Saul and the Witch of EnDor

8/16/2019 Saul and the Witch of EnDor

1/21

[ SOT 73 ( 19971 3-23]

EAT ING

THE BLOOD

:

S AUL AND THE

WITCH

OF

ENDOR

Pamela Tamarkin Reis

8 Roc

kl

and

Park

. Branford. CT 06405.

USA

You shall nOl eat on the blood; y u shall not practice divination nor

wilchcraft (Lev. 19.26).

The witch

of

Erdor

has cast a spell over biblical commentators. Des pite

God's

virulent c.enunciations of soothsayers, Josephu s says,

'It

would be

weU

.. .to imitate the example of this woman nt 6.14.4); Origen writes

of

her as a type

of

Christ ; Jerome calls h

er

industrious and practical

' . '

EquaUy enchanted, the modems extoU h

er

pity (Beuken), her motherly

care'

(Fokkelm an), her generosity ( Ades), her in sight of an angel

(Simon

)2

Acco rding to these exegetes, the bu stling domesticity of this

paragon of womanly solicitude results in a beneficent meal that rev ives

King

Sa

ul

's

phys ical strength , relieves the t

orpor

into which he has

sunk, and fortif es hi s determination to face courageously certain death

• I am

indet

cd to

Elizabeth

Rei

s and Marc Brcnler for their com men ts and

s

ugges tion

s

and

to

Matthew Denni

s

for his painstaki

ng

readi

ng

and re reading

of

thj

s

anicJe.

I . P. Cox, Odgen and

th

e Witch

of

Endor: Toward an Ico noclast ic Typolo

gy ,

ATR

66 ( 1984), p 144: R. Brown, J. Fitzmyer and R. Murphy (cds.). Th e Jerome

Biblical Commelll Y (Englewood Cliffs,

NJ

: Prenlice-Hall , 1968). p. 173 .

2. W.A.M. B, uken , I Samuel 28: The Prophel as Hamm

er

of Wilches , JSOT

6 (1978), p. 13; J P . Fokkelman,

Narrative Ar/lInd Poetry

ll

'he Books

of Samuel

(3

vols.; Assen : Van Gorcum, 1986),

n

p. 620 ; J. Ades,

'Sa

muel , Whear

AS

Th

B n Sin r Saw Th ee ? . in V. To ilers and

J.

Maier (eds .), Mappings of ,he Biblica l

Terrain:

Th

e Bib as Text (Lewisburg, PA : Bucknell University Press, 1990), p. 263:

U Simon , A

Balimced Story

: The Stem Prophet and the Kind Witch , Proo tex s 8

( 1988),

p.

165.


2/21

JOLlmalfor the Study of

ir

ld Testament 73 ( 1997)

in battle. The reader is also served by the witch, A. Schulz teUs us, for

the homely conclusion

of Saul s encounter with her has a calming effect,

relieving emotions contemporary authors would

w

hip

Up 3

H. Hertzberg

says our sympathy for Saul

is

roused by the moving description

of

the

witch s hospitality, for although the chapter depicts Saul s fate as well

deserved, we respond

to

the tender concern the woman shows the king

and are thereby led to see the tragic element n Saul

s

punishm ent

4

Saul s dignity is restored,

D.

Gunn writes, for the mundane incidentals

of normal sustenance tum the reader s attention from Saul s enervating

fear to his ordinary fa st-induced hunger.

s

The literary device of devoting

so much of the chapter to the everyday details of food preparation,

Ad

es

says, ends the account

of

God s judgment on Saul on a touching

dinninuendo .

6

I too am charmed by the witch of Endor, but I find her moti vation

to

be self-preservation, not hospitality. She is not a model of motherly pro

tectiveness but of mother wit, professionalism, resource fulness , and

daring. Although imperiled, she does not become petrified like Saul but,

controlling her fear, manages to manipulate her adversary, protect her

self, and do her job. She not only raises a ghost but offers a ritual meal

that assures her survival. The God

of

Israel

is

a jealous God, and the

infernal worship that secures the witch

s life blasts what is left of Saul s.

The purpose

of

this article is to demonstrate by a close reading

of

the

text that the meal the witch prepares for Saul

ha

s many functions other

than nourishment. Firstly, t is a mantic sacrifice to the dead entailing the

stringently proscribed eating of blood; secondly,

it is

an unholy but legally

effective covenant between God s anointed and an idolatrous shaman;

thirdly, it warrants Saul

s

consequent suicide; and la

st

ly , it provides a

scenario for the contrast

of

Saul s perfidious complicity with Dav

id

s

later faithful integrity in an analogous situation. The witch does not set

before the king so dainty a dish as has been hitherto supposed.

The pericope begins by reminding us that Samuel is dead and that al l

3.

A. Schulz,

Na

rrative Art in the B

ooks of

Samuel

, in

D.

Gu

nn (

ed

.),

Narrarive and Novella ill Samuel: Studies by

u

go essman and OIlier Scholars

06 1923 (JSOTSup.

116

: Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991

), p. 156

.

4. H. Hertzberg,

I alld

I

Samuel

(repr

.:

Philadelphia: W

es

trnini stcr. 1976

[1964]),

p.

220.

5. D. Gunn.

The Fate oj Killg Saul

(JSOTSup.

14

: Sheffield: JSOT Press.

1980 ),

p. 109 .

6. Ades

Sa

mu

el, Whear .

Sl

Tha

Been

.

p.

266.


3/21

REIS Eating the lood 5

Israel mourned him ( I Sam. 28.3). Samuel s prominence is reiterated for

a reason, as we sh all see.

7

We are also told that Saul has removed (i O;,)

witches ~ and O'll1 ) from the land, which was his kingly duty (v. 3).8

In vv. 4-5 we learn that the Israelites and the Philistines are massed for

war, and the sight

of the Philistine camp

in

cites fear in Saul and a great

trembling

of

the heart. He inquires

of

the Lord and receives no answer,

neither by dreanls, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. Saul feels alienated

from access to God; he could seek reconciliation through prayer a

nd

repentance, but he does not attempt these avenues of grace.

He

is looking

for the occult. The thrice repeated 0 (neither, nor, nor) in

v.

6 tolls

God's rejection

If

Saul's predilection for the numinous. God is not

to

be

coerced.

Unable to wn,st instruction or assurance from God, Saul teUs hi s

se

rv

ants to seek Jut tDp:J) a witch that he might inquire of her (v. 7). In

Lev. 19

.3

1God (ommands the Israelite

s,

'Do not seek out

[tDP:J)

a witch

,

because '1 am th , Lord' 9 Seeking witches is apostasy, unfaithfulness to

God. The alacri :y with which a witch is located and her convenient

proximity to Sad s camp has been noted by many commentator

s.

1O

At

one time Saul m

iy

have removed witches from the land, but they have

either returned o ' new practitioners have

be

come established.

Ca

naanite

7.

I Sam. 3.20 aJso testifies

lO

Samuel's

renown.

8.

On e basi s of Hittite , Ugaritic, Assyrian, a

nd

Sumerian parallel

s,

H. Hoffn

er

defines :J11

as

a rilUal pit used for communion with the deceased (pp. 385, 392).

n ? , t . I (v. 7 is a woman who possesses such a pit (, Seco nd Millenn ium

Antecedents to the Hebrew 8 , J L 86 [ 1967J,

p.

394). T. Lewis defines :J1t\ and

JDi as

denoti

ng

bol

h spirits of the dead and . el

lipti

cally. the conjurors of such sp irits

(CU lS

o the

Delld

in

Ancient

Israel l

nd

Ugari( [Atlan

t

a:

Scholars Press, 1

9891.

p. 163).

