5 12. Saul’s life again in David’s power<\/p>\n
5<\/strong>. in the trench<\/em> ] See on 1Sa 17:20<\/span>. The Sept. rendering “in a chariot” is a mistake.<\/p>\n Verse 5<\/span>. David arose<\/B><\/I>] As David and his men knew the country, they had many advantages over Saul and his men; and no doubt could often watch them without being discovered.<\/P> <\/P> Saul lay in the trench<\/B><\/I>] The word bammaegal<\/I>, which we translate in the trench<\/I>, and in the margin in the midst of his<\/I> carriages<\/I>, is rendered by some in a ring of carriages<\/I>, and by others in the circle<\/I>, i.e., which was formed by his troops. Luther himself translates it wagenburg<\/I>, a fortress<\/I> formed of wagons<\/I> or carriages<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> As agal<\/I> signifies any thing round<\/I>, it may here refer to a round pavilion<\/I> or tent<\/I> made for Saul, or else to the form<\/I> of his camp<\/I>. The Arabs, to the present day, always form a circle<\/I> in their encampments, and put their principal officers in the centre.<\/P> <\/p>\n Came to the place where Saul had pitched; <\/B>came near to the skirts of Sauls camp; which he might easily discover from some neighboring hill or wood, and yet not be discerned himself. And it is probable he came thither disguised, and towards night. <\/P> Saul lay in the trench, <\/B>encompassed with his carriages for better security. Compare 1Sa 17:20<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n 5. Saul lay in the trench, and thepeople pitched round about him<\/B>Among the nomad people of theEast, the encampments are usually made in a circular form. Thecircumference is lined by the baggage and the men, while the chief’sstation is in the center, whether he occupy a tent or not. His spear,stuck in the ground, indicates his position. Similar was thedisposition of Saul’s campin this hasty expedition he seems tohave carried no tent, but to have slept on the ground. The wholetroop was sunk in sleep around him.<\/P><\/p>\n And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched<\/strong>,…. Came near it, within sight of it; so that he could take a view of it with his naked eye, and observe where and in what manner he was encamped:<\/p>\n and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner<\/strong>,<\/p>\n the captain of his host<\/strong>; where he and his general had their quarters in the camp:<\/p>\n and Saul lay in the trench<\/strong>; or circuit; not in the foss or ditch thrown up, in which an army sometimes lies entrenched; but this is to be understood either of the camp itself, so called, as Ben Gersom, Abarbinel, and Ben Melech think, because it lay in a circular form, that all comers to it on every side might be seen; or else a sort of fortress all around the camp, made of carriages joined together; and as the word signifies a carriage, cart or chariot, it may design the chariot in which Saul slept, as kings have been used to do when not in their houses; and to this the Septuagint agrees, which uses a word that Procopius Gazaeus says signifies one kind of a chariot, and is used of a chariot drawn by mules, in the Greek version of Isa 66:20<\/span>; Grotius observes, kings used to sleep in chariots where there were no houses;<\/p>\n [See comments on 1Sa 17:20]<\/span>; though he rather seems to have slept, “sub die”, in the open air:<\/p>\n and the people pitched round about him<\/strong>; both for the sake of honour, and for his greater security; this shows it could not be the loss he laid in, for then they could not pitch around him.<\/p>\n (5) And David arose.<\/strong>Immediately after the scouts informed him of the purpose of Saul, and of the near proximity of the royal army David seems to have resolved upon that night adventure which resulted in the episode told in this twenty-sixth chapter.<\/p>\n In the trench.<\/strong>The English Version (Margin) has, in the midst of his carriages; Keil renders, by the wagon rampart; The LXX. translate the Hebrew word by covered chariots. The meaning is, no doubt, that the king lay down within the barricade or rampart formed by the baggage wagons.<\/p>\n 5<\/strong>. <\/strong> David arose <\/strong> Probably just after dark. <\/p>\n Beheld the place where Saul lay <\/strong> David was not content with the report of his men; he wished to survey the situation with his own eyes. <\/p>\n The trench <\/strong> The wagon rampart. See note on 1Sa 17:20<\/span>.