tribe of
Ephraim—and not as a Bethlehemite, as Hoffmann (Weissag. u. Erfüll. II:61) and
Robinson (Pal. II, 583 [Am. ed. 1 Samuel 2:7 sq.])sup. pose; for in 1 Samuel 17:12
and Ruth 1:2, to which appeal is made, the word is further expressly defined by the
phrase “of Bethlehem.” “It by no means follows, however, from this description of
Elkanah (comp. Then. p2) that Ramathaim-zophim pertained to the territory of
Ephraim, but only that Elkanah’s family had settled in this Ramah, and had
afterwards moved to Ramah in Benjamin” (Keil, p18). As Elkanah came from the
Levitical family of Kohath, son of Levi, whose land lay in Ephraim, Dan and
Manasseh ( Joshua 21:5; Joshua 21:21 sq.), and as the Levites generally were
counted as citizens of the tribes in which their residence was, it is not strange that
Elkanah is here designated as an Ephraimite according to his descent, while he lived
in Benjamin, whither his forefathers had immigrated.
The family of Elkanah is here traced back only through four generations to ‫צוּף‬
“Zuph,” no doubt with reference to the preceding designation Zophim, because
Zuph had settled in this district with his family, and it had taken its name from him.
It would therefore properly be written ‫ים‬ ִ‫צוּפ‬ “Zuphim.” This explanation of the
name is certainly more natural than that which supposes that the district in which it
16

17. lay, the “land of Zuph” ( 1 Samuel 9:5) was so called from its abundant supply of
water, and than the explanation of some Rabbis, “Ramathaim of the watchers or
prophets.” [The first question with regard to this word, whether we read Zophim
or, with Erdmann, Zuphim, is a grammatical one: is the combination Ramathaim-
zophim in accordance with Heb. usage? In proper names the rule is that the first
word of a compound is in the construct. state, but the two exceptions, compounds
with ‫ל‬ֵ‫ב‬ ָ‫א‬ “meadow,” Genesis 50:11, etc, and ‫ֵה‬‫ו‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ “plain,” Genesis 14:5, seem to prove
the possibility of an appositional construction, so that we must admit (against
Wellhausen “Der Text. d. Bücker Sam.” in loco) Ramathaim-zophim to be a possible
form. But, as “Zophim” never appears again as an appendage to Ramathaim, and
the old vss. Chald. and Syr. render it as an appellative, it would perhaps be better,
with Wellhausen, to suppose that the final ‫ם‬ m comes by error of transcription from
the following word, and to read ‫י‬ ִ‫צוּפ‬ “a Zuphite,” which would then correspond to
the “Zuph” at the end as “an Ephraimite” does to “Mount Ephraim.”—Tr.]. From a
comparison of the two genealogies in 1 Chronicles 6:26-27 ( Hebrews 11, 12) 34, 35
( Hebrews 19, 20) with this genealogy of Samuel it appears that they agree except in
the last three names, which in the first list in Chr. are Eliab, Nahath and Zophai,
and in the second, Eliel, Toah and Ziph. They are plainly the same names with
various changes of form. These changes are probably to be ascribed to differences of
pronunciation or to the mis-writing of the original forms which are preserved in this
passage (comp. Then2).
The Levitical descent of Elkanah and Samuel is put beyond doubt by a comparison
of the genealogy here with those in Chronicles. In the first of these, 1 Chronicles
6:22 sq. ( Hebrews 7 sq.) the genealogical list descends from the second son of Levi,
Kohath, to Samuel and his sons; in the second, 1:33 sq. ( Hebrews 18 sq.), it ascends
from the singer Heman, Samuel’s grandson, to Kohath, Levi and Israel. These
Levites of the Family of Kohath had their dwellings appointed them in the tribes of
Ephraim, Daniel, and Manasseh. As the Levites were usually designated by the
tribes in which their dwellings were fixed (Hengstenb. Beitr. [Contributions] zur
Einl. ins. A. T. III:61), the name “Ephraimite” here cannot be adduced against the
Levitical descent of Samuel, as is done by Knobel (II:29, Anm2), Nagelsbach
(Herzog, R-E. s. v. Samuel) and others. The latter himself refers to Judges 17:7;
Judges 19:1 as cases where a Levite is described as belonging to another tribe, but
thinks it strange that, while in those passages the Levitical descent of the men is also
expressly mentioned, Elkanah’s descent from Levi is here not hinted at, and this is
all the more surprising, if he was really a Levite, when his ancestor came from
Ephraim to Ramah and gave his name to the region. But the author of the Book of
17

18. Judges had a special motive for mentioning the Levitical character of those persons,
while our author had little or none, since in his narrative of Samuel he lays all the
stress on his prophetic office, and writes, as we have seen, from a prophetic stand-
point. There was the less need to emphasize Samuel’s Levitical character because, as
Ewald (II:594) remarks, the Levites that were not of Aaron’s family, seem in early
times to have been more blended with the people. And the statement in “Chronicles”
of Samuel’s Levitical descent was not occasioned by the fact that the prophet
performed priestly functions (Knobel ubi sup.), nor is it to be explained by saying
that perhaps quite early the conviction that Samuel must have been a Levite grew
out of the difficulty which every Levite must have felt at the discharge of priestly
duties by Samuel, if he were not of the stem of Levi (Nagelsbach, ubi sup.)—nor to
be referred, with Thenius (p2), to the fact that, perhaps in later times the genealogy
given in our Book was attached to that of Levi in order thus to justify Samuel’s
offering sacrifices. “Chronicles” throughout makes its statistical-historical
statements from the Levitical point of view, and thus supplements the history of
David and Samuel in our Book. Hengstenberg well says (ubi sup.): “We cannot
suppose these genealogies to be an arbitrary invention, simply because, if the author
had been disposed to this, he would doubtless have put Samuel among the
descendants of Aaron.” Ewald remarks, “Anyone who looks narrowly at the
testimony in ‘Chronicles’ cannot possibly doubt that Samuel was of a Levitical
family,” while our author attached no importance to this fact (ubi sup. Anm2). So
Bunsen (in loco), referring to Joshua 21:21, where the dwellings of the Kohathites
are fixed in Mount Ephraim also, says: “The Levitical descent of Samuel is certain;
only it is not made specially prominent here.” Nägelsbach himself is obliged to admit
that the proofs of Samuel’s Levitical descent are convincing; for1) looking at
“Chronicles” ( 1 Chronicles 25:4; comp. 1 Samuel 6:18 sq.), he is obliged to concede
that Samuel’s posterity is very decidedly considered as belonging to the Levites,
since Heman, the renowned singer, grandson of Samuel and father of a numerous
posterity, has an eminent place in the lists of Levites of David’s day; and2) he urges
further as a not unimportant consideration the name of Samuel’s father, “Elkanah,
that Isaiah, he whom God acquired or purchased,” for this name is both in
signification and use exclusively a Levite name, and all the Elkanahs mentioned in
the Old Test, (leaving out the one in 2 Chronicles 28:7, whose tribe is not stated)
were demonstrably Levites, and belonged mostly to the family of Korah from whom
Samuel also was descended. See Simonis Onomast, p493; Hengstenb, ubi supra 61;
Keil in loco.—The further objection is made that Samuel was really dedicated to the
Sanctuary-service by his mother’s vow, which would not have been necessary if
Elkanah had been a Levite. To this the answer is not that Hannah’s vow referred to
the Nazariteship of her son—for though all Nazarites were specially consecrated to
the Lord, they did not thereby come under obligation to serve in the Sanctuary like
18

