Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 24:14

After whom is the king of Israel come out? after whom dost thou pursue? after a dead dog, after a flea.

14. after a dead dog, &c.] “A dead dog, a single flea,” express what is absolutely contemptible, harmless, and insignificant. A worthy object truly for an expedition of the King of Israel with his picked troops!

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

After whom … – i. e., was it consistent with the dignity of the king of Israel to lead armies in pursuit of a weak and helpless individual like David?

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 14. After a dead dog] A term used among the Hebrews to signify the most sovereign contempt; see 2Sa 16:9. One utterly incapable of making the least resistance against Saul, and the troops of Israel. The same idea is expressed in the term flea. The Targum properly expresses both thus: one who is weak, one who is contemptible.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

After a worthless, contemptible, and impotent person, such as I am. Thou disparagest thyself in contending with such a person; and even thy conquest of me will be inglorious and shameful.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

After whom is the king of Israel come out?…. From his court and palace, with an army of men, and at the head of them:

after whom dost thou pursue? with such eagerness and fury:

after a dead dog; as David was in the opinion, and according to the representation of his enemies, a dog, vile, mean, worthless, of no account; a dead dog, whose name was made to stink through the calumnies cast upon him; and if a dead dog, then as he was an useless person, and could do no good, so neither could he do any hurt, not so much as bark, much less bite; and therefore it was unworthy of so great a prince, a lessening, a degrading of himself, as well as a vain and impertinent thing, to pursue after such an one, that was not worthy of his notice, and could do him neither good nor harm:

after a flea? a little contemptible animal, not easily caught, as it is observed by some, and when caught good for nothing. David, by this simile, fitly represents not only his weakness and impotence, his being worthless, and of no account, and beneath the notice of such a prince as Saul; but the circumstances he was in, being obliged to move from place to place, as a flea leaps from one place to another, and is not easily taken, and when it is, of no worth and value; signifying, that as it was not worth his pains to seek after him, so it would be to no purpose, he should not be able to take him.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

And even if he should wish to attack the king, he did not possess the power. This thought introduces 1Sa 24:14: “ After whom is the king of Israel gone out? After whom dost thou pursue? A dead dog, a single flea.” By these similes David meant to describe himself as a perfectly harmless and insignificant man, of whom Saul had no occasion to be afraid, and whom the king of Israel ought to think it beneath his dignity to pursue. A dead dog cannot bite or hurt, and is an object about which a king ought not to trouble himself (cf. 2Sa 9:8 and 2Sa 16:9, where the idea of something contemptible is included). The point of comparison with a flea is the insignificance of such an animal (cf. 1Sa 26:20).

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

(14) After a dead dog, after a flea.These homely but vivid similes are very common in Oriental discourse. David certainly, in his protestations of loyalty, could scarcely humble himself more than by drawing a comparison between the king of Israel in his grandeur and power and a poor dead dogevidently an object held in special loathing by the Hebrews. After a fleathe original is even stronger, after one flea (a single flea)against a single flea, which is not easily caught, and easily escapes, and if it is caught, is poor game for a royal hunter.Berl. Bible and Lange.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

14. After a dead dog, after a flea A term of contempt and a term of insignificance. By these terms David represents himself as one so contemptible and insignificant that it was beneath the dignity of Israel’s royal monarch to pursue him.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Sa 24:14. After a dead dog? after a flea? A dog was an object of the greatest contempt. The reason why this secondary idea was always associated with the name of this animal in the mind of a Jew, may be deduced from the Mosaic law, which was intended not only to preserve the idea of the unity of thy Deity, but as an invincible barrier to keep the Israelites separate from other nations, by opposing, as well as imitating, under certain corrections, their ritual ceremonies. The dog being the hieroglyphick of the chief deity among the Egyptians, the treating this symbol with contempt, and propagating the term with such an associated idea to the latest posterity, was, in the course of nature, the most efficacious means to preserve the Israelites from adopting that species of idolatry; and when we recollect that Egyptian superstition was peculiarly affected by the Israelites, we cannot sufficiently admire the depth of the riches of the divine mercy and wisdom. The sense of this passage then is, “Dost thou pursue one of the weakest and meanest of thy subjects, and of no more signification and strength, in comparison of the king at the head of his chosen troops, than a dead dog, or a single flea?” And this was justly said; for Saul had now three thousand chosen men with him, and all the forces of Israel at his command; and David had at most but six hundred.