F.

Cryer sa{s

th

at

~

is

a famous puzzle a

nd that

Jli

-P

has someth

in

g

to

do with

knowledge but o wha t

sort

it is impossible to say (Divination in Ancient

Israel and its Near t. as/ertl Environmellf A Socia-Historical Illvestigation [JSOTSup.

142; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994J, pp. 260-61). The common understanding of

these

terms in I Sa n. 28 is that they refer to a human

medium for

co

mmunication

with the

dead,

a

nd ulal

is the sense in which use the word w itch .

9. Though docllmentary theorists propose that

th

e law sof

Leviticus

were

written

after

the books

of SllllUel, sequence of

authorship

is immaterial to

my

literary view

o

the

Bible. J

be li

e, e

the

artistically consummate. received lex t of

th

e MT is

intended

by

the


4/21

Journalfo r the Study o the Old Testamellf 73

(1997)

cuitic practice is difficult to eradicate, as the Hebrew Bible tells us over

and over again.

Saul disgui ses himself

in

order to vis it the witch ( I Sam. 28.8). He

needs to. Although Israelites were commanded, You shall not suffer a

sorceress to live (Exod. 22.17 , obviously there has been toleration,

albeit not by the king. f the witch were to learn the identity of her regal

client, she

mi

ght cast a retaliatory hex or be too intimidated to perform.

Some critics think Saul had to pass through Philistine lines to get to the

witch and disg

ui

sed himself for military reasons, but a man whose heart

trembled within him at the sight

of

the Philistine camp would hardly

venture to penetrate its defenses with so small a cohort. 12

Since we are to

ld in

the

fir

st clause

of

I Sam. 28.8

th

at Saul

di

sg ui

ses

himself, why

in

the second clause

of

v. 8 are we further told that he puts

on other clothing? As he was unlikely to

pos

sess a wig, make-up, or

fal

se

beard at his military camp, he mu st have effected

hi

s disguise by replacing

his royal robes with commonplace garments; therefore, the fir

st clause

of

the verse suffices to inform us that Saul changes hi s apparel and

renders the second clause unnecessary. The apparent redundancy invites

exam ination. The verb used in the second clause for put on

(iD

J :» is

often used

in

a figurative sense to mean becoming clothed

in

a personal

attribut

e.

For example, one puts on

(iD

J :» righteousness (lsa. 59.

17 ,

majesty (Ps. 93 .I), or desolation (Ezek. 7.27). Literally, Saul puts on

clothing, but the word selected for cloth

in

g' and

th

e word treachery

J. K.

Spronk

associates the witch of E

nd

or s necromancy with the

Canaanil.e

death

cu

ll a

nd find s, in

1Sam. 28, implication

of sy

n

cre

t

ist

ic worship (Beatific Afterlife

in An cient Isra el ami ill h e Ancient Net ml [Neukirchen

V

luyn: Neukirchener

Verlag, 19861, pp. 52,256). E. Bl och-Smith says, A cull of the dead appears to

have been a sign

ifi

cant

and

on

go

ing component of Israelite

and

Judahile society

(Judahile

Burial Pr

actices

(lfId Beliefs about fhe

Dead

[J

SOTS

up

, 123: Sheffield:

JSOT Press, 1992], p. 127). Lewis says that necromancy was wi despread through

Oul

I

srae

lite

society

and

not just in Canaa

nite enclaves

CUlf o

the

Dead, p.

113 ).

Like

Lewis (p. 177

),

1 define death cult as the performance

of

acts

de

signed to

pl

acate

the

dead

or to procure

favors from

th

em.

12. D. Edelman asc bes Saul s disguise to

mania

caution

and

ci les others who

agree ( ing

Saul ill

the His toriography

of

Judah [JSOTSu p. 12 1; Sheffield: JSOT

Press, 1991], p. 242). Klein says Saul intended to hide his identity from both the

Phili

stines and the

witch 1

Samuel, p. 271).

1

3.

BOB, p. 528, says that

very o

ft

en

the verb

is used

with figurative clothes as

in Job 7.5 (worms) and Isa. 49.18 (inhabitants

,

but more often

the

garment is some

abstract

quality' .


5/21

REI

S

Eating

th

e Blood 7

have

th

e same root (' ,J ). The Hebrew word denotes infidelity.

In

seeking

out a witch, Sat I is being di sloyal

to

the Lord; he is 'whoring after other

gods' (Judg. 2.17).

Th

e needless duplication of the second clause in I

Sam. 28.8 admits the implication that Saul has clothed him self with

faithless treachery. Further, the image of Saul attired specifically

in

D" ' J

(rather than in

11 i1:liD, m ~ :

OiD1J'i , mn: ,

O 1:l y

nonyms for apparel)

will be recalled

to

his disadvantage later in the chapter.

Saul uses

th

e same root to accuse his army of treachery (om )J ) when

he discovers thc:m sinning against the Lord

by

eating meat on the blood

(

14

.33). What p:ecisely was the s

in

of Saul

's

army? J. Grintz di stinguishes

between the

of eating blood (Gen. 9.4; Lev . 3. 17 ; 7.26-27;

17.10,12,14;

])eut.

12

.

16

, 23; 15.23) and that

of

eating

'o

n'

or

' upon'

('ill and

~

th blood (Lev. 19.26; I Sam. 1

4.32,33

, 34

[ i ~ l ;

Ezek.

33.25) .

The

former offense is prohibited because 'the blood is

th

e life'.

The

s

tri

ct ure against

th

e latter sin of eating

'o

n'

or

' upon' the blood is

based, he belie"es, upon the second clause

of

my epi graph, Lev. 19.26:

' You sha

ll

not eat on the blood; you shall not practice divination n

or

witchcraft,' 4 He argues that Saul's army was sacrificing to chthonic

powers for the Jurpose of divination (p. 84) and compares their slaugh

tering to the ac l prohibited in 17.5-7: 'sacrifice

in

the open field ...unto

satyrs they whore after'.

Though, as Cirintz states, 'modem Jewish Biblical research has

co

n

tinued to unden tand the verse in the same way: viz. that the act of "eating

on the blood" \las for purposes of divination' (p. 80), the Talmud does

not associate the law against eating blood in the first clause of 19.26

with the contirluation of that verse. The sages connect it with rath er

more distantly elated restrictions against eating the fl esh of a live animal

and against eating the

fle

sh

of

the sacrifice before the blood has been

ritually sp rinkkd on th e altar.

5

However, Jewish scholars of the Middle

Ages, with the exception of Saadia Gaon, did understand eating

th

e

blood to be an dement

of

soo

th

saying and sorcery (p. 79) . Maimonides

discusses eating

th

e blood and says,

They thought it was the food of the spirilS [the dead]; by eating it

man

has

somethi llg in common with the

spirits,

whi

ch

join him and tell him

future eventL . .

They

imagined thaL ..

lovc

brotherh

ood.

and friendship

with

the

spir

Is

were

establish

ed

because

they

dined

with

the latter

alone

14. J Grinlz.

'Do

Not

Eat on

the Blood : Reconside

ration

s in Setting and

Dating

of

the Prie:;tly Code' ,

ASTI8

( 1972), pp. 78-105.

15 .

b

Sa,, . 6:·

a.