19. the Levites—but rather that in Hannah’s vow the words “all the days of his life” ( 1
Samuel 1:11; 1 Samuel 1:22) are to be emphasized. While she consecrates him to the
Lord as Nazarite, she at the same time by her vow devotes him for his whole life to
the service of the Lord in the Sanctuary; while the Levites did not enter the service
till the age of twenty-five or thirty ( Numbers 8:23 sq.; Numbers 4:23; Numbers
4:30; Numbers 4:47), and then needed not to remain constantly at the Sanctuary,
Samuel as soon as he is weaned is destined by his mother to continual service there
( 1 Samuel 1:22), and while yet a boy wears there the priestly dress.—It is again
urged against the Levitical descent of Elkanah that, according to the Septuagint
rendering of 1 Samuel 1:21 (which adds πάσας τὰς δεκάτας τῆς γῆς αὐτοῦ “all the
tithes of his land”), he brought tithes (Then.); but the genuineness of this addition is
very doubtful, and, even if it be received, the bringing of tithes is no evidence of
Elkanah’s non-Levitical character (Josephus, who relates the Levitical descent,
makes no difficulty in speaking of the tithe-bringing), for, according to the Law, the
Levites had to bestow on the priests, as gift of Jehovah, one-tenth of the tenth which
they themselves received from the other tribes, Numbers 18:26 sq.; comp. Nehemiah
10:38 (Keil26, Note). Ewald (II:594) says: “The tithe which Elkanah (according to 1
Samuel 1:21, Sept.) brought proves nothing against his Levitical cha racter.” See his
Alterthümer (Archæology), p346. Thenius refers the fulfilment of the prophecy in 1
Samuel 2:35 to Samuel, and thereon bases the assertion that Samuel’s Levitical
descent is set aside by the prophecy; but, even if his reference be conceded, this
consequence does not follow, for in this prophecy the sense requires us to emphasize
not the priest but what is predicted of him.
‫ָה‬‫נּ‬ַ‫,ח‬ ̓́Αννα, Hannah (found in Phœnician also; Dido’s sister was named Anna), a
common name for women among the Hebrews, signifying “charm,” “favor,”
“beauty,” and in a religious sense “grace.”
Elkanah’s bigamy with Hannah and Peninnah (“coral,” “pearl”), like the custom of
taking concubines along with the proper wives, is fundamentally opposed to the
original divine ordination of monogamy. The Mosaic Law does not forbid polygamy,
but never expressly approves it; it accepts it as a custom and seeks to restrict and
govern it by various regulations ( Leviticus 18:18; Exodus 21:7-10; Deuteronomy
17:17; Deuteronomy 21:15-17). According to Genesis 4:19 it was a Cainite, Lamech,
that first violated the original ordinance. As it was usually only the men of more
wealth and higher position that took two or more wives, we may suppose that
Elkanah was a wealthy man.—The curse which attached to this relation appears in
19

20. Elkanah’s married and family-life; Peninnah, who was blessed with children, exalts
herself haughtily above the childless Hannah, and embitters her soul. The resulting
discord in the family-life shows itself at the holy place, where Hannah’s heart is
continually troubled by her “adversary,” while Elkanah seeks to console her by all
the more affectionate conduct.
LANGE, "HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL[FN22]
[This is the appropriate place to introduce a brief statement of the chronological
relation between the latter part of “Judges” (end of chap16) and the beginning of
“Samuel.” We shall not attempt to discuss the various schemes of the chronology
which have been presented by different writers, but merely give the biblical data for
determining the chronological relations of Samson, Eli, and Samuel. The first datum
is given in 1 Kings 6:1, and, putting the fourth year of Solomon B. C1012, fixes the
Exodus in B. C1492, the entrance into Canaan B. C1452, while David’s accession
falls B. C1056. The second datum is found in Jephthah’s statement, Judges 11:26,
according to which the beginning of his judgeship falls300 years after the entrance
into Canaan, that Isaiah, B. C1152. From this time to the death of Abdon ( Judges
12:7-15) is thirty-one years, and Abdon’s death is to be put B. C1121. We have thus
between the death of Abdon and the accession of David a space of sixty-five years in
which to put Samson, Eli, Samuel, and Saul. It is clear that their histories must be in
part contemporaneous. Eli dies an old Prayer of Manasseh, while Samuel is yet a
youth, and Samuel is an old man when Saul is anointed king. The following table
may give approximately the periods of these men:
Samson’s Judgeship,
B. C1120–1100
Eli’s Life (98 years)
20

21. B. C1208–1110
Eli’s Judgeship (40 years)
B. C1150–1110
Samuel’s Life
B. C1120 (or1130)–1060
Saul’s Reign
B. C1076–1056
According to this view the judgeships of Samson and Eli were in part
contemporaneous, and Samuel was twenty (or thirty) years old when Samson died,
the work of the latter being confined to the west and south-west, while Samuel lived
chiefly in the centre of the land. The forty years of Philistine oppression ( Judges
13:1) would then be reckoned B. C1120–1080, reaching nearly up to Saul’s
accession, and the third battle of Ebenezer would fall in B. C1080 when Samuel was
forty years old. Hannah’s visit to Shiloh occurred about (or, a little before) the time
that Samson began to vex the Philistines, but it is probable that the hostilities were
confined to the territories of Judah and Dan. Partly for this reason, and partly
because the history has been given already in the Book of Judges, our author does
21

