In a recent post on Saul, the first king of Israel, Tyler F. Williams wrote:
When we turn to the book of Chronicles, Saul’s fate is even worse! All that is left of Saul’s two year reign is a couple geneological [sic] notes (1Chron 8:33; 9:39) and a short chapter detailing his death on Mount Gilboa (1Chron 10:1-14).
The statement that Saul reigned only two years in Israel finds no support in the biblical text. It is true that a proper regnal formula is missing in 1 Samuel 13:1. The reason for this is because the numbers in the Hebrew text of 1 Samuel 13:1 are missing.
The New Revised Standard Version recognizes the problem of the missing numbers by leaving blank spaces. This is how the NRSV translates 1 Samuel 13:1:
“Saul was . . . years old when he began to reign; and he reigned . . . and two years over Israel.”
Over the years, biblical translators have made several attempts at guessing how old Saul was when he became king of Israel and how long his reigned lasted. Here are a few examples:
The New International Version (NIV) translates 1 Samuel 13:1 as follows:
“Saul was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel forty-two years.”
The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) translates 1 Samuel 13:1 as follows:
“Saul was 30 years old when he became king, and he reigned 42 years over Israel.”
The New English Translation (NET) translates as follows:
“Saul was thirty years old when he began to reign; he ruled over Israel for forty years.”
The New American Standard Bible (NAB) translates as follows:
“Saul was forty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned thirty-two years over Israel.”
The New English Bible (NEB) translates as follows:
“Saul was fifty years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel for twenty-two years.”
The TNK translates as follows:
“Saul was . . . years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel two years.”
The Modern Reader’s Bible, a translation done by Richard G. Moulton translates as follows:
“Saul was thirty years old when he began to reign and he reigned two years over Israel.”
The Douay-Rheims Bible (1899 American Edition) translates as follows:
“Saul was a child of one year when he began to reign, and he reigned two years over Israel.”
The American Standard Version (ASV) translates as follows:
“Saul was forty years old when he began to reign; and when he had reigned two years over Israel . . . ”
The King James Version (KJV) translates as follows:
“Saul reigned one year; and when he had reigned two years over Israel . . . .”
In the New Testament, Acts 13:21 says that Saul reigned forty-years over Israel.
These translations reveal several factors:
1. No one knows how old Saul was when he began to reign in Israel because the text does not give his age when he ascended the throne.
2. Although the text does not say how long Saul reigned, the total years of his reign was a number that ended in two since the number missing in the Hebrew text ends in two.
3. The idea that Saul’s reign lasted forty-two years is based on a harmonization of the forty-years mentioned in Acts 13:21 with the number two that appears at the end of 1 Samuel 13:1.
A better explanation for the length of Saul’s reign is found in John Tullock’s book, The Old Testament Story, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1981), p.123. Tullock wrote:
The length of Saul’s reign is uncertain since a number is missing in the Hebrew text, which simply says, ‘he reigned . . . and two years’ (13:1). Most scholars would say he ruled about twenty-two years. If one takes the biblical evidence, twelve years might be more logical. The ark was captured by the Philistines some time before Saul began to reign. According to 1 Samuel 7:2, it was kept in Kiriath-jearim ‘some twenty years.’ It was taken to Jerusalem in the early part of David’s reign (2 Sam. 6:1-15), but David reigned for over seven years at Hebron before Jerusalem was captured (2 Sam. 5:5). If this twenty years is to be taken literally or even as meaning around twenty years, it would seem to limit Saul’s reign to no more than twelve years.
Readers who only use one translation of the Bible will struggle to know the truth about Saul’s reign. For instance, take the translation proposed by the KJV: “Saul reigned one year; and when he had reigned two years over Israel.” People reading the KJV may believe that what follows in 13:2 happened two years after Saul became king. Translations such as the NIV and the others listed above try to harmonize the Book of Acts with the text in Samuel by saying that Saul was king for forty-two years, when the length of his reign probably was much shorter.
Thus, although no one knows how old Saul was when he became king of Israel, it is possible to know how long he reigned as king. However, it was not forty-two years, nor forty years (the reference in the New Testament notwithstanding), nor thirty-two years, nor twenty-two years, and not even two as Tyler proposed. I believe that the twelve years proposed by Tullock better fits the events narrated in 1 Samuel.
For a longer study of the problem of Saul’s reign, read my post, Rereading 1 Samuel 13:1.
NOTE: For other studies on Saul, read my post Saul, King of Israel.
Emeritus Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
VISIT MY AMAZON AUTHOR’S PAGE
BUY MY BOOKS ON AMAZON (Click here).