6/21

8 l oum l or the Study oflhe ld Testament 73 ( 1997)

place

and

at

the same time; that the spirits would appear to them in dreams,

inform them o coming eve

nt

s, and be favorable to them . . The Law [the

Pen

ta

teuch , which is perfect

in the

eyes

o

those who know it, and seeks

to cure mankind

o

lhese

lasting

di

seases,

forbade the eati

ng

o

blood,

and

emphasized the prohjbition in exact ly the same te

rms as

it emphasizes

idolatry. 6

In commenting on 19.26, Nachmanides says that eating on the blood is

a kind

of

witchcraft and that in I Samuel 14 , when Saul s men feared

the Philistines, they were

eating with the blood in order to perform that craft. It

is

for

this

re

ason

that Scripture there

states, 'Then

they told Sau

l, sayin

g:

Behold the

people

s

in

again

st

the

Eterna

l,

in

that

th

ey

eat

with

the

bl

ood, And

he

sa

i

d:

Ye

have dealt treacherous

ly [Cni):l]. · 17

Saul s use

of IDp:l in

28.7 and the narrator

s

word choice

of lJ:l in v.

8

presage Saul s imminent commission of the same dead y s

in.

When Saul asks the witch to divine for him, her response is heavily

weighted with her fear (vv. 8-9). She acc

us

es Saul both

of

seeking her

life and of causing her to die. She assumes everyone knows of the king s

zeal in casting out witches and is apprehensive of any strange r who

could and should denounce her to the authorities. Although we are told

in v. 3 that Saul has removed

(TO;" )

the sorcere

rs,

the witch says that

Saul ha s cut them off (ni:l). Unlike modern literary sty

li

sts, the biblical

author does not vary words merely to avoid repetition. s We are meant

to notice that the witch uses a more lethal verb than does the narrator. It

expresses her perspective on Saul s extermination of her profess ion.

Though

it

may be translated as cut off,

it

is a technical term used for the

death penalty; it is also the specific term used for agree ing to a covenant.

One cuts a covenant just as, in contempora

ry

English vernacular, one

cuts a deal.

·

The author may also have used this verb to foreshadow

subtly the impending covenant-cutting between Saul and the witch.

Saul reassures the woman

in

the name

of

the Lord and asks ber to

16. Maimonides.

The Guide for rhe Perple. 4:ed

(

trans. M. Friedlander;

rep

r

: New

York: Dover, 1956 [1904]),

p

362.

17. Ramban (

Na ch

mall;e/es) Commentary on

Ihe

Torah: eviticlls

(trans.

C e have l; New York: Shilo. 1974),

p.

307.

1

8. See R.

Alter's chapter, 'The Techniques of Repetition

, The

Ar

of

Biblical

amllive

(New York : Basic Books, 1981 ),

pp.

88-113.

19. BOB sa

ys

thar

one

'c uts' a covenant 'becau se of the

cutting

up and dislribu·

lion o the flesh

o

the victim for eating

in

the sacrifice o the covenants' (p. 503),


7/21

REIS Eating the Blood 9

bring up Samuel (vv.

10-11 .

When she succeeds in manifesting the

prophet, she rEalizes that her visitor is the king (v.

12).

Many exegetes

are troubled by her recognition

of

Saul upon the sight

of

Samuel. With

no scriptural foundation, Lev. Rob. 26.7 advances the fancifu l solution

that spirits

of tle

dead normally rise from the netherworld upside down ,

but

if

they rise at a king's behest, they emerge right side up. When the

witch, therefole, sees Samuel emerge right side up , she pierces Saul's

disguise. P.K. McCarter offers a source-critical explanation: the verses

are confused and amended; the woman recognizes Saul from he

ar

ing his

imperious ton, : in v. 10 and would have unmasked him earljer had the

verses been

in

correct order.'o Several commentators maintain that only

an important person would presume to request the raising

of

another

important pers)n, or that onl y one individual , Saul , would be interested

in interviewing Samuel

in

time

of

war.

In

either

of

these cases, how

ever,

th

e witch would have identified aul as soon as she heard whom he

wanted; there \lould have been no need for her to see Samuel to make the

connection. W.A.M. Beuken also makes this point and offers his theory

that the very presence

of

the prophet strips away all ambient decei t and

enables the wi :ch to see through Saul's disguise. J.P. Fokkelm an, too,

relies upon the power

of

the prophet

to

dissipate Saul's disgui

se.

He

sug

gests the

e

nergy field' between the prophet and

th

e king

is

so highly

charged that tlte witch intuits Saul's identity from the 'a

ur

a' Samuel's

emergence ger era

te

s.

23

My reasonir lg is rather more prosaic. Judging from Samuel's queru

lous, 'Why ha'ie you disturbed me,

to

bring me up?' v.

15),

the shades

apparently prf fer to preserve their

po

sthumous rest. As

an

effective

prophet

of

God and a celebrity in life, Samuel's ghost must have been

frequently sought

in

vain

by

an

anxious populace on the brink

of

war.

He would allo'v himself to be raised only by one to whom he had strong

affective ties.

~ : a m u e l s

regard for Saul has been frequently underscored.

When he anoints him

(10.1),

he kisses him

a

gesture

of

affection not

20. P.K. McCaner, I Samuel (AB, 21 ; Garden CilY, NY Doubleday, 1980),

p. 423.

21

J ertzbeq ;. / and I Samllel. p.

219

n

his comments

he al

so di smisses

th

e

notion

that an

an mymou

sgh

ost wa

s

rep

la

ced

by

Samuel

in

a

later

r

edactional

s

tage

,

Ihough Ados ('SlO

lUel

, Whear ' ASl Tha Been', p. 263 ), and McCarlee l S{l Il el

p. 423) subscribe

1

the idea.

22. Beuk.en, Hammer of

Witches' , p. 9.

23

. Fokkelml

n,

Narrative Art p. 606.


8/21

10 ournalfor the Study

of

the Old Testamelll73 1997)

repeated with David; Samuel grieves for Saul and cries out to God all

night on Saul's behalf after the Lord repents of having made Saul king

(15.11); even after this event Samuel honors Saul in the eyes of the

people (vv. 30-31) and mourns Saul

s

failure as king v . 35) so obses

sively that the Lord chides

him

(

16

.1). The witch

of

Endor, amazed to

see Samuel actually rise to a summons, knows that her tall client is

Samuel's beloved k:ing

24

By her great cry of distress upon recognition of Saul (28.12), the text

makes the point that the woman

is

afraid

of

the king, not

of

the ghost.

She was frightened when three anonymous men came to her; now she

recognizes one of these men to be her chief enemy. Up to this time Saul

has been acting as

an

individual. His conversations with his men and

with the witch have been personal; the narrator has used only Saul s

name and will revert to this exclusive use after the one utterance Saul

makes with the power

of

his position.

In

the only instance

in

this chapter

in

which Saul speaks

in

his capacity

as

k:ing, he orders the woman not

to

fear and asks what she sees

v.

13) . He has already invoked the Lord' s

majesty, but, until this moment, he has not compromised his own, and

he proves reluctant to be

as

free with his own authority as he was with

God's:

in

God's name he swears surety;

as

king he does not promise the

woman immunity from punishment. Since the reader knows Saul

is

speaking here with the might

of

the k:ingship, his peremptory directive

to the witch may be interpreted

as

a mandatory royal comma

nd

: 'Do

not be so frightened that you cannot do your job ' The witch knows the

k:ing can cut her off. Her jeopardy

is

now official.

Saul's self-absorbed answer to Samuel's question reveals the extent of

his narcissism and of his estrangement from God (v.

15). Hi

s own state

of

mind

is

his first concern:

I

am

greatly troubled .' He sees the Philistine

threat to Israel in personallenns as well: 'The Philistines are attacking

me.' That God' s spirit no longer rests upon him takes the position of

least significance in his list

of

woes, and this loss seems to be regretted

only because, without advice, he cannot plan his military tactics.