22. not mention Samson, whose life had no point of contact with that of Samuel, who is
the theocratic-prophetical centre of the Books of Samuel. On the general subject see
Herzog, Art. “Zeitrechnung (biblische”), Smith’s Dict. of Bible, Art. “Chronology,”
Comm. on Judges in Lange’s Bible-work, and Smith’s Old Testament Hist, chap17,
Note (A) and 1 Samuel19, Note (A). But it is doubtful whether we have sufficient
data at present for settling the question.—Tr.].
1. The beginning of the Book of Samuel coincides with a principal turning-point in
the history of the kingdom of God in Israel, introducing us into the end of the Period
of the Judges, which is to be included with the Mosaic under one point of view,
namely, that of the establishment of the Theocracy on its objective foundations. The
Mosaic Period of the development of the Israelitish religion—which is based on
God’s revelation in the Patriarchal Period in order to the choice of the one people as
the bearer of the Theocracy, first in germinal form in the family, and then in its first
national development in Egypt—shows us the firm establishment of the Divine Rule,
which embraced and shaped the whole life of the people, on the theocratic law-
covenant, and on the word of the divine promise. The establishment of the Rule of
God in His people, in their outer and inner life, in all things great and small, by
means of the institution of the Law, in which His holy will is the norm for the
people’s life, is the aim of the whole revelation of God in the Mosaic Period, as it
appears in commandments, statutes, holy institutions, and legal principles. The land
in which this God-rule in the chosen people was to reach historical form and
development, was the object of the promises in the Patriarchal Period, and the
period of Joshua and the Judges shows how this promise was fulfilled in the
acquisition and division of the land. What sudden changes, from complete defeats to
glorious victories in battle against the heathen peoples in and out of the land of
promise, from divine deliverances to apparently complete abandonment by God, as
a consequence of the vacillation of the people between idolatrous apostasy from the
living God, and return to His help forced on them by need and misery, are exhibited
in the history of the post-Mosaic times! But through all the gloom shines out
continually the goal, the fulfilment of the promise of the complete possession of the
land; and in the midst of the people’s sin and misery the Theocracy stands fast
unshaken, with its Mosaic law controlling the popular life, and all its great objective
institutions which, even in times of most wretched disorder, marked Israel as the
chosen people of the living God. The Mosaic period of development of the Theocracy
in Israel up to the end of the period of the Judges is therefore the time of its
establishment in the chosen people by the institution of the covenant of the law and
the geographical-historical realization of the idea of the Theocracy in the
22

23. permanently acquired land of promise.
But now came the task of bringing the people, they being at rest and permanently
fixed in Canaan, face to face with their theocratic destination and their calling
( Exodus 19:6) in their whole inner and outer life. The content of the Revelation,
which had produced the covenant of the law and the fulfilling of the promise in the
Mosaic Period, was to be inwardly appropriated and become the life of the people in
knowledge, heart and will. For this there was needed on God’s side the progressive
realization and announcement of His counsel of revelation; and on man’s side there
was the unceasing obligation to penetrate with the whole inner life, with
understanding and feeling, with mind and will, into God’s revelation in law and
promise, and appropriate inwardly its content. This task—the deep, inward
implanting of the revelation of God in law and promise in the heart and feeling of
individuals and in the life of the whole nation—could be fulfilled neither by the
Judges, the lives of some of whom corresponded poorly to their theocratic calling,
nor by the priesthood, which showed its fall from its original theocratic elevation in
the transition from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar and in the house of Eli,
nor by the mere existence and use of the objective theocratic-historical institutions,
national sanctuary, feasts, offerings. This impossibility is vividly set before us in the
beginning of the Books of Samuel. But we are there at the same time pointed to the
new element in the development of the Theocracy, the prophetic office, which was to
be the instrument of fulfilling this task, and of realizing the idea of mediation
between God and His people through their living permeation by[FN23] His
objective revelation of word and promise; so Moses, as type of prophecy,
represented it. The turning-point from the Mosaic to the prophetic period of
development of the Theocracy falls in the beginning of the Books of Samuel; that
Isaiah, in the first years of Samuel’s life. (Comp. Oehler, Prolegom. zur Theol. des
A. T, 1845, pp87, 88; and W. Hoffmann, Die göttliche Stufenordnung im A. T. in
Schneider’s Deutsche Zeitschrift, 1854, Nr. 7, 8.) From Samuel’s time Peter ( Acts
3:24) dates the prophetic office; from then on the prophets, devoted to the service of
the Theocracy, form a separate Order, and, as organs of God’s revelations to His
people, a continuous chain. (See Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen,
2ed1861, p26.)
2. The end of the Period of the Judges, like its previous history, reveals a deep
disorder of the theocratic life, which neither judges nor priests could help, because
they were themselves affected by its corrupting influences, as is shown by the
23

24. histories of Samson and Eli. The unimportance and weakness to which the
Judgeship was fallen may be inferred from its connection with the High-priesthood
in the person of Eli, the latter office having evidently passed from Phinehas’ family
to Ithamar’s, contrary to the promise in Numbers 25:11-13, because the condition of
“zeal for the Lord” was not fulfilled. And the conduct of Eli and his sons, and
especially God’s judgment against his house, show how badly the High-priesthood
was represented in him. The political life of the nation was crushed under the
constant oppression of external enemies, the heathen nations on the east, and
especially the Philistines on the west, and under internal national distraction; the
tribes were at enmity with one another, did not unite against foreign foes, and could
gather together “as one man” only against one of themselves (Benjamin), and that
was the last time ( Judges 19-21).[FN24] And though individual men, called of the
Lord to be deliverers, exerted a mighty influence on the distracted national life, yet
their influence was restricted to particular tribes, and was not permanent—was
always followed by a sinking back into the old wretched condition. The cause of this
was the deterioration of religious life, which was wide-spread among the people; the
worship of the living Covenant-God was mingled with the nature-worship of the
Canaanitish nations, not all of whom were completely conquered, and especially
with the Baal-worship of the Philistines; or it was suppressed by these heathen
worships. Gideon’s ephod-worship ( Judges 8:27) and Micah’s image-worship
( Judges 17, 18.) belonged also to this corruption of the religion of Jehovah. With
this moral decline and distraction of theocratic life was connected corruption of
moral life, such as we see in some parts of Samson’s history (he succumbs morally,
as well as physically, to the Philistines), in the crime of the Benjamites ( Judges 19),
which calls forth all the rest of the nation against them in stubborn, bloody war, and
in the unworthy character of the sons of Eli, who disgrace the sanctuary itself with
their wickedness. The whole popular life had fallen into an anarchy in which “every
man did that which was right in his own eyes” ( Judges 21:25).
3. The necessity for a reformation of the whole national life from within outward,
that Isaiah, a renewal of the whole Theocracy on a religious-moral basis meets us at
the beginning of the Books of Samuel. The holy institutions, the ordinances of divine
worship, and the theocratic legislation of the Mosaic Period are present indeed in
the time of the Judges (comp. the exegetical explanations). The people had their
national central sanctuary in Shiloh as sign of God’s abode among His people,
celebrated their festivals, and brought their offerings there. The priestly service in
the sanctuary was arranged; the nazirate and the institution of holy women[FN25]
in connection with the sanctuary were the special forms of consecration of life to
24