NOTE: Did you like this post? Do you think other people would like to read this post? Be sure to share this post on Facebook and share a link on Twitter or Tumblr so that others may enjoy reading it too!
I would love to hear from you! Let me know what you thought of this post by leaving a comment below. Be sure to like my page on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, follow me on Tumblr, Facebook, and subscribe to my blog to receive each post by email.
If you are looking for other series of studies on the Old Testament, visit the Archive section and you will find many studies that deal with a variety of topics.
Hey Claude,Good catch… my mistake!
Tyler, you were right after all. Remember there is the possibility of a leap year and that is an extra month, not just an extra day. I checked with the local Rabbi and using the Hebrew, he showed me Saul was only king for about 2 years. Never use a translation over the original.
I am sorry to disappoint you but you comment here is not correct. The possibility of a leap year and an extra month is just that, a possibility. There is no biblical evidence for this theory. My post is based on the original Hebrew text. The Hebrew text literally says: “Saul was one year old when he began to reign and he reigned over Israel two years.” This is what the Hebrew text says.
Two things: First, I doubt that Saul was one year old when he became a king. This is just impossible. Second, if you read the book of 1 Samuel, the historical fact in the book clearly shows that Saul reigned more than two years. Your intent is good, but your argument is wrong.
I am glad that you enjoyed reading my post. I invite you to develop a deeper appreciation for the Old Testament by subscribing to my blog. By subscribing to my blog you will receive all my future posts whenever they are published.
I did not set out to catch a mistake. I thought your position was that Saul had reigned only two years. However, your post inspired me to reflect on the issue of Saul's reign.I hope you were not offended by my post.
>Firstly, I'd like to say thank you for this tread post. Professor Mariottini, if you don't mind, I need some clarity on the quote from Tullock. I'm not sure how his desciption leaves a 12 year reign for Saul. Let me explain:Just for the example sake let's say David began his reign in Judah in year 100. If David didn't bring the Ark back into Jerusalem until 7 years into his reign, when he conquered it, that would place the year in 107. If we minus the approx. 20 years the Ark was in Kiriath-Jearim it brings us back to year 87. Then recognizing the 7 months the philistines had the Ark and the carry over 6 months of David before he took Jerusalem, we subtract 1 more year, bringing us to year 86. Subtracting 86 from 107 gives us a 21 year window. Not a 12 year window. Please explain. Ultimately, in my studies right my goal is to determine how long the Ark was displaced from Jerusalem before David brought it back. Thank again for posting this thread.Joshua
Thank you for visiting my blog and for your comment.The problem with your reasoning is that you are doing your math backward and that does not work.If you read 1 Samuel 7:2, it says that the Ark was taken to Kiriath-jearim in the days of Samuel, before Saul became king and stayed there 20 years. So, these 20 years must include a few years before Saul became a king, all the reign of Saul, and the seven and a half years of David's reign.So, do the math again and you will see that your calculation was incorrect.
So if Saul reigned 12 years, why does the New Testament say he reigned 40 years?
The Old Testament never says how long Saul reigned. The number mentioned in the New Testament comes from Jewish tradition. The Jewish historian Josephus is the only one who says that Saul reigned for 40 years.If you follow the narrative of 1 Samuel and do the calculations, you will see that 12 years make better sense for the length of Saul's reign.
I had just finished talking to my mother about this exact passage (1 Samuel 7:2), Dr. Mariottini. I came across your post in search for why it says what it does in Acts 13:21. Thank you for letting us know that the reason why it mentions the space of 40 years is because it came from Jewish tradition. I also wanted to add that in 2 Samuel 5: 4-5 it says the following: 4David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned forty years. 5At Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years over all Israel and Judah. This then makes sense that Saul would tell him in 1 Samuel 17:33 what he did, ‘Then Saul said to David, “You are not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him; for you are but a youth while he has been a warrior from his youth.”’ If at this point David is a youth let’s say 15-16 years of age then he waits 14-15 years until he begins to reign. Then, by that point the ark has been in Kiriath-Jearim for about 5 years which when we read all the Scripture with ages and years that are actually written out in the original text we see that it doesn’t add up to more than 20 years of Saul reigning as king. The number of how long he did reign I still am uncertain of because of the original text of 1 Samuel 13:1 Reading “בֶּן” or “son of” as the first word found in the original text…Anyway, this is a bit more clearer to me that it was not as long as 40, 30, or even 20. Thank you for this write up! God keep giving you wisdom and insight through HIs Holy Scriptures and Spirit.
Thank you for your nice words and thank you for visiting my blog.
In my blog I try to deal with passages such as this one because people have questions and sometimes it is difficult to find good answers to these problems in the Bible. I encourage you to read my book because there I deal with many other similar passages in the Old Testament. You can find a link to my book in the blog.