The sequence of Samuel's response is a rebuke to Saul and displays

the proper ordering

of

priorities (vv. 16-19).

25

The issue of greatest

importance

is

Saul s loss

of

God s support, and Samuel addresses it

fir

s

t,

24. Saul s

unu

s

ual

height

is

mentioned in I Sam. 9.2

and

10

23

25. P Miscall notes without discussion that Samuel s first poinl is Saul s third

1

Samuel A Literary R

e i

llg

[Bloomington: Indiana University Pre ss. 1986] ,

p 169).


9/21

REIS Eatillg the Blood

not last. Saul is Ihen told that the land

of

Israel will fall to the Philistines,

and only after that

is

he informed

of

his own fate. He learns he and his

sons, that is, the dynasty, will perish on the morrow. Of least moment is

that his army,

DO,

will succumb to

th

e Philistines. They are soldiers,

after all, and it i ; the common lot

of

soldiers to die in combat. However,

the loss

of

land, the holy land God promised to Israel,

is

an uncommon

calamity. No Ph ilistines had dwelt within Israel

s

borders since Samuel s

prayerful intercession had resulted in the recovery

of

previously lost

territory (7. 13- 14 . Though there were transient incursions during Saul

s

reign, the integ ity

of

the boundaries had endured. The coming battle

will leave part

0

the holy land under Philistine occ

up

ation (31.7).

Saul was tol in 15.19-23 that his kingdom would be torn from him

and from his heirs for his failure to execute Agag, the king

of

Amalek.

From Samuel s denunciation he now learns not only

th e precise day

of

his death but a1

;0

of further punishments and disasters

26

Land will be

lost, he and

hi

s ions will die violently, and

hi

s army will be vanquished.

Throughout thE Hebrew Bible there is a strong sense of appropriate

justice, of meas lfe for measure. If the consequence of sparing Agag and

the best of the Amalekite spoil is the failure of the dynasty, what

offenses

led

to the additional penalties?

In I ehron. 10.13 we are told that Saul died for failing to kill Agag

and for consulting a ghost. The extended retribution , then, is a result

of

the divination i ev Rab 26.7 adds Saul s slaughter

of

the priests

of

Nob

(I Sam. 22.16-1 to the list

of

sin s justifying punishment. PS.-P hilo Bib.

Ant 58; 63.3) blames the army

of

Israel for not interceding on behalf

of

the priests and escuing them as they had Jonathan ( I Sam. 14.45). No

source I have f(lund hazards a reason why land is lost to the Philistines

(or even acknowledges the loss), but I believe the immediate discovery

and proximate bcation

of

a witch in 28.7 teaches that under Saul, and in

spite

of

his witch-hunting, the land had become polluted with death cults

and their attend. nt medium

s.

In his re sponse to Saul, Samuel repeats the sacred telragrammaton,

26. Against Miscall , who says, The dead have nothing new

to

say J Samuel,

p.

171 ),

and Fokkdman, who asserts th

at the

message

is in no way new Narrarive

An

p.

605). McC:ner says

that

clauses a

and

c of

v.

19

are the

co

nflated

versions

of

o

ne original

clausl

: I Samuel.

p. 419). S.R.

Driver says, C

lau

ses

a

and

c are

almo

st

identical: and the verse is decidedly improved

by

the omission

o

one o them

NOles 0 the He , rew Text nd t e Topog raphy of the Books of Samuel [repr. ;

London : Oxford Lniversity Press, 1966 ( 1913)],

p.

218).


10/21

2 Journal for rhe

Srudy

o rhe Old

Tesramel

73 ( 1997)

;11;1 , seven times. The extraordinary power and influence

of

th e mysti

cal number seven is evoked over and over again in the Bible. The seven

fat cows and seven lean cows

in

Pharaoh' s dream (Gen. 41.18-19) and

the seven priests with seven horns circling Jericho seven times on the

seventh day (Josh. 6.4) are but two examples among hundreds. Samuel

makes one last formidable attempt

to

turn Saul back to God and away

from the pagan conjuring to which he has

re

sorted. By the sevenfold

repetition of the name of God, Samuellries but fails

to

turn Saul to God

and prevent the desecration of God

s

name (Lev. 20.3-6) that is to

come. The prophet delivers his necessarily harsh message with a potent

formula that tes tifi es to his love for Saul and to his abhorrence of the

grievous sin Saul

is

poised to

co

mmit.

28

Saul' s interview with Samuel is over. As unwilling to listen to Samuel

as he was to hearken to the voice

of

God , Saul falls crushed to earth by

the weight of the divine retribution foretold for hi s sins ( I Sam. 28.20).

Emotionally, he suffers from great fear and, physically, he is weakened

by a twenty-four hour fast . · The witch s fear of Saul, already great, mu st

also have intensified with Samuel s prophesy. Her arch nemesis may have

been willing to let her live as long as he might need her se rvices, but

now he will require her astral powers no longer. He mi ght

eve

n,

in

an

attempt to mollify God, order her immediate execution. She has literally

been the medium

of

bad news to Saul; that alone is sufficient grou

nd

for

the king

to

put her to death.

o

27. Verses

16

. 17 (twice), 18 (twice), 19 (twi ce).

28

. Samuel s formulaic

repelition of God

s

name fail

s to influence

Sau

l, but ,

when Abi

g

ail

emp loys

the

sevenfo

ld re

it

eration in

1

Sam

. 25. mentionin g

th

e name

of God in v. 26 (twice

),

v. 28 (twice), and

vv

. 29. 30. 31. she successfully deters

David from bloodshed (my paper,

C

upidity and Stupidit

y:

Woman

s

Agency

an

d

the Rape

of

Tamar', forthcoming

in N

ES U

[ 1997]).

29. Both Mi sca

ll

I Samuel

p. 170) and Simon (, Balanced Story' .

p.

163)

differenti a

te

between conscious fasting

and

failure to eat. Simon ssert

S

t

ha

t Saul

does nOl

fast

but loses

hi

s

appe

t

e in nervou

s

apprehension

of

the

comi

ng battle

.

Klein 1 Samuel, p 272) offers that

Saul may

not have

eaten

due

O

the rigors of the

lrip to Endor and also joins McCarter I Samuel, p. 42 J n. 20) in suggesting that

Saul

engaged in a ritual fast

t

purify him self for the witch s conjuration.

Sau

l may have

fa

s

ted on

th

e eve

of

battle

to en

gage God s s

Uppor ,

according

t

Edelman

,

but

His

reas

on

s for not

ea

ting seem

to have

been deliberately shielded from the

audien

ce to

rai

se the ques on of his intentions' King Saul p. 249).

30. See 2 Sam . 18.2 1-22 in which Joab dispatches an expendable Cushite to

convey

bad

news

to Da

v

id and trie

s 10

dis

s

uad

e Ah

imaaz

from being

the

messenger.


11/21

REIS Eating the Blood

3

Unlike Saul, t le woman does not collapse under her fear but takes the

first desperate action that occurs to her, and, hoping to buy her

li

fe with

her body, she a,)proaches Saul sexuall

y:

And the woman came in to

Saul (v.