25. Jehovah’s service. It is a false view to regard the time of the Judges as a period of
fermentation, out of which first arose fixed legal institutions and appointments.
Rather the whole Mosaic legislation and the history of the establishment of the
Theocracy on the basis of the covenant of law is in many places presupposed in the
Book of Judges and in the beginning of the Books of Samuel themselves (comp.
Hengst, Beitr. III:40 sq. [Eng. transl, “Contributions to an Introd. to the
Pentateuch,” Clark, Edinb.]). But it is true (as is expressly stated in Judges 2:10 sq.),
that in the religious-moral life of the people there was a general defection from the
living God to strange gods. Though in particular circles and families (as Samuel’s,
for ex.) there was true service of God and piety, yet the national and political life of
the distracted and shattered people was on the whole not in the least in keeping with
its priestly calling. The gap between the people’s religious-moral condition on the
one hand, and the theocratic institutions and the demands of the divine law on the
other was become so wide and deep, that a great reformer was needed, who, by
special divine call and in the might of the Spirit of God, should turn the whole
national life to the living God again, and make Him its unifying centre. To this need
of a reformation of the Theocracy by new revelations of the covenant-God, and by
the return of the covenant-people to communion with their God answered the
special divine working by which the prophetic office, instead of the priesthood, was
united with the true theocratic Judgeship in the mighty God-filled personality of
Samuel.
4. The special divine working shows itself in the providential plan by which God
chose and prepared the great instrument for leading His people into the path, in
which they were to find their holy calling and merge their whole life in the divine
rule and communion. The reformer of the Theocracy, the second Moses, sprang
from a thoroughly pious family, faithful and obedient to the law of the Lord. In its
very commencement his life is specially consecrated by the hearing which God
vouchsafed to the prayer of his pious mother for a son. In the same Tribe, whence
came the saviour of the people from the bondage of Egypt and the founder of the
Theocracy through God’s wonderful working, and which by divine appointment
represented the whole people in the Sanctuary-service, was born the man of God,
who in the highest sense as Prophet of the Lord, was all his life to do priestly service
in renewing the theocratic life, and restore it from its alienation from the living God
to communion with Him. Specially also it was the energy and earnestness of his
mother’s piety which from the first gave to this great man’s life the direction and
determination by which he became God’s instrument for the regeneration of His
people. Hannah, in devoting her child to the perpetual service of the Lord (thus
25

26. giving Him back what her prayer had obtained from Him), did unconsciously and
silently, under the guidance of the Spirit of the Lord, a holy deed, which, taken into
the plan of the divine Wisdom of Solomon, was the beginning of that series of great
God-deeds by which, through this chosen instrument, a new turn of world-historical
importance was given to the history of Israel. The name which she gives her son
marks him out for the people as an immediate gift of God, through which, as Calvin
says, “God in His mercy ordained a reformation of His worship in the people.”
5. In Samuel’s early life we see again the importance (even for the Kingdom of God)
of the theocracy of a truly pious family-life in the Old Dispensation. There were still
in Israel houses and families in which the children (who, according to the Law, were
not usually carried to the great feasts celebrated at the Sanctuary), were introduced
to the public religious life, and accustomed to the religious service of the people; and
this is a sign that, in spite of the desolation of the theocratic life and the degradation
of the religious-moral life, there still lay hidden in domestic life a sound germ of true
piety and fear of God. From this uncorrupted vigorous germ which appears
religiously in the earnest life of prayer of the parents, and ethically in their tender,
considerate conjugal love, Samuel’s life sprouts forth as a plant consecrated from its
root directly to the Lord’s special service.
6. Thus the religious-moral life was not so far gone that it could not, by God’s
power, produce from the narrow circle of the house and family such a person as
Samuel; nor, in spite of the general depravation and disruption of the theocratic-
national life, was it impossible for Samuel, as God’s instrument sprung from this
soil, to find positive points of connection and a responsive receptivity for his work of
reform as Judge and Prophet. The spirit which gave shape to his childhood and
youth from the first moments of his life, had shown itself, sporadically it is true, yet
living and powerful in individual facts in the time of the Judges (comp. Deborah’s
Song of Solomon,, Judges 5; Gideon’s word “Jehovah shall rule over you,” Judges
8:23; and especially the energetic reaction of the theocratic zeal of the whole people
against the Tribe of Benjamin, who, contrary to the command “be ye holy,” had
refused to deliver up the offenders, by whose execution evil was to be put away out
of the midst of Israel, Judges 20) The prophetic reformer, called by God out of the
domain of a deeply pious family-life, found in that theocratical spirit, which was
concealed under the general corruption, the receptive ground on which he could
plant himself in order to gather the whole people about the living God and His
26

27. word, and press His revelations into their very heart and soul.
7. The divine name Jehovah Sabaoth (‫אוֹת‬ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫צ‬ ‫,)יהוה‬ which does not occur in the
Pentateuch or in the Books of Joshua and Judges, is found here for the first time,
and seems to have come into general use particularly in the time of Samuel and
David (comp. 1 Samuel 15:2; 1 Samuel 17:45; 2 Samuel 7:8; 2 Samuel 7:26 sq.;
Psalm 24:10). It seldom occurs in the Books of Kings, is found most frequently in the
Prophets, except Ezekiel and Daniel, and never in Job,, Proverbs, the later Psalm
and the post-exilian historical books, except in Chronicles in the history of David,
where it is to be referred to the original documents.—The word ‘Sabaoth’ is never
found in the Old Test, alone. The Sept. sometimes gives it as a proper name,
Σαβαώφ, as here, where it has also the full form κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ (Lord God), which
answers to the proper complete expression of this divine name, Jehovah God of
Sabaoth (‫אוֹת‬ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫צ‬ ‫י‬ֵ‫ה‬ ֱ‫א‬ ‫יהוה‬ comp. Amos 3:13; Amos 4:13; Amos 5:14; or ‫אוֹת‬ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫צּ‬ַ‫ח‬ ‫,)י׳א׳‬ of
which Jehovah Sabaoth is an abbreviation.[FN26]
The signification “God of war”? (see Exodus 7:4; Exodus 12:41, where Israel is
called “the hosts of Jehovah,” ‫ָה‬‫וֹ‬‫ה‬ְ‫י‬ ‫אוֹת‬ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫)צ‬ cannot be regarded as the original sense of
this expression, though the latter includes the glory of God manifested in His
victorious power over His enemies. If this were the proper and original signification,
it would be inexplicable why the name is wanting precisely in the histories of those
wars and battles, which were Jehovah’s own ( Numbers 21:14), though Israel is
expressly called His “hosts.” Appeal is made in support of this signification to
passages like 1 Samuel 17:45 (God of the armies of Israel), and Psalm 10-24:8 ,
(Jehovah strong and mighty, mighty in battle); but as these phrases are attached to
the name “Jehovah of Hosts,” they show (as Hengstenberg, on Psalm 24, and
Oehler, ubi sup. point out) that the latter means something different, that “Jehovah
of Hosts” means something higher than “Israel’s God of war.” Its meaning must be
derived from Genesis 2:1, where ‫ם‬ ָ‫א‬ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫צ‬ “the host of them” refers properly only to
“heavens”—and only by zeugma to “earth” (Oehler). Comp. Psalm 33:6;
Deuteronomy 4:19; Nehemiah 9:6, where ‫ם‬ ָ‫א‬ָ‫ב‬ ְ‫ל־צ‬ָ‫כּ‬ “all the host of them” refers
exclusively to the heavens. “The hosts are always the heavenly hosts, not created
things in general” (Hengstenberg). They are of two classes, however, the material,
the stars, and the spiritual, the angels. In reference to the stars as the “host of
heaven” ( Psalm 33:6) and the “host of God,” praise is rendered to God’s power and
government of the world, by which He controls these glorious objects ( Isaiah 40:26;
Isaiah 45:13), against the Sabian worship of the stars as divine powers, and against
27