Thank you for your comment.
It does make sense especially if we accept that David entered the royal court as a teenager maybe around 17-19 and did not become king in Israel until he was 30. Sauls reign could therefore be guessed to be between 11 – 15 years
That is the best explanation for what we find in the biblical text. All others possible suggestions are difficult to fit with the events in the book of Samuel.
I am aghast at the human reasoning here.
2 Timothy 3:16
ALL scripture is given by inspiration (God breathed- meaning the words are inspired, not the writters; they were move by the Holy Ghost: 2 Peter 1:21) of God, and is profitable…”
To say the 40 years Paul gave in acts was simply from tradition is to say 2 Timothy 3:16 is wrong.
The New Testament is the Old Testament revealed. We have been given many areas of clarification in the New Testament ( I.e. heaven, hell, after death, the allegory of Abraham and Sarah, etc…)
In Acts 13, Paul was preaching, and used the word “about”, meaning not exactly! Remember, Samuel was a judge as well, so his time is included in the ABOUT 450 years.
Do you really believe God would have allowed a number 30 years off to be recorded?
If so, we have no assurance anything in the Bible is accurate, and Christians are wasting their time!
Beginning in the Garden of Eden, Satan has always attacked the Word of God.
The Bible is the inspired word of God and 2 Timothy is not wrong. But the fact remains that 1 Samuel 13:1 is problematic. Just see what the Bible say. When Paul mentioned how long Saul reigned, he did not use the word “about.” On the contrary, Paul was very specific: “God gave them Saul son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, who reigned for forty years” (Act 13:21). Paul did not say that Saul reigned “about forty years.” Paul said that Saul reigned “forty years.”
But now, see what the Bible says. 1 Samuel 13: 1 literally says: “Saul was one year old when he began to reign.” Right here, 1 Samuel 13:1 contradicts 2 Timothy 3:16. Saul could not have been one year old when he became a king. Even though 1 Samuel 13:1 and 2 Timothy 3:6 don’t agree, the Bible is still the inspired word of God and 2 Timothy is still true.
The facts I presented in my post reflects the history behind the text. Maybe you need to take some time and do a careful study the history behind the passages I present in my post. I am sure you will come to the same conclusion I did and when you do, you will still affirm that the Bible is the inspired word of God, just as I did and as I still do.
According to most of these accounts Saul was 72 when he died or there abouts.
The Bible never says how old Saul was when he died. Those who say he was 72 years old when he died are just guessing.
If we want to make the events line up with the whole book of Samuel, wouldn’t 30ish years be more accurate? When Saul became king, he was a young man who still lived in his father’s house, meaning by custom he was most likely unmarried and with no children. Yet, at the end of his kingship, he is married with multiple children that are around David’s age. Logically, he must have married and had children after becoming king. Therefore, mathematically he would have to have been king for approximately 30 years since that was David’s age when he ascended to the throne. Correct?
Your proposal makes sense and it could be possible that Saul reigned 30 years. Your proposal is one of the many that have been suggested. However, since in ancient Israel children lived together with their parents, I believe the solution I offer seems to agree with the biblical texts. As for sons living with their parents, take the case of Jacob: all his sons lived with Jacob and his sons had children of their own. Jacob had 12 sons but 70 people went to Egypt with him.
Good nice one
Thank you for your comment and thank you for visiting my blog.
Is 2 Kings 3:1, which says that Jehoram “reigned for twelve years,” grammatically equivalent to 1 Samuel 13:1, save for the missing number in the latter? Since there was a “Jewish tradition” that Saul reigned for 40 years, why does the LXX omit this verse? Was there no Vorlage of the MT upon which the LXX and author of Acts 13 could obtain the length of Saul’s reign?
The problem is not 2 Kings 3:1; it is 1 Samuel 13:1. The reading of 1 Samuel 13:1 makes no sense the way it is written in the Hebrew Bible. This is the reason the LXX omits this verse. There is no MT text that says that Saul reigned 40 years. The number in Acts probably refers to one generation. I believe the proposal that I make in the post is the best answer and it is in accordance with the biblical text.
After reading all the comments i can onky conclude that all is based on assumptions and speculations. Simply because the scriptures was rewritten by men who made mistakes in doing so and some manuscripts were damaged over time causing those who were rewriting them to insert assumed words and numbers to replace the missing.
Thank you for your comment. You completely misunderstood the content of what I wrote. In the original Hebrew manuscript the number is missing. The translators of the text, using some historical evidence, added the numbers to their translations in order to make sense of the text to the readers. The fact is, no one knows for sure how long Saul reined.
And thats just what I am saying Claude. We dont know, however I do enjoy such conversations because it helps me to search the scriptures more closely.