21).31

Although coming

in

to

(

1':1::: )

is

often a sex-neutral

expression, a woman coming

in

to a man, particularly a specific man

as here where the woman comes

in

expressly

to

Saul - may bear a

sexual insinuation

n

In

current English slang, one might say the woman

comes on to S lUI. The Hebrew expression need not convey this inter

pretation, but I ee no other reason for the narrator to tell

us

the woman

came in. We ere never told she went out; nor are

th

e goi ngs and

comings of

SaU

l's men recorded. They are present in v. 23, but we do

not know whetller or not they attended the seance. This extraneous

information is

1I0t

important to the narrative; neither is the woman s

coming in unleg,; it bears

an

erotic alIusion

33

She makes carnal overtures to Saul but then sees that he is paralyzed

by terror and changes her tack. She tenders him a proposition in the foml

of

an

equation, 1 formal statement of equality: Behold your handmaid

hearkened to your voice and set

my

life in

my

hand, and I hearkened to

your words that you spoke to me. And now you please hearken also to

the voice

of

yo r handmaid and I will set a morsel

of

bread before you

(vv.

21-22). It

i;

not appropriate for a woman, and especially a woman

so low

in

the social order, to set the terms for a king. The witch s pro

position

is exprc:ssed with intelligence, delicacy, and tact. The terms she

sets are obviou, ly

un

equal.

It

is up to the king to correct the equation;

he must make the mental computation and understand her to be actually

saying: I hear

l:

ened to you and set my Ufe

in

your hand; now you

hearken to me and set your life in my hand.

3J. Whe

ther

OJ not prostitution

was an

actual concomitant

of

sorcery. the inter-

weaving

of

sexual

and

death cult imagery is ubiquitous

throu

ghout

th

e Bible. See

Lewis.

elllts

t .

Dead

pp.

149-50. 158 .

32. See Gen. 1

9

33-34 in which

Lot

s daughter

s

in tum,

o

me in to

~ : : : : . i. C.,

slee

p

with

,

their

f.

lther

; 2 Sam.

11.4 in

which Bathsh

eba come

s

in

to (K) , sl

eeps

with) David; and Ruth 3 7 in which Ruth comes

into

(Ki:::: ) Boaz for what is an

arguably chaste bu

undeniably

sexually

charged encounter

.

33 .

Edelman

St:cs

echoe

s or Abigail

s exchange with

David

and

s

ays

that

both

women

attempt

H

steer

[the

men] toward

a

correct

course

of

action

L J

...

Whether

the woman

of

End

oJr is

making sexual

overtures toward

the

king

as

Abigail

see

ms to

have been

doing [I David

is open to the

imagination .

Ede lm an run

her argues that

the witch s

knowledge or ignorance of Saul s fale is irrelevant

to the plot

line

n

g

Salll.

pp.

250-51 .


12/21

4

ournal for the Study

o

the Old Testament

73 (1997)

The witch tells the king that she listened both to his voice and

to

the

words he spoke to her, but she pointedly asks him to hearken o

nl

y to

her voice. Shrewdly, she directs Saul s attention away from her exact

words. She wants him to apprehend her vital message from her tone

and from her syntax but not to heed the disingenuous morsel of bread

words of her equation. Her contract is not about bread; it equates a

life with a life. Since she leaves it open-ended, Saul may also understand

the bargain to be, As you save

my

life, so will I save your life. She

is

offering to perform her augury, to make an idolatrous sacrifice to the

spirits of the dead in order that Saul will not die as Samuel foretold. The

advantage of the covenant to her, of course, is that Saul will spare her

life. Beuken says the witch unwittingly proposes a covenant to Saul, for

by listening to others and acting accordingly, people enter into covenant

with each other and God with them .34 I believe the witch

to

be neither

so unwitting nor so winsome as male exegetes seem

to

find her.

Fokkelman finds reciprocity

in

the witch s compact and a natural

and efficient tit for tat .35 I do not consider a human life, even a witch s

life, in exchange for a morsel of bread to be reciprocal tit for taL Simon

observes the marked lack

of

both symmetry and proportion in the

witch s proposal and finds the logical weakness part

of

her

de

li

ghtful

charm . The behavior Simon interprets as generous hospitality to Saul

and as innocence of any grudge toward him for cutting the spiritualists

from the land seems to him to exhibit marvelo

us

faithfulness

to

the truth

of Iife .

6

I think it far from realistic to suppose that a menaced and

evidently terrified woman overlooks the mortal danger her worst enemy

inflicts upon her and becomes his gracious hostess. Indeed, in such a

predicament, a response of eager hospitality would be bizarre.

t

is more

true to life for a frightened , hunted, and condemned person to try

to

outwit and outmaneuver her adversary to save her own life than to try

to feed him to save and fortify his

Saul understands and initially refuses the witch s offer. He may want

to

make a pact with the woman that might save his life and the lives of

his sons, but

God s

laws and Samuel s words against witchcraft, idolatry,

and teraphirn

in 15.23 restrain him]7 Eventually, however, Saul-like, he

34. Beuken, Hammer

of

Witches ,

p.

3

.

35. Fokkelman, Narrative Arl

p

620.

36. Simon, Balanced Story , pp . 164-67.

37. K. Spanier says. Saul was rebuked by Samuel for resorting to teraphim for

the purpose o divination ( 1 Sam. xv 23), CRachel s Theft of the Teraphim:

er


13/21

REIS Eating the lood

15

cannot withst.md the urging

of

the witch and

of

his courtiers, and he

gives in to th,: force

of

their persuasion and to his own inclination as

three times pr v i o u s l y he has given in to pressure. At Gilgal in 13.8-14

he disobeys God

s

command and performs an untimely sacrifice to keep

his men from scattering from him; in 14.45, abandoning the oath he

made in God' , name, he spares Jonathan's life at the people ' s insistence,

and in

15 .24 e transgresses the commandment

of

the Lord because, he

says, ' I feare: the people and listened to their voice '.

Though

Saul

hearkens neitl ,er to the voice

of

God nor to the voice

of

Samuel, he does,

in the end, hearken to the voice of the witch and

of

his men (28.23).

Saul rises from the earth, but not to his feet; he sits upon the bed (v. 23).

Contrary to Gunn (see

n.

5), the Bible does not record ' mundane

incidentals ' . Why then are we told that Saul sits upon the bed? We are

not informed of the position

of

the witch and

of

the courtiers. I believe

only Saul s p )sture is important to the story because

of

the correlation

of

the phrase ' ~ l : l ; J - t \ (on the bed, upon the bed) with the same phrase

in 19.13, 16 describing the placement

of

the teraphim Michal uses to save

David

s

life.

3

'

In all

of

Scripture the expression

J ~ l : l ; J - 1 ' :

is used only of

Saul,

of

the t

,:

raphim, and

of

Jacob

at

his death (Gen. 49.33). The last

mentioned may also alJude to teraphim, for

in

v.

27 Jacob

s

son, Benjamin

(Saw s progectilOr), is designated as the divider

of

the spo

il

; on Jacob' s

death he ma:1 have taken possession of the teraphim stolen by hi s

mother,

a c h

from her father

(3

1.19)

39

The Bible may be intimating

that the terapltim were handed down from mother to son to distant heir.

The nexus between I Sam. 28 and

19.11

-

17 is

iUustrated by a number

of other

COITI s

pondence

s:

David

is

told, ' If you

do

not save your life

tortight,lOmoTow you will be slain ' (19.11); Saul also knows that he has

only this one night in which to save

hi

s life, for tomorrow, Samuel tells

him, he will

de

(28. 19) . Michal disguises the teraphim with a cloth,

ll:l

(19.13); Saul as we have see

n, is

disguised with

O ll:l

- the same root

word (28 .8). Saul asks Michal, 'Why thus have you deceived me?'

Struggle for Family Primacy'.

V 42

[1992J. p. 406).

38.

Note

tha only

the teraphim are ilro1-?l t

David,

in the sa

me

passage, is said

to

be

; ]= ' in .he

bed'

(v.

14).

39.

Teraphi

n

are

defined

as

ancestor figurines

u

sed

for

divin

a

tion

and

cui tic

inquiry directed to

the

dead.