28. the danger to which Israel was exposed of perversion to such star-worship. This
danger became great enough in the Period of the Judges and in the beginning of the
Kingly Period to make the supposition allowable that the expression, with the sense
of opposition to idolatry, came into use at this time. In Isaiah 24:23 this meaning of
Jehovah Sabaoth comes out unmistakably in the reference to God’s creative power
which is loftier than the splendor of the stars, and in the contrast between His
worship and that of the stars. The reference of the name “God of hosts” in Psalm
89:8 sq. to the angels is equally certain. The angels are marshalled around Jehovah
in heaven, awaiting His commands, ready to perform His will on earth, especially as
His instruments for the execution of His will in grace and judgment, for the
protection of His people, for the overthrow of His enemies ( 1 Kings 22:19 sq.; Job
1:2); they go along with God in the revelation of His judicial-kingly power and glory
( Deuteronomy 33:2; Psalm 68:18); they form the Lord’s heavenly battle-host
( Genesis 2-32:1 ; Joshua 5:14 sq.; 2 Kings 6:17). By the reference to the two hosts, of
stars and angels, which represent the creation in its loftiest and most glorious
aspect, this expression sets forth the living God in His majesty and omnipotence
over the highest created powers, who are subject to His control and instruments of
the exercise of His royal might and power in the world; But God’s glory, in His
majesty and power over the star-world, and in His lordship over the spirit-world
which stands ready to do His bidding in the world, exhibits Him of necessity in His
royal omnipotent control of the whole world; and so “Jehovah Sabaoth” means in
several passages the almighty controlling world-God, who has His throne in heaven,
of whose glory the whole world is full, who “is called the God of the whole earth,”
who “buildeth His upper-chamber in heaven, and foundeth His arch on the earth.”
So Psalm 10-24:8 ; Isaiah 6:3; Isaiah 54:5; Amos 6-9:5 . In connection with the name
“Jehovah” the expression indicates, with special reference to Israel, the almighty
and victorious God, who overcomes the enemies of His people and His kingdom,
who is the protection and help of His people against all the powers of the world.—
The name occurs frequently in connection with wars and victories, in which God
helps and protects His people against hostile powers; 1 Samuel 15:2; 1 Samuel
17:45; 2 Samuel 7:8; 2 Samuel 7:26 sq.; Psalm 24:10; Psalm 46:8; Psalm 80:8; Psalm
80:15; Isaiah 24:21-23; Isaiah 25:4-6; Isaiah 31:4-5. This name of God, Lord of
Hosts, first appears in the beginning of the Books of Samuel, near the end of the
Judges, and just before the kingdom was established, and occurs most frequently in
the time of the Kings; and this fact has its deepest ground herein, that during this
time God’s royal power as almighty lord and ruler of the world and heavenly king
of Israel first unfolded itself in all its fulness and glory—in victories over the
enemies of His kingdom in Israel, in the almighty protection which He vouchsafed
His people in the land of promise, and in the powerful aid which He gave them in
28

29. establishing, fixing and extending the theocratic kingly power.[FN27]
8. A characteristic mark of Hannah’s sincere piety is the vow (v11) which she makes
to the Lord. The vow, from the Old Testament-point of view, is the solemn promise
by which the pious man binds and pledges himself, in case his prayer is heard or his
wish fulfilled, to show his thankfulness for the Lord’s goodness by the performance
of some special outward thing. Hence vows are almost always connected with
petitions, though never as if they were the ground for God’s fulfilment of the
request. The positive vow (‫ר‬ֶ‫ֶד‬‫נ‬), the promise of a special offering as a sign of
gratitude, includes also the negative element of self-denial, so far as it is a
relinquishment of one’s own possessions, which are given to the Lord. This
custom—namely, by a special promise making a particular act or mode of conduct a
moral duty, and basing the obligation of performance not on the divine will, but on
a vow made without divine direction—answers to the legal standpoint of the Old
Testament and the moral minority founded on it. Forbearing to vow, was however,
by no means regarded as sinful ( Deuteronomy 22:22); thus not only was the moral
principle of voluntariness brought out, but the idea that the vow was in itself
meritorious, was excluded. The vow, as a custom corresponding to moral weakness
and consciousness of untrustworthiness in obedience to the Lord, is never legally
commanded, nor even advised (comp. Proverbs 20:25; Ecclesiastes 5:4, with
Deuteronomy 23:22); but it is required that a vow made freely shall be fulfilled
( Numbers 30:3; Deuteronomy 23:21; Deuteronomy 23:23; Psalm 50:14; Ecclesiastes
5:3). But, as the hearing of a prayer is conditioned strictly on true piety, Song of
Solomon, that a vow should be well-pleasing to the Lord, presupposes an humble,
thankful soul which feels itself pledged and bound to the Lord, to devote everything
to Him. The ethical idea of the vow finds its realization and fulfilment, as well as its
clear and true apprehension, from the New Testament stand-point also in the
vowing and dedicating to the Lord for life in baptism the personality renewed by the
Holy Ghost, (who in the Old Testament also is recognized and prayed for as the
source of sanctification, Psalm 51). Hannah’s vow is an analogue of Christian
baptism in so far as it (the vow) consecrates the life of the child obtained by prayer
wholly to the Lord for His property and for permanent service according to the
stand-point of Old Testament piety, but this from the New Testament point of view
comes to full truth only in the free spiritual devotion of the heart and the whole life
to the Lord. [There is no warrant for introducing the lower Old Testament
conception into an ordinance of the New Testament. Christian baptism, into the
name of the Trinity, sets forth the free and full consecration of the believer to God,
as Dr. Erdmann points out, and is no otherwise a vow, is never so spoken of in the
29