I also enjoy and welcome conversation. Thank you for visiting my blog.
My daugher is doing a project and she needs to list something for when Saul reigned. What should she put?
I apologize for not answering your comment in a timely manner. I have been away on a writing project and have not posted for a while. No one is sure how long Saul reigned. The solution is to say that scholars differ on the length of Saul’s reign. I hope your daughter had good marks on her project.
Tried this post here: https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/463971/jewish/Saul-First-King-of-Israel.htm#comments
Bible Chronologist Eugene Faulstich has 2970 AM and 2983 for the anointing of King David. http://biblechronologybooks.com/scientificmethod.html
How long does Chabad say Saul reigned?
Googled “Saul reigned for how many years” and found this:
“The length of Saul’s reign is uncertain since a number is missing in the Hebrew text, which simply says, ‘he reigned . . . and two years’ (13:1). Most scholars would say he ruled about twenty-two years. If one takes the biblical evidence, twelve years might be more logical. The ark was captured by the Philistines some time before Saul began to reign. According to 1 Samuel 7:2, it was kept in Kiriath-jearim ‘some twenty years.’ It was taken to Jerusalem in the early part of David’s reign (2 Sam. 6:1-15), but David reigned for over seven years at Hebron before Jerusalem was captured (2 Sam. 5:5). If this twenty years is to be taken literally or even as meaning around twenty years, it would seem to limit Saul’s reign to no more than twelve years.” Dr. Claude Mariottini – Professor of Old TestamentBlog
When taking the biblical evidence, the twelve years seems to be correct.
“Ben — shanah Shaul b’mal’kho, —ush’tei— shanim malakh al Yisrael.”
Saul was [missing] years when he began to reign, and two [and missing] years he reigned over Israel.
The use of the form “sh’tei” is almost a smoking gun for textual corruption. The proper form for two years is “sh’nataim” (1 Kings 16:8) or “sh’taim shanim” (2 Kings 21:19) — “ush’tei” suggests “ush’teim esreh” (“and 12”) or else misvoweled “[v’xxx] ush’taim” (“and xxxty and 2”).
Not even the Dead Sea Scrolls can help us out here, the extant scrolls of 1 Samuel seem to be missing the relevant chapter. Jerome, the early church’s master of three languages, never found Hebrew manuscripts that filled the blanks in, and so his Vulgate translation reads “Filius unius anni erat Saul cum regnare coepisset, duobus autem annis regnavit super Israel.”
Incidentally this lack of any textual evidence to the contrary is why at least one Catholic commentator (Richard Challoner) instead explains the anomalous years given as Saul being as innocent as a 1 year old boy, and remaining in that state for two years before his fall from grace, the same explanation as in the Targum Jonathan.
Origen’s Hexapla, a six-column interlinear that compared a Hebrew text known to him with a Greek phonetic transcription and four different Greek translations, allegedly has Saul being 30 years old in one of the Greek translations.
Thank you for your comment. The missing numbers in the Hebrew text has served as a justification for a lot of guesses about Saul’s age when he became a king and how long he reined. In my opinion, the proposal I offered in my essay seems to be a good solution.
Thank you for reading and commenting on the post.
Claude F. Mariottini
Also tried this post yesterday which includes Saul’s anointing year: ” “2970 AM
Eugene Faulstich, Bible chronologist, in Science & G-d in Balance, shows pattern of 990 years related to birth of son Isaac. Abraham 99 when rec’d Covenant of Circumcision. In Land 10 yrs when rec’d Covenant of Parts. 99X10=990
Hypotenuse right triangle whose base & height is 70=99.
Start yr 0. 70 yr exile. Total of added #s=70 (Gene doesn’t address, but 70=David’s life and deficiency of Adam’s life from 1000 or 930.70+990=1060-930 Adam’s death-130 Seth’s birth=0
1060+990=2050 Isaac born 2+5=7
2050+990=3040 Solomon’s Temple 1 K 8.17-19 3+4=7
3040+990=4030 Loss of Hewn Stones Gen 49.1,10 4+3=7
4030+990=5020+930 Adam’s end=5950 Law of Return, 5+2=7
5020+990=6010-70 Babylon=5940 Holocaust 6+1=7
6010+990=7000-4030 Loss Hall Hewn Stones=2970 Year Saul made king. 7+0=7
7000+990=7990-2050 Isaac birth=5940 Holocaust
7990+70=8060 Hall Hewn Stones lost 4030X2.
Patterns symmetrical. Whatever we do as we regress downward, must do as progress upward. Working G-d in history Israel.
Thank you for this information.
I read Faulstich a long time ago. You should be careful on depending too much on his work.