The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
Apparatus & Provenance
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
- Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
- Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
- Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
- Geneva Study Bible, Marginal Notes (1599)
- Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory (1871)
- John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
- Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
- Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
- Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
- Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible (1685)
- The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)
Text. This is one of the textually roughest passages in Samuel, and the BSB's English is smoother than its source. (1) In v. 34 the BSB prints a full second sentence — “And the watchman went and reported to the king, ‘I see men coming from the direction of Horonaim, along the side of the hill’” — which the Masoretic Hebrew of our interlinear does not contain; it follows the Septuagint. Cambridge quotes that Greek text in full and identifies “Oronen” with Horonaim or Beth-horon. K&D argues the Greek addition is secondary, since if the spy had already reported, “there was no necessity for Jonadab to do it again.” We have built the literal renderings from the Hebrew words actually supplied in the brief, and flagged the divergence rather than silently following either text.
(2) In v. 37 the subject of וַיִּתְאַבֵּל is absent from the Hebrew. Cambridge holds that “David has fallen out of the Heb. text, but is found in the Sept. and Vulg.”; K&D denies any loss and supplies the subject from “the king” in v. 36. The BSB prints “David” without a note. Both are defensible; neither is certain.
(3) Verse 39 is the hardest sentence in the unit: a feminine verb (wat·tə·ḵal, H3615) with a masculine subject. At least four readings are live in our sources — supply “the soul” (Targum, Jewish commentators, AV, BSB); read impersonally, “David desisted from going out against Absalom” (Vulgate, probably LXX, Ellicott, Cambridge); read kâlâh as kâlâʼ, “it held him back” (K&D); or keep the pathos, “was consumed in going forth” (Barnes). Cambridge also notes “a very probable conjecture” emending the text to the king's wrath ceased to go forth. Gill preserves Aben Ezra's supplying of “wife” and Abarbanel's harmonizing narrative. We have not decided this. Our literal rendering keeps the feminine verb visible in English (“And-she-was-spent”) precisely so the reader can see the problem, and both the note at index 2 and the fourth movement lay out the options without choosing.
Sources. Eleven public-domain commentators are present in the brief (Ellicott, Benson, Henry, Barnes, JFB, Poole, Gill, Geneva, Cambridge, Pulpit, K&D); ten are quoted in this unit — Poole and JFB have no entry at some verses, and Henry's entry is a single block covering 13:30–39, so his words appear identically at every verse. Where a commentator is himself quoting someone else we have said so: Benson is relaying Patrick Delany, and Cambridge at v. 38 is relaying the Speaker's Commentary. Gill's remark at v. 38 is a reply to Spinoza's Tractatus Theologico-Politicus. Pulpit's reconstruction of David's thoughts at v. 36 (“we may feel sure”) is that commentator's inference, not the narrative's statement, and is marked as such in the editorial note.
What we do not know. The compass direction of אַחֲרָיו; the location of the watchman's station, and therefore which mountain is meant (K&D: “the position of the spy is not given”); whether “his son” in v. 37 is Amnon or Absalom (Ellicott, Cambridge and Gill say Amnon; Benson allows either); and what v. 39 says. Tamar's fate after 13:20 is not mentioned in this unit at all, and we have not supplied it.
Thread bases. Every Hebrew↔Hebrew badge above cites the Verifier's computed shared lexemes with canonical frequency. The Jeremiah 35 candidate scored on a rare lexeme (H3122, 6 verses) and has been deliberately downgraded to “flagged — verify source,” because the shared name belongs to two different men. The Hebrews thread is cross-Testament and therefore cannot carry a verbal tier at all; its basis is a shared legal institution named by JFB at Numbers 35:21, not a lexical overlap.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)