30. New Testament.—Tr.].
PETT, "Introduction
SECTION 1. The Birth, Rise, Prophetic Ministry And Judgeship of Samuel (1-12).
This first section of the book covers the life of Samuel from his birth to the setting
up of Saul as king in response to the people’s request. The first three chapters deal
with the birth and spiritual growth of Samuel. This is then followed in chapter 4 by
the Philistine invasion in which the Ark of YHWH of hosts is lost to Israel,
something which takes place while Samuel is still a youth. That loss indicates
YHWH’s demonstration of the fact that He no longer sees Himself as king over an
Israel that has forsaken Him. However, He then goes on to demonstrate His
authority over the gods of the Philistines by bringing disaster on them, so that His
Ark is restored to Israel by the Philistines, who also pay Him generous tribute. The
Ark is then placed with due honour (after a previous unfortunate incident) in the
house of Abinadab where it will remain for many years. It is a recognised symbol
that YHWH is still present as King over His people, and will therefore, once they
turn back to Him, act on their behalf through His appointed deliverers.
This will firstly be through Samuel in this section, then through Saul before he is
finally rejected, in the next section, and then through the young David in the final
section, until he is outlawed and then exiled as a result of Saul’s activities. As a
result of his exile there will be a lull, and the Philistines triumph. But in the second
part of the book David will become the Spirit inspired king, the Philistines will be
defeated, and then the Ark will be restored for public worship, having been
‘purified’ by its period spent in the house of Abinadab. The Kingship of YHWH has
triumphed.
A). The Birth, Call and Establishment of Samuel the Prophet (1:1-4:1).
This opening subsection of the book commences with a description of the events that
led up to the birth of Samuel. That is then followed by a description of the spiritual
growth of Samuel which is interwoven with a description of the sinfulness of the
30

31. sons of Eli, the High Priest of Israel, and leads up to a prophetic denunciation of the
priesthood of the house of Ithamar. After that we have a description of how Samuel
is called to be a prophet and a summary of what follows, ending with the fact that
Samuel takes the word of YHWH to all Israel.
a The birth of Samuel (1 Samuel 1:1-28).
b The prophecy of Hannah (1 Samuel 2:1-10).
c Samuel ministers to YHWH (1 Samuel 2:11).
d The failure of Eli’s sons (1 Samuel 2:12-17).
e The blessing of God on Samuel and on the house of Elkanah (1 Samuel 2:18-21).
d The failure of Eli’s sons (1 Samuel 2:22-25).
c Samuel grows in favour with YHWH and men (1 Samuel 2:26).
b The prophecy of the man of God (1 Samuel 2:27-36).
a The call and establishment of Samuel as a prophet (1 Samuel 3:1 to 1 Samuel 4:1).
Note that in ‘a’ we have described the miraculous birth of Samuel, and in the
parallel his establishment as a Prophet of YHWH. In ‘b’ we have the prophecy of
Hannah, and in the parallel the prophecy of a man of God, both including reference
31

32. to YHWH’s ‘anointed one’.
Chapter 1. The Birth of Samuel, The Miracle Son.
At a time when the priesthood was at a very low ebb, and Israel’s faith was failing in
the face of the terrible threat of the ferocious Philistines, a woman in Israel who was
seemingly perpetually barren prayed for a son and promised that if one was born to
her she would dedicate him to YHWH. In the course of time that son was born, and
she gave him to YHWH. And although no one apart from God realised it, it was the
indication of a new beginning for Israel.
The greatness of Samuel cannot be overestimated. He took over a broken and
weakened nation, re-established it, and guided by God anointed and nurtured the
one who would take Israel to its greatest heights. The description in detail of his
birth is intended to bring out the importance of the occasion. It indicated that this
was all God’s doing, and that it was all part of God’s sovereign plan. It was no
accident. God was at work replacing Israel’s failing leadership in His own way. This
is the message of the whole book, and there can be no doubt that David’s godliness
and rise to power owed much to the influence of Samuel
But however that may be, alongside this we have a very human story. Man in his
weakness is seen to cause a multiplicity of problems, and produce a multiplicity of
difficult situations. The pendulum appears to swing to and fro. But in the end all
this is seen to be under control. God’s sovereignty and man’s freewill are seen to
progress hand in hand.
Verses 1-8
The Events That Lead Up To Samuel’s Birth (1 Samuel 1:1-20).
We should note initially the godliness of both Elkanah and Hannah. The writer’s
32

33. aim is to bring out that they were worthy and godly people. The message is that
when God seeks to do a work it is usually to such sources that He looks, and that
always in every age, however dark the hour, He has such people to call on. And their
godliness emphasises that what is to follow is the doing of YHWH. They stand in
stark contrast both to Elkanah’s disgruntled second wife, Peninnah, and to the two
sons of Eli. The stress is on the fact that, while the country might time and again be
almost on its knees, there are always those who trust in YHWH. And that is the
picture being depicted here.
For us there is the message that often what appears to be a tragedy in our lives is
actually God’s way of bringing about His purposes, so that we can confidently look
forward and say, ‘all things work together for good to those who love God, to those
who are called according to His purpose’ (Romans 8:28).
The Household of Elkanah (1 Samuel 1:1-8).
The writer commences with a detailed description of the household of Elkanah. In it
he reveals that one of Elkanah’s wives who is named Hannah (meaning ‘grace) is
barren and in great distress because she has had no child.
Analysis.
a Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of the hill-country of
Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son
of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite, and he had two wives. The name of the
one was Hannah, and the name of other Peninnah, and Peninnah had children, but
Hannah had no children (1 Samuel 1:1-2).
b And this man went up out of his city from year to year to worship and to sacrifice
to YHWH of hosts in Shiloh. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, priests
to YHWH, were there (1 Samuel 1:3).
33

34. c And when the day came that Elkanah sacrificed, he gave to Peninnah his wife, and
to all her sons and her daughters, portions (1 Samuel 1:4).
d But to Hannah he used to give a double portion, for he loved Hannah. But YHWH
had shut up her womb (1 Samuel 1:5).
c And her rival behaved towards her with great provocation, in order to upset her,
because YHWH had shut up her womb (1 Samuel 1:6).
b And as he did so year by year, when she went up to the house of YHWH, so she
provoked her; therefore she wept, and did not eat (1 Samuel 1:7).
a And Elkanah her husband said to her, “Hannah, why are you crying, and why do
you not eat, and why is your heart grieved? am not I better to you than ten sons? (1
Samuel 1:8).
Note that in ‘a’ Hannah had no children, but she had a worthy husband, and in the
parallel her husband asks whether he is not better to her than tens sons. In ‘b’
Elkanah went up on a regular basis to sacrifice, and in the parallel he does the same.
In ‘c’ we have a description of Elkanah’s provision for Peninnah and her children,
and in the parallel we have described Peninnah’s attitude towards Hannah.
Centrally in ‘d’ we have described Elkanah’s special love towards Hannah. Note
also the repetition of the phrase ‘YHWH had shut up her womb’, a kind of pattern
of repetition that occurs regularly in Biblical chiasmuses.
1 Samuel 1:1-2
‘Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of the hill-country of
Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son
34