See H.

Hoffner

,

Hittite

Tarpi

and Hebrew Tertjpltim ,

JNES 27

(196.l

),

p. 66; Spanier, 'Rachel's Theft' , pp. 405, 410; Bloch-Smith,

Judahite Burial. p.

121

: K. v n dec Toom, The Nature o

the

Biblical

Teraphim in

the Light of the Cuneiform Evidence

, C Q

52 ( 1990),

pp.

204. 2 13, 2 15 , and 222.


14/21

6

Journol or the Study 0

th

e Old Testament 73 (1997)

( 19 .17); the witch asks Saul, Why have you deceived me? (28. 12). The

word why ', i1D? a Leitworr

in

ch. 28, is used there four times (vv. 9, 12 ,

IS

, 16). It i.s accen

tu

ated

in

ch. 19 by being enunciated by two different

speakers in the same ve r

se v.

17).

It

s

fir

st use is echoed by the witch as

quoted above; its seco

nd

use, Let

me

go; why should I kill yo u

?'

attracts

notice because of tb e idiosyncratic phraseology. One would hardly

suppose that a desperate, fleeing man had time for questions. [t seems a

more natural lie for Michal to

claim D

av

id

had said, Let me go, or [ will

kill

yo

u.

In a

ge

neral di sc

us

sion

of

biblical literary devices,

M.

Stemberg writes

of the rhetorical power [of] implici t intertextual and interepisodic

relation

s'

and

of

the intertextual analogy-by-allusion

4

R. Alter

observes, The biblical writers like to lead their readers to inferences

through oblique hints rather than

in

sisting on explicit statements. 41 The

analogous portrayals

of

Saul and of t

eraphim-both

i 1 ~ D i 1 ? both

covered with lJ:l-may hint at what the once majestic Saul has become:

a hollow man, a fake, an abomination. The allusion to teraphim in relation

to Sa

ul

may al so be a portent

of

the forbidden ancestor worship to co

me

.

The witch sacrifices (n:li) a

ca

lf (28.24). She does not kill it (KJV and

RSV

),

slaughter

it

(McCarter and

JP

SV),

or butcher

it

(Klein); she

sac

rifi

ces

it.

The word for sacrifice n :li) is used 129 times

in

the Hebrew

Bible, and, according to 1. Milgram,

it

refers to cultic ritual slaughter and

sacrifice in 127

of th

ose instances.

f

the word n:li is used twice to

mean sec

ul

ar slaughter, [ cou

ld

belie

ve it

refers to secular slaughter

in

our passage too were there not several other indications in the text,

di scussed below, that also point to ritual sac

rifi

ce.

Along with the meat, the witch provides unleavened bread

i1::>D).

40. M. St

ernberg h

e

Poetics

of Bibli

cal

Narrative

Bl

oomington: ndiana

University Press. 1987), p. 497 .

4 1. lter he n ofBiblical Narrative p. 183 .

42. J. Milgrom ( Profane Slaughter a

nd

a Formulaic Key to the Composition of

Deuleronomy

', UC

47 [19761, pp. 1-2) excepts only Delli.

12

.

15.21.

In

these

two

cases alone he believes the word refers to secular slaugh ter for food In I Sam

28 he believes

n ~

inilicates some undefined

bu

t permiss ibl e ritual slaughter and

sacri

fice. for he find

s

it

un1ikely that the witch of

Endor wou

ld

have prepared

a pro-

fane

[secular]

meal

before

the

very

king

who

troubled

himself

to

impr

ovise

an

al

t

ar

on

the

battlefield

so

that

hi

s

tr

oops wou

ld not

be

guilty of

profane

or

illicit slaug

hter

(I Sam.

14

.32-35) . Though Milgram thu s ag rees with me hat the witch proffers a

ceremo

nial

ob

l

at

ion

rathe

r th

an

a

dome

s

tic

repas t he

considers th

e w

it

ch

s

sacrifice

lawful.


15/21

REIS Eating the Blood

17

Unleavened bread

is

a constituent of a sacrificial offering; it is the meal

offering and if a sign and symbol of sacrifice. In Lev. 2 .4 the MT

specifies n:lt for the meal-offering, and in 2.11 we are told that no leaven

may be brough : to the altar for this purpose.

Of

course one cannot pre

pare quick.ly any bread other than unleavened bread, for leavened bread

needs time to ·ise. However, the unleavened nature

of

the bread the

witch serves ne, d not have been specifically emphasized.

In

Gen.

18

.5-6,

to use a partic Ilarly apt parallel, when Abraham rushes to provide a

'morsel

of

bre d'

fo

r three strange men who unexpectedly arrive at his

dwelling, his wlfe hastily makes 'cakes

of

bread' (ll1lll).43 Unlike n:ll , this

word may refer to bread that is leavened or unleavened. The cakes, or

loaves, Sarah hakes are

of

necessity unleavened, but the word n:lt

is

avoided. There is no hint of ritual sac

rifi

ce.

After the wit :h sacrifices the calf, we are not told how she prepares it.

The absence of detail

in

this regard is especially noticeable because we

are given so many particulars to describe the preparation of the n:ll; she

takes flour, kn eads, and bakes-three verbs. If we look again at the

paradigmatic hospitality scene of Abraham and

th

e three strangers in

Gen. 18.6-7, we see that an equal number of operations is itemized for

the bread and for the meat. The bread is prepared-quickly (one word

in

Hebrew), kneaded, and made; the meat is fe tched, given to the servant,

and dressed. No commentator has remarked upon this deficiency in

regard to the meat in I Samuel 28, but Fokkelman at least has sensed it;

he

furnishes th" lacuna for us by stating that the witch 'applies herself to

baking and roa ;ting' 44 What roasting? We do not know if the meat was

roasted, boiled or barbecued, and I submi t it was not cooked at a ll but

eaten raw with the blood.

In discussin the 'depth and sophistica

ti

on

of

biblic

al

narrative,

A. Berlin says i

he

narrator may ' leave gaps in the story to be filled in by

the reader ' 4s The yawning gap

in

this story is one more indication that

God ' s chosen, anointed, first king

of

Israel ate meat with the blood as

part

of the abominable rite of divination. The narrator stresses the prepa-

4

3.

The compll'ision

of

Gen.

18

.

1-8

and I Sam.

28

.22-25 is s

in

gularly pertine

nt

,

for

in oth

a morse )

o

bread is prepared for three

un

expected, unknown,

m l

e

v

s

t

o

rs

44. Fokkciman,

Narrative Art p.

621.

45.

A.

Berlin, 'Point

of

View in Biblical Narrative

.

A Sense o e Text (lQRSup:

Winona Lake,

[

Ei senbrauns, 1983

,

p. 112. See

al

so Sternberg' s chapter on 'Gaps,

Ambiguity, and tl e Reading Process

,

The Poetics pp . t86-229.


16/21

18

oumalfor

the Study of the Old TeSIOlllem

73 (1997)

ration of the bread and leaves a void concerning

th

e meat so that, by

means of the disparity, this degrading and treacherous (1lJ ) act of Saul

s

may be inferred.

The witch takes the raw meat, the blood, and the sacred bread and

offers them in the presence of Saul and his men (v. 25). The KJV trans-

lates toll (offers ) as brought .

The

RSV says put . Klein and the JPSV

have

se

t .

The

word Cl1to (put or set) is tbe word one is led to expect

here from the two precedents established by its use in

v.

