SAMUEL, a prophet who played an important part in the establishment of the Hebrew kingdom under Saul, and became naturally the hero of numerous legends, some of which are found interspersed among narratives of greater historical value in the early part of I Samuel. This mixture of legend with history tends to obscure the facts, and the difficulties of recovering the true story are aggravated because we find two absolutely contradictory representations of his attitude towards the idea of monarchy. According to one of these, after a severe defeat inflicted upon Israel by the Philistines, involving the temporary loss of the ark (1 Samuel, iv.), Samuel, acting in the tradition of the judges, summons "all Israel" to Mizpah (vii.), performs rites of puri fication, and offers sacrifice to Yahweh. The Philistines are subdued by the miraculous intervention of Yahweh, and Israel recovers its lost territory. Samuel thereafter rules as a theocratic judge. His sons, whom he would make his successors, are cor rupt, and the people demand a king, like those of the surrounding nations, to rule them. Despite the solemn warnings of Samuel as to the arrogant oppression of kings the people are insistent, and, by Yahweh's instruction, Samuel concedes their demand, choosing, by sacred lot, Saul (x. 17-24). The same adverse attitude towards the institution of monarchy is even more emphatically expressed in the long farewell address of abdication made by Samuel (xii.). Quite different is the view we find in I Sam. ix.–x. 16. Here Samuel is a local seer of so little renown that his fame is unknown to Saul, who, seeking some lost asses, is advised by a servant to consult him. Samuel receives the divine command to anoint Saul as king, which, seemingly, he does with unqualified enthusiasm.
It is obvious that of the two representations the latter will be nearer the truth; had Samuel been really a theocratic judge tra dition would hardly have dwarfed him to the grade of a local seer, whereas the contrary proceeding is quite natural. Further, the strong anti-monarchical ideas are surely the product of a later age, when the nation had experienced the exactions and follies of subsequent kings, whom they came to look upon as responsible for the national misfortunes (viii. 7, x. 59, xii. 12).
What, then, is the nucleus of important fact in these traditions? It is probable that the birthplace of Samuel was Ramah, and that— though the story of his dedication to the service of the sanctuary at Shiloh is idyll rather than history—he was a priestly seer who came into prominence during the dark days of Philistine oppres sion. The strong tradition as to his being the "king-maker" must rest on some historic basis; and, though later tradition has exalted Samuel at the expense of Saul, we may believe that he played an important part in the installation of Israel's first king. Though Samuel's denunciations of the monarchical idea are but the reflec tions of the views of a later age, they seem to have a point of con tact with the history, for it is probable that the breach between Samuel and Saul in connection with Agag, 1 Samuel xv., was only the culmination of earlier divergences. Late tradition emphasizes this by its representation of Samuel as anointing David to replace Saul. (See SAMUEL, 1300KS OF.) (W. L. W.)