35. of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite, and he had two wives. The name of the
one was Hannah, and the name of other Peninnah, and Peninnah had children, but
Hannah had no children.’
The importance of what is about to be described is revealed in the detail given about
Elkanah’s ancestry. For this is to be seen as also the ancestry of Samuel (Shemuel).
He was an Ephrathite (Ephraimite) descended from Zuph. 1 Chronicles 6:33-38
reveals further that Zuph was a Levite descended from Kohath, the son of Levi.
Thus Samuel (Shemuel) was of Levite origin, and descended from the Levites who
had settled among the Ephraimites (Joshua 21:20). Elkanah (‘bought by El’) in fact
appears from its uses to be a Levite name. Given that Salmon, the seventh from
Judah in descent, entered Canaan with Joshua, we might assume that Zuph, the
seventh from Levi, did the same, which would explain why he was seen as so
important. He was the original dweller in the land.
Elkanah lived in Ramathaim-zophim. Ramathaim (LXX Armathaim) means ‘the
twin heights’ (ramah = ‘height’) and its whereabouts is disputed, but it is
presumably the same as the Ramah (1 Samuel 1:19) which was Samuel’s birthplace
and later headquarters (1 Samuel 7:17; 1 Samuel 8:4 ff; 1 Samuel 9:6; 1 Samuel
9:10; 1 Samuel 25:1). Zophim may indicate that it was in the land of Zuph (1
Samuel 9:5 ff). It has been suggested that it is the same as the later Arimathea (John
19:38).
“Of the hill country of Ephraim.” This was the central mountainous district of
Palestine, made up of limestone hills intersected to a certain extent by fertile valleys
which were watered by numerous springs. Deborah’s palm tree was ‘between
Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim’ (Judges 4:5).
“And he had two wives. The name of the one was Hannah, and the name of other
Peninnah, and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.” Elkanah was
a polygamist. He had two wives. Polygamy was practised in the Old Testament quite
regularly and was tolerated by the Law (Deuteronomy 21:15-17), even though not in
line with the creation ordinance (Genesis 2:24). Abraham and Jacob were both
polygamists, and there is never any hint that polygamy was frowned on by God or
35

36. man. Indeed the impression given is that God was quite reconciled to the idea.
However, with the exception of kings and chieftains (Abraham and Jacob were
chieftains) it does not appear to have been frequent, and no example of it is found in
Scripture after the exile. It was, however, left to Jesus to make clear the importance
of Genesis 2:24.
“Hannah” means ‘grace’, and Peninnah means ‘pearl’ or ‘coral’. But only Peninnah
was blessed with children. This would be a great hardship to Hannah who would
feel that she was failing in her duty. Every Israelite woman longed to produce
children. It was that that gave her status. And she felt it to be her responsibility. The
situation was somewhat similar to that of Hagar and Sarah, with Sarah being
barren. In that case also there was grave disquiet between the two. It was an
inevitable consequence of polygamy. It may well be that Elkanah had married
Peninnah because Hannah was childless.
PULPIT, "1 Samuel 1:1
There was a certain man of Ramathaim-Zophim. Though Samuel belonged to the
tribe of Levi, yet no special mention is made of the fact, because he owed his
importance and rank as a judge not to his Levitical origin, but to the gift of
prophecy, which was independent of the accidents of birth and station. In the First
Book of Chronicles, 1 Samuel 6:1-21; his parentage is twice given, that in 1
Chronicles 6:22-28 being apparently the family genealogy, while that in 1
Chronicles 6:33-38 was probably taken from the records of the temple singers,
sprung from Heman, Samuel's grandson (1 Chronicles 6:33). His name there
appears as Shemuel, our translators not having perceived that it is the same as that
for which elsewhere they give the familiar rendering, Samuel. The variations
Elkanah, Jeroham, Elihu, Tohu, Zuph (1 Samuel 1:1); Elkanah, Jeroham, Eliab,
Nahath, Zophai (1 Chronicles 6:26, 1 Chronicles 6:27); Elkanah, Jeroham, Eliel,
Toah, Zuph (ibid. 1 Chronicles 6:34-35), are interesting as showing that the
genealogies in Chronicles. were compiled from family documents, in which, as was
usual in the case of proper names, there was much diversity of spelling, or possibly
of interpreting the cumbrous signs used for letters in those early days. The
variations, however, in Elihu (God is he), Eliab (God is Father), and Eliel (God is
God) were probably intentional, as were certainly other changes in names, such as
that of Ishbaal into Ishbosheth. The name of Samuel's father, Elkanah (God is
owner), is a common one among the Kohathites, to which division of the sons of Levi
36

37. Samuel belonged.
The prophet's birthplace was Ramathaim-Zophim, no doubt the Ramah which was
Samuel's own head-quarters (1 Samuel 7:17; 1 Samuel 15:34; 1 Samuel 16:13; 1
Samuel 19:18-23; 1 Samuel 25:1); the place where he dwelt, wrought, died, and was
buried, and the Arimathsea of the Gospels. The Septuagint generally gives the name
in full, but this is the only place where it is so written in the Hebrew. Ramah
signifies a height, and the dual Ramathaim the double height, the town being
situated on a hill ending in two peaks. But which it was of the many Ramahs, or hill
towns, in the Holy Land, is hotly contested; probably it was the Ramah in Benjamin,
about two hours' journey northwest of Jerusalem. Its second name, Zophim, is
taken from Zuph, Samuel's remote ancestor, with whom the genealogy here begins.
Zuph had apparently emigrated from Ephraim, one of the three tribes (Ephraim,
Manasseh, Dan) to which the Kohathites were attached, and was a person of
sufficient power and energy to give his name to the whole district; called the land of
Zuph in 1 Samuel 9:5. His descendants, the Zophim, had Ramah as their centre, and
Elkanah, as their head, would be a man of wealth and influence. Though actually
belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, Ramah is said to be upon Mount Ephraim,
because this limestone range extended to and kept its name almost up to Jerusalem
(see 4:5, and 2 Chronicles 13:4; 2 Chronicles 15:8, compared with 2 Chronicles
13:19). Elkanah too is called an Ephrathite, i.e. an Ephraimite, no doubt because
before Zuph emigrated the family had belonged to Ephraim, it being apparently the
practice to reckon Levites as pertaining to the tribes to which they were attached
( 17:7). The Hebrews Ephrathite is rightly rendered Ephraimite in 12:5, and should
be so translated here, and in 1 Kings 11:26. In Ruth 1:2; 1 Samuel 17:12 it means
Bethlehemite, that town being also called Ephratah, the fruitful; Ephraim has the
same meaning, but being a dual, no adjective can be formed from it.
2 He had two wives; one was called Hannah and
the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but
Hannah had none.
37