21, \ have set

Cl1to) my life in my hand and in v. 22, Le t me set Cl1to) a morsel of

bread before you. Any variation in a rhetoric that stresses repetition

confers added significance on the variant. The change of verb alerts the

careful reader that, though the woman asked permission to set

CI

lto),

in

the actual event she offers (toll)

.46 Cl1to

is a neutral verb that denotes

place or put ; toll is a loaded verb that connotes both tbe priestly

approach to the altar and sexual intercourse

4

?

This verb choice confirms

that the witch sacrifices, not butchers, the calf. Here, instead

of

setting

Cl1to) food before Saul, she is offering (toll) gifts to the dead.

For Saul the forbidden food propitiates the spirits. For the witch the

communal meal seals a covenant; that is, it performs the legal function of

a treaty, eliminating enmity and establishing peace between the partici,

pants. A Viberg lists all the biblical covenantal meals that satisfy hi s

criteria for the symbolic, yet legal , act.

48

He does not include the meal

shared by the witch, Saul, and the courtiers. Nevertheless, tbis meal

fulfills the four indications

of

legality he stipulates:

These indkalions

are, firstly. the pivotal position

of

th

e meal

in th

e

literary

structure followed

by

geographical dislocation

secondl y. the use o

terminology within the context o therwise well known from covenant-

making.

thirdly

,

the

la

ck

o

any

other

explicit means of satisfy

in

g

the

covenant,

and fourthly, the mere fact that the mea1 is mentioned.

49

46. Aller says,

Wher

e the

narration so abundantly

encourages us to expect. ..

repetition, on occasion the avoidance o repetition,

whether

through substi tlllion of a

synonym

or

of a wholly divergent word or phrase

for the anticipated

reoccurrence.

may aJso

be particularly reve

aling The Art ofBiblical Narrative, p. 180

).

47, The

verb

choice

hints

that the

witch

offers

food

to the dead and offers herself

sex

ually

to

Sa

ul

and

hi

s

men

(see

n.

32

above).

48. A Viberg defines a legal sy mbolic act as a

non-v

erbal

ac

t which fulfill s a

legal function when it is

performed under

the

proper

circumstances Sym olsof

U W (Stockholm: Almqvist Wiksell , 1992] , p. 9).

49. Viberg,

Symbols ofLaw

p.

75

.


17/21

REIS Eating he Blood

19

The pivotal p )sition

of

the meal

in

our text is marked; we are told that

Saul and his men

ri

se up and leave (geographi

ca

l dislocation)

in th

e same

verse

in

which we are told that they eat (v. 25). Covenantal terminology

is first implied by the witch s use

of

the technical word for cutting a

covenant,

,

and then realized by Saul s acceptance

of

her obliquely

equilateral proposition. The presence

of

two witnesses (Saul s men) is

another technical indication of tbe legal context O Viberg s third crite

rion is c i e v d

fo

r, o

th

er

th

an the shared meal, no means of satisfying

the covenant is explicitly specified. The fourth criterion is extensively

fulfilled, for tle meal is not only mentioned but dwelt upon. In our peri

cope of twenty-three verses (vv. 3-25), talk of the meal, preparation of

the meal , and consumption

of

the meal occupy five verses.

The witch of Endor intends to survive . She instigates this meal because,

as a covenanl , it safeguards her life. She does not promote it in order to

nurture her enemy by bolstering his declining strength. Nor does the

author provide a calming breather for

th

e reader; on the contrary, Saul s

apostasy intellsifies our apprehension. The loathsome conviviality of this

prohibited sa;rifice does not arouse our sympathy for Saul ; rather, our

contempt for him is increased. And it does not suggest thaI the

wi tch is

a ministering angel; it establishes that she is a clever, capable, determined

man.

SI

The witch ; sorcery may have saved her life, but

it

fails Saul. The next

morning he goes into battl

heroically, according

to th

e commentators

2

They believe him gallant because, they think, he braves

th

e battlefield

in

the certain kr.owledge of death. Stoically, he submits to God s sentence

for himself and for hi s sons rather than leave

th

em behind to an un certa

in

future. However, Saul, unlike David (

l6

.18

),

is never identified as a

mighty man

of

valor or a man

of

war . Saul s

fa

th

er is

di

st

in

g

ui

shed

as a mighty nan of valor

in

9.1, whereas Saul is introduced in the very

next verse as a young man and handsome . Perhaps the comparision is

indirectly de,i sive. Certainly, the reader notes Saul hiding among the

50. Viberg, Symbols

of

Law, p. 10.

51. Lewis SlY S Little can be

s

aid

about

the

woman s feast. It may be enticin

g to

look

for some type of cultic ritual here uniting Saul with a meal for the dead, but the

text,

with

its nph sis

on

the woman s compas

sion,

does not seem

La

support such

a notion

Culls

of

the Dead,

p. 117

).

Contrary to Lewis, I

nd

no emphasis on

compassion in our text,

but

mp le accent on ap

pr

opriately responsive,

su rvi v

l-

oriented

i

nt

e

lJiFe

n

ce

wh.ich

doe

s,

indeed.

support

thi

sn

otion

.

5 . Lev. Re . 26 .7; Josephu s, Alit. 6. 14.4 , 7; Simon praises Saul s heroism

(p. 169) and ci t

S

others who glori fy

it

( Balanced Story , p. 17 I n.

15

).


18/21

2 Journal

or

the Study o the Old Testament

73 (1997)

baggage'

in

10.22, sees him afraid to engage Goliath himself but willing

to let David, as a sort of proxy, fight the giant dressed

in

the king ' s

armor

in

7 .38 , and observes his self-abasement before David on being

spared death at the latter' s hands in chs. 24 and 26.

Is

the reader then

to accept that Saul is suddenly, uncharacteristically, totally unafraid

of

death and willing to consign not only himself but also his sons to certain

oblivion? In my

exegesis , Saul risks battle only because he believes he

has enlisted the protection of the infernal deities. He is not courageous

but is encouraged by the witch's conjuring to trust that the friendly

ghosts, the spirits with whom he shared blood, will save him and his

heirs.

With the death

of

hi

s sons, Saul realizes the witch

s

necromancy has

not been a shield. Writhing (,:>n , writhe or whirl-not wounded as it

is

frequently translated) in mental anguish, contorting with fright, cowering,

or perhaps dodging the archers, he ends his life by suicide, lest the

Philistines torture bin to death (31.2-4). This denouement provides the

reader with a sense of equity. After Samuel's pronouncement, it seemed

no further punishment could possibly be given Saul, yet the retribution

he receives for eating the blood is fitting. The horror that spurs his suicide

goes beyond Samuel ' s prophesy and fulfills the measure for measure

standard of judgment. It is as though God had said, ' You feared death ;

now you will fear to live. You wanted to escape your fate; now you will

run toward it.'

The meal Saul shares with the witch has yet another function beyond

sacrifice and covenant. t provides a means of comparing Saul and David

directly, to Saul ' s decided disadvantage.

In

2 Sam. 12.16-23, David

beseeches God for the life

of

his

ill

son, the fruit

of hi

s adulterous union

with Bathsheba. The prophet, Nathan, has already foretold that the child

will die because of David's sin. The thematic parallels between thi s scene

and the witch of Endor scene are striking. Both kings are shown by pro

phets to be sinners, both hear a forecast of doom, both are threatened with

the death of progeny, both fast , lie on the ground, refuse food, change

clothes,

ri

se from the earth, and finally accept food. S4 For seven days

53. Tho

se

who believe that after Saul stabbed hims

elf

the maJekite killed him

see Saul s end as (a more acceptable) euthanasia

rath

er than s

ui

c

id

e (2 Sam. 1.6-

10 .

By either the Amalekite sor the narrator s account , however, Saul

committed

suicide

o r

tri

ed and fail

ed

to

ommit

suicide.

