- 133-
(^12) This in all probability is the correct rendering.
(^13) That Eli was a descendant of Ithamar, not of Eleazar, appears from 1 Chronicles
24:1, Abimelech being the great-great-grandson of Eli. Ewald, suggests that Eli
was the first high-priest of that branch of the family of Aaron, and that he was
invested with the office of high-priest in consequence of his position as judge.
Other writers have offered different explanations of the transference of the
priesthood to the line of Ithamar (comp. Keil, Bibl. Comm. 2. 2, pp. 30, 31). But
the Scriptural narrative affords no data on the subject. It gives not the personal
history of Eli, nor even that of the house of Aaron, but of the kingdom of God.
(^14) Ver. 13, literally rendered: "She was speaking to her heart."
(^15) Ver. 18, literally: "And her face was the same face no more to her."
(^16) This we infer from the addition, "and his vow," in ver. 21.
(^17) The period of suckling was supposed to last three years (2 Maccabees 7:27). A
Hebrew child at that age would be fit for some ministry, even though the care of
him might partially devolve on one of the women who served at the door of the
tabernacle.
(^18) This literal rendering will sufficiently bring out the beautiful meaning of her
words. It is difficult to understand how our Authorised Version came to translate
"lent."
(^19) They had brought with them three bullocks - two for the usual burnt and thank-
offerings, and the third as a burnt sacrifice at the formal dedication of Samuel. The
meat-offering for each would have been at least 3/10 of an ephah of flour
(Numbers 15:8).
(^20) Possibly it would be more accurate here to translate, "deliverance."
(^21) In the original, "knowledge" is in the plural; I have rendered this by "all
knowledge."
(^22) Many interpreters understand this not of man's but of God's deeds, as meaning
that God's doings were fixed and determined. But this seems very constrained. I
would almost feel inclined to discard the Masoretic correction of our Hebrew text,
(^)