38. BARNES, "He had two wives - Compare Gen_4:19. This was permitted by the law
Deu_21:15, and sanctioned by the practice of Jacob Gen. 29, Ashur 1Ch_4:5, Shaharaim
1Ch_8:8, David 1Sa_25:43, Joash 2Ch_24:3, and others.
Hannah - i. e. “Beauty or charm,” is the same as “Anna” Luk_2:36.
Peninnah - i. e. “a Pearl,” is the same name in signification as “Marqaret.”
The frequent recurrence of the mention of barrenness in those women who were
afterward famous through their progeny (as Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel) coupled with the
prophetic language of Hannah’s song in 1 Sam. 2, justifies us in seeking a mystical sense.
Besides the apparent purpose of marking the children so born as raised up for special
purposes by divine Providence, the weakness and comparative barrenness of the Church
of God, to be followed at the set time by her glorious triumph and immense increase, is
probably intended to be foreshadowed.
CLARKE, "He had two wives - Compare Gen_4:19. This was permitted by the law
Deu_21:15, and sanctioned by the practice of Jacob Gen. 29, Ashur 1Ch_4:5, Shaharaim
1Ch_8:8, David 1Sa_25:43, Joash 2Ch_24:3, and others.
Hannah - i. e. “Beauty or charm,” is the same as “Anna” Luk_2:36.
Peninnah - i. e. “a Pearl,” is the same name in signification as “Marqaret.”
The frequent recurrence of the mention of barrenness in those women who were
afterward famous through their progeny (as Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel) coupled with the
prophetic language of Hannah’s song in 1 Sam. 2, justifies us in seeking a mystical sense.
Besides the apparent purpose of marking the children so born as raised up for special
purposes by divine Providence, the weakness and comparative barrenness of the Church
of God, to be followed at the set time by her glorious triumph and immense increase, is
probably intended to be foreshadowed.
GILL, "And he had two wives,.... Which, though connived at in those times, was
contrary to the original law of marriage; and for which, though a good man, he was
chastised, and had a great deal of vexation and trouble, the two wives not agreeing with
each other; perhaps not having children by the one so soon as he hoped and wished for,
he took another:
the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; the
first name signifies "grace" or "gracious", and she was a woman who had the grace of
God, and very probably was also very comely, beautiful, and acceptable, as she was in the
sight of her husband; the other signifies a cornered gem, a precious stone or jewel, as the
pearl, ruby, amethyst, &c. Very likely Hannah was his first wife, and having no children
by her, he took Peninnah, who proved to be a rough diamond: and Peninnah had
children, but Hannah had no children; how many Peninnah had is not said, perhaps ten;
see 1Sa_1:8 and that Hannah had none was not because she was naturally barren, but
because the Lord had shut up her womb, or restrained her from bearing children, to put
38

39. her upon praying for one, and that the birth of Samuel might be the more remarkable:
see 1Sa_1:5.
K&D, "Samuel's pedigree. - 1Sa_1:1. His father was a man of Ramathaim-Zophim, on
the mountains of Ephraim, and named Elkanah. Ramathaim-Zophim, which is only
mentioned here, is the same place, according to 1Sa_1:3 (comp. with 1Sa_1:19 and 1Sa_
2:11), which is afterwards called briefly ha-Ramah, i.e., the height. For since Elkanah of
Ramathaim-Zophim went year by year out of his city to Shiloh, to worship and sacrifice
there, and after he had done this, returned to his house to Ramah (1Sa_1:19; 1Sa_2:11),
there can be no doubt that he was not only a native of Ramathaim-Zophim, but still had
his home there; so that Ramah, where his house was situated, is only an abbreviated
name for Ramathaim-Zophim.
BENSON, "1 Samuel 1:2. He had two wives — As many had in those days, though it
was a transgression of the original institution of marriage. Hannah seems to have
been his first wife; and as she proved barren, he was induced, it is probable,
through his earnest desire of children, to take another, as Abraham had done, by
Sarah’s consent.
ELLICOTT, " (2) And he had two wives.—The primeval Divine ordination, we
know, gave its sanction alone to monogamy. The first who seems to have violated
God’s original ordinance appears to have been Lamech, of the family of Cain
(Genesis 4:19). The practice apparently had become general throughout the East
when the Mosaic Law was formulated. In this Divine code it is noticeable that while
polygamy is accepted as a custom everywhere prevailing, it is never approved. The
laws of Moses—as in the case of another universally accepted practice, slavery—
simply seek to restrict and limit it by wise and humane regulations. The inspired
writer in this narrative of the home life of Elkanah of “Ramah of the Watchers”
quietly shows up the curse which almost invariably attended this miserable violation
of the relations of the home life to which in the old Eden days the eternal law had
given its sanction and blessing. The Old Testament Book contains many of these
gently-worded but fire-tipped rebukes of sin and frailty—sins condoned and even
approved by the voice of mankind.
HAWKER, "(2) And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the
name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no
children.
The having more wives than one, never did, nor ever can produce happiness. That it
was from the lustful affections of our fallen nature, and not of divine authority, is
39

40. evident from what our Lord said upon it: that from the beginning it was not so.
Matthew 19:8. And moreover, as marriage is a beautiful type of the mystical union
between Christ and his Church, this sweet order is broken in upon by such means.
See Ephesians 5:25.
Peninnah.—Hannah signifies grace or favour, and has ever been a favourite name
among the women of the East. It was the name of the Punic Queen Dido’s sister,
Anna. The traditional mother of the Virgin Mary was named Anna. (See Luke 2:36.)
Peninnah is translated by some scholars “coral;” according to others it signifies
“pearl.” We have adopted the same name under the modem “Margaret.”
WHEDON, " 2. Two wives — Such bigamy at this day, and in the light of a
Christian civilization, would be criminal; but the ancient laws allowed it, and
custom sanctioned it. But the practice was nearly always the occasion of domestic
broils. Polygamy seems to have begun with Lamech, (Genesis 4:19,) and it prevailed
extensively in the patriarchal age. Jacob had two wives, and most of the ancient
worthies had, besides the proper wife, one or more concubines. The great desire for
offspring often prompted to this, as in the case of Abraham, (Genesis 16:2;) and it is
generally supposed that Hannah was Elkanah’s proper wife, but she proving
barren, his desire for children led him to take Peninnah. According to the Talmud a
man was bound, after ten years of childless conjugal life, to marry another wife, and
if she proved barren he should marry even a third. And all this might be done
without repudiation of the first wife. This great desire for offspring is generally
supposed to have been inspired by the expectation of the Messiah, and the hope,
which every Hebrew woman entertained, that she might be the mother of the
Promised Seed.
Hannah had no children — A great affliction to a Hebrew wife. But Hannah is on
this account to be associated with other saintly women — Sarah, (Genesis 16:1,)
Rachel, (Genesis 29:31,) and Elizabeth, (Luke 1:7,) who yet, by the favour of God,
became the most distinguished mothers in Israel. The ancient expositors represent
Hannah as a type of the Christian Church, for a long time barren, and mocked by
her rival the Jewish Synagogue, but at length triumphing over her rival, and
bringing forth many children to the Lord. Compare 1 Samuel 2:5.
TRAPP, "1 Samuel 1:2 And he had two wives; the name of the one [was] Hannah,
and the name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had
40