54. Da vid s changing of clOlhes is expressed by

th

e mauer-of-f

ac

t mCitl j?rn

rather than by

th

e metaphorically significant In w:J?'1 used for Saul.


19/21

REIS

Eatillg e lood

2 1

David

re

sists he exhortations of his servants, never accedes

to

them,

bUl

insists upon c.oing what he knows to be right ; Saul gives in

to

rar less

coaxing, thoU:lh he knows he is acquiescing to the ultimate iniquity.

The

lexical correlations between the two scenes are also remarkable.

In both scene ;, and nowhere else n the Hebrew Bible, mention is made

of

joining the dead: Samuel tells Saul that tomorrow Saul and

hi

s sons

' will be with me' ( I Sam. 28.19), and David, speaking

of

hi s dead son,

tell s

hi

s servllnts, ' I shall go

to

him' (2 Sam. 12.20)." [n both sce nes,

and nowhere Ise in the Hebrew Bible,

th

ere is the locution 'and he rose

from the

eanh ,

f lK;)Q

O " I

Sam.

2 .23

and 2 Sam. 12 .20

).

The

reader is guiced

to

compare the supplicatory behavior

of

the two kings

by similarity

of

in

cident,

of

issue, and

of

expression.

6

Both Davie and Saul are disappointed in their appeals. David washes

himself after his polluting association with death, faithfully worships the

Lord despite Ihe severe chastisement he has received, and eats an appro

priately secu ar meal in

hi s own house. Saul does not wash after the

defilement

of

hi s contact with the ghost

of

Samuel, s its on a bed in

th

e

house

of

a witch, worships his ancestors instead

of

the Lord, and eats a

detestable wit ch s stew

of

raw meat, blood, and unleavened bread.

I have

r

n t e

arguments that expose the witch

s

motivati on and

King Saul

s

defection from monotheism ,s7 The char

ge

against Saul is

grave, but th" text demands it.

8

His record

of

yielding to entreaty, hi s

proclivity fOi magic, and his fear-numbed stupor constitute the back

ground for his penultimate act

of

desperation. Among the evidence in

55. In Gen. 37.35 Jacob says thai he will go to hi s son in Sheol: however, Ihe

reader know s thll Jacob is deceived; his so n

is

ali ve.

56.

That

Da

v

id'

s behavior is

not normative

[

srae lit

e

ritual

is sho

wn

by

the

con

s

ternation

o h i ; se

rv

ant (2 Sam. 12.2 1 . Lewis m

akes

lhe to me rather dubious

case that David s seven-day fasting and lying on the ground

constitu

te a ceremonial

desce

nl

lO

Sheo . He states. ll seems

quite

likely

tbat Da

vid

was

ritually

ac tin

g

out

a

descent into the und

erworld

to

try

to

bring

his son

back

from the clutches of death'

Cults

of e

D

ad,

p. 43). Those who

agree

with Lewis s assertion will

find yet

another corresI=ondence

betw

een Saul and David, for Saul

briefly

brings Samuel

back from the cl ulch of death.

57. The spir IS

of

Ihe dead are called gods (I Sam. 28.13): Bloch-Smilh says 'The

dead

were div

i le

beings'

(Judahite Burial Pract ices,

p.

123

),

and

P

s.

16.3

refers

to the dead

as

'ho

ly ones in

the

eanh .

Wor

s

hip o and

s

acrifice

to such

pretemalllral

beings is polylh ' ism.

58. Though recen t

death cu

ll

research

(cited seve

ral

times above) supp Orts

my

argument

, the

s<

riplural evidence alone is s

ufficient

to justify my conclusion

s.


20/21

22 lourn lfor

the Study

of

the ld Testament

73 (1997)

the foreground is the pointed use of the root lJ tying Saul to treachery,

to the eating of blood by his army, and to teraphim. The phrase ;;t lQ;J-'tI,

used in the Bibleonly of Saul and of teraphim,again links Saul to ancestor

worship. The witch s use

of

distinctly covenantal

terminology-the

tech

nical term n1::> plus her equation in the form of: as I did X now you

do

Y -delineates

the heretical bargain. The absence

of

detail

in

the meat

preparation (made noticeable

by

juxtaposition

of

rich detail

in

the prepa

ration

of

the bread) becomes substantive evidence

of

the bloody rite

when coupled with the use

of

the word

nJi

(sacrifice, rather than a verb

meaning, simply, slaughter) and the needlessly explicit mention

of

the

unleavened, and thus sacrificial, character of the bread. That the witch

s

meal is a blasphemous ritual

is

further indicated by the surprising use

of

the allusive word

IVl)

(offer, approach) where we are led by double pre

cedent to expect 11V (set). Saul s end, his

final

terror-not of death but

of

life-shows

the playing out of an inexorable justice. It is the un fore

told penalty for his treacherous blood worship of false gods.

My exegesis of I Samuel

28

contradicts all preceding analyses. History

may be written by the victors (the Davidic faction), but it is interpreted

by partisans of a particular point of view. Analysts, blinkered by their

religions theology, have been averse to allowing Saul the autonomy

that God permits him. Although Samuel predicts the certain end of

Saul s disobedience (15.23), and we are twice told that God repents of

his selection

of

Saul (vv.

II,

35), prior commentators cannot let them

selves perceive apostasy

in

God s choice for a king. Saul

is

portrayed as

a tragic, yet valiant, figure because to recognize him as the craven idolater

he becomes would, in their philosophies,

be

tantamount to declaring that

God errs.

Correspondingly,

in

previous explications, the witch cannot have

seduced Saul to heterodox worship. Her role had to be that

of

care-giver.

The interpreter s image of a selfless and compassionate nurturer also

fits

an

idealized standard of femi.ninity. Even today, the biblical author s

depiction of the medium as self-interested and resourceful is not a repre

sentation of woman that is readily embraced. The witch

is

not seen as

an adroit strategist but as a generous, solicitous, and adorably illogical

hostess. God s vehement condemnations of witchcraft are discounted, the

human drive for self-preservation is depreciated, and the witch

of

Endor

basks

in

approval, continuing

to

entrance exegetes down the centuries.


21/21

REIS Eatillg e lood 23

ABSTRACT

This article re·c

nmi

ne

s the encoumer between King Saul and the

wi

tch

of

Endor

and demonstrates

by

a close reading

of

the text that t

he

witch is not a solicitous

hostess but an adnit strategist intent upon surviva l. The foo she prepares for Saul

is, firstly. a m n t sacrifice to the spirits

of

the dead entailing the stri ngently pro

scribed eating

of

l:lood. Secondly, the shared meal is an unho

ly b

Ull

egaJ ly

effective

covenant between God's anoi nted first king of Israel and a sorceress. Third ly, the

forbidden meal SCI ves an apostasy that warrants Saul'sconscqucnl suicide; and lastl

y,

it provides a scencrio for the conlrast

of

Saul's treachery with David's constancy in

an analogous situa jon.

This publication

is available in

microform.

University Microfilms

International reproduces this

publication in microform:

microfiche nnd 6mm

or

35mm film. For in forma tion

, about this publication

or

any

of the m

ore than

13,000 lilles

we offer,

and

mail tbe coupon to: University

MicrofUms International. 300 N. Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor,

MI 48106. Call us IoU-free {or an immedia te response :

800-521·3044. Or call coUecl

in

Michigan, Alaska and

Hawaii: 313-761-4700.

N ~

eom nyf. slIhllIOft _

._----------------

a

51.1 _

,

~ L _ _ _

University

MicrOf ms

International

Documents

Saul and the Witch of EnDor