REFLECTIONS.Saul, in the heat of the day, fatigued probably with the toil of mounting the craggy steeps, retires into the cave to cover his feet, wrapping himself up in his garments, for a little repose. When his nap is over, unsuspicious of what has passed, he arises and departs; David quickly follows him, and ere he was gone far, cries after him with the most honorable title, My lord the king; and bows before him with the deepest respect. Greatly surprised at the voice, no doubt, he turns; and is more surprised at the person, but most at the discourse which was addressed to him by his pious son and loyal subject.

1. He wisely and politely lays the blame of Saul’s conduct on his courtiers rather than himself; and many such as Doeg, no doubt, there were, who envied David’s preferment. The courts of princes abound with sycophants: it is difficult for them to see with their own eyes; and the best friends of their country, represented through this medium, are often made to appear, and are treated, as her sworn enemies.
2. He produces the strongest evidence of his innocence in that day’s occurrence: so far from seeking Saul’s life, when urged to slay him while lying at his mercy, the skirt he held up proclaimed how tender he was of his life; he reverenced him as God’s anointed, he respected him as his king; and he adds the endearing name of father, both as a reason for rejecting so wicked a proposal, and to awaken the tenderness of a father’s bowels towards a son so dutiful, and a servant so faithful. Note; No provocation can justify regicide.

3. He solemnly protests, that it never was his intention, and never would be his desire, to avenge himself: he referred the matter wholly to God; and observes, according to an ancient proverb, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked; as a man’s heart is, so are his actions: had he harboured any ill design, it must then have undoubtedly appeared; therefore Saul might be assured of his innocence and loyalty. Note; (1.) As the saying is, conveys many a good admonition; the words of the wise deserve to be long remembered, and often quoted. (2.) The only safe conclusion of a man’s temper is certainly from his actions: an evil tree beareth not good fruit.

4. He expostulates with him, not only how unbecoming it was in a good man to pursue the innocent, but how unbecoming of a great king to persecute one so much his inferior, a shepherd, an exile, leaping as a flea from hill to hill for safety; and as worthless and unable to make resistance as a dead dog. Note; Yielding pacifies wrath: to humble ourselves before others, is the best way to keep them from trampling upon us, if they have any nobleness of spirit remaining.

Lastly, he rests his cause in the hands of the great Judge and avenger, and trusts that he will plead for him now, and stand by him, if the king still refuses to be convinced by such undeniable evidence of his innocency. Note; It is the comfort of the oppressed, that they have a tribunal to appeal to, where justice shall be done them. The last day at least will be our vindication from every malignant accusation.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

1Sa 24:14 After whom is the king of Israel come out? after whom dost thou pursue? after a dead dog, after a flea.

Ver. 14. After a dead dog, after a flea. ] Egregiam vero laudem, a great praise, a great purchase sure, to kill a dead dog, to fight with a flea! Is this an employment fit for a king? an exploit worthy of such an army? a Caligula took his army to the ocean, as if he would have passed over into Brittany, and done great matters there: but he only caused his soldiers to pick up cockle shells that lay on the shore, and so returned to Rome: Magnifie glorians quasi oceano subacto. Ridiculum caput! b Domitian spent his time in catching flies: and Artaxerxes in making knife handles. Was this handsome? Aquila non captat muscas, as saith the proverb of the ancients.

a Facis quod est tanto rege indignum, dum me tenuissimum, infimum, et infirmissimum tanto comitatu persequeris. – Jun.

b Dio, in Calig.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)