<\/p>\n David Pays A Secret Visit To Saul And Enters His Camp ( 1Sa 26:5-7<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> ). <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n David then took two of his best men with him and went to an eminence from which he could observe Saul’s camp, and from there he saw the lay out of the camp, and the place where Saul and Abner slept among the wagons. Then that night, taking one of his men, he evaded the guards and entered the camp, making his way stealthily towards the spot where Saul lay asleep, alongside Abner, his commander-in-chief. Stuck in the ground at Saul’s head was his ceremonial spear, the symbol of his kingship. The situation was totally different from the previous time when they had fled from Saul and been hiding in a cave, with Saul coming into their power by ‘accident’. Here David was in control, and Saul came into his power by design. <\/p>\n Analysis. <\/p>\n a <\/strong> And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had encamped, and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host, and Saul lay within the place of the wagons, and the people were encamped round about him (1Sa 26:5<\/span>). <\/p>\n b <\/strong> Then answered David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, saying, “Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp?” And Abishai said, “I will go down with you” (1Sa 26:6<\/span>). <\/p>\n a <\/strong> So David and Abishai came to the people by night, and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the place of the wagons, with his spear stuck in the ground at his head, and Abner and the people lay round about him (1Sa 26:7<\/span>). <\/p>\n Note that in ‘a’ Saul was sleeping, along with Abner, among the wagons, with his people around him, and in the parallel he is described as being the same. Central in ‘b’ is David’s decision to enter the enemy camp. Note how the distinctive features of this venture are being accentuated by the use of small chiasmuses. This is the first stage, entry into the enemy camp. <\/p>\n 1Sa 26:5<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n ‘<\/strong> And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had encamped, and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host, and Saul lay within the place of the wagons, and the people were encamped round about him.’ <\/p>\n Leaving his troops in hiding, David, more confident now than he had been when Saul had previously hunted for them, took two of his best men, Ahimelech the Hittite and Abishai, the son of Zeruiah (and therefore Joab’s brother), and led them to an eminence from which he could observe what was happening in Saul’s camp. From there he observed the lay out of the camp and exactly where Saul and Abner had their sleeping quarters. This was among the supply wagons, which were parked in the centre of the sleeping army. <\/p>\n 1Sa 26:6<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n ‘<\/strong> Then answered David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, saying, “Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp?” And Abishai said, “I will go down with you.” ’ <\/p>\n There seems little doubt that Saul and Abner were so confident that David and his men would be fleeing from before them as they had before, that they took few, if any, extra precautions, being quite certain that they would be undisturbed. No doubt sentries were posted, but they felt able to sleep soundly, confident in the security of their camp. After all, who was there to bother them? <\/p>\n This situation was too tempting for a now more confident David. And determining to leave one of his men on watch, so that if necessary he could report back anything that might happen to the others, he asked which of the two men would like to join him on a visit by night to the enemy camp. It would obviously be a risky business but Abishai immediately responded and volunteered. <\/p>\n Ahimelech the Hittite was probably a Hittite native to Canaan, for groups of Hittites (sons of Heth) had been resident in Canaan since before the time of Abraham in this very region (Genesis 23<\/span>). His familiarity with the region from birth may well have been why he was one of the party. Abishai was one of David’s mighty men. His mother Zeruiah was David’s sister. He was bother to Joab who would later become David’s commander-in-chief. He was not one of the first ‘Three’, but was head of the second ‘Three’ (2Sa 23:18-19<\/span>). He may well have been seen as especially skilled at nocturnal adventures. He would later save David’s life during a battle with the Philistines (2Sa 21:17<\/span>), and was one of the three who spectacularly brought water to David when he was thirsty (2Sa 23:17<\/span>). He was thus a skilled warrior and a daredevil. <\/p>\n 1Sa 26:7<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n ‘<\/strong> So David and Abishai came to the people by night, and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the place of the wagons, with his spear stuck in the ground at his head, and Abner and the people lay round about him.’ <\/p>\n The two then made their way into the enemy camp by night, successfully evaded the sentries, and making their way through the hillside camp, came to the spot where Saul was lying among the wagons with his ceremonial spear stuck in the ground at his head. It marked the spot where the king lay so that all the troops would know who lay there. It was the symbol of his authority and presence, just as royal standards would later indicate the same for later kings. Around him lay Abner, his commander-in-chief and cousin, no doubt with his other commanders, surrounded by the whole army. <\/p>\n (David and Abishai would know that hillside like the back of their hands, having been encamped there a number of times. They would thus know all its routes, even in the dark. And once past the sentries there was no reason why anyone should suspect two armed men walking through the encampment. No one was expecting anyone to attempt to enter the camp. There would only be danger for them when they came close up to those who knew them both well). <\/p>\n 1Sa 26:5<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>And Saul lay in the trench<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Within the trench, <\/em>Houbigant; which appears to be the true meaning of the original word. The Chaldee renders it the same. This entrenchment is generally thought to have consisted of chariots joined together; and therefore Le Clerc renders it, not improperly, intra ambitum plaustrorum. <\/em>The LXX with no great propriety read; in his chariot. <\/em>The author of the Observations <\/em>is of a different opinion from Houbigant. “One can hardly imagine,” says he, “that the Hebrew word mangal, <\/em>signifies a ditch and bank thrown up; as one would suppose our translators apprehended, from their using the word trench; <\/em>for it appears from the history, that no precautions were taken against David. Nor does it seem to mean a ring of carriages, <\/em>as it is supposed in the Margins of our Bibles, and as Buxtorf interprets the word; for, most probably, the parting of carriages was impracticable in that mountainous country. It seems then simply to mean the round which the troops formed, <\/em>in the midst of whom, as in the place of honour, Saul slept. The view which D’Arvieux gives us of a modern Arab camp, agrees perfectly well with this account of Saul; only supposing that, for the sake of expedition, they carried no tents with them: for he tells us, that, when the disposition of the ground will permit, an Arab camp is always round, the prince being in the middle, <\/em>and the Arabs about him, but so as to leave a respectful distance between them. Add to this, that their lances <\/em>are fixed <\/em>near them in the ground, all the day long, ready for action. When David is represented as sometimes secreting himself in the night, when he was with his armies, 2Sa 17:8-9<\/span> it is to be supposed to refer to his not lodging in the middle of the camp, which was a proper place for a king, the better to avoid any surprize from enemies.” Observations, <\/em>p. 347. See Hom. Iliad. ix. ver. 47. and Sil. Ital. lib. vii. ver. 291. <\/p>\n REFLECTIONS.<\/strong>Good impressions are quickly worn out, where the heart is not truly turned to God. <\/p>\n 1. Saul returns to the pursuit of David, still retaining the old rancour, and perhaps instigated by the Ziphites, who, from their former ill behaviour to David, might be apprehensive of suffering for it, should he ever come to the throne. Note; <\/em>(1.) One sin usually involves the soul in another, so connected is the chain of evil. (2.) A little instigation will revive an old grudge, where the reconciliation is not sincere. <\/p>\n 2. David gets information of Saul’s motions, and, as before, trusts not to his sword, but to concealment, for his safety. So unwilling was he, under every provocation, to appear in arms against his sovereign. <\/p>\n (5) And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched: and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host: and Saul lay in the trench, and the people pitched round about him. (6) Then answered David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, saying, Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp? And Abishai said, I will go down with thee. (7) So David and Abishai came to the people by night: and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the trench, and his spear stuck in the ground at his bolster: but Abner and the people lay round about him.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n This bold attempt probably was from some secret influence imparted to David’s mind. The sequel of the history of it proves, how sweet a lesson he gathered from it, and therefore it seems not improbable, that the Lord inclined his heart to the undertaking. Reader! it is very profitable at times to observe, how graciously the Lord leads on the minds of his people to do what they themselves would otherwise have never been competent to perform.<\/p>\n 1Sa 26:5 And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched: and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host: and Saul lay in the trench, and the people pitched round about him.<\/p>\n Ver. 5. And came to the place.<\/strong> ] He came privily, saith the Vulgate, and as some think, in a disguise; as Alexander once did into the camp of King Porus: but surely not without a divine instinct, like as Gideon went to the host of the Midianites. Jdg 7:9-11 <\/p>\n <\/p>\n And Saul lay in the trench.<\/strong> ] Or, In the midst of the carriages; in ambitu plaustrorum,<\/em> for safety’s sake; and in the midst of this people, which yet could not secure him. Henry IV, of France, was stabbed by a traitor in the midst of all his forces; so little trust is there to [be put in] men or means.<\/p>\n 1 Samuel<\/p>\n LOVE AND REMORSE<\/p>\n 1Sa 26:5 – 1Sa 26:12 <\/strong> ; 1Sa 26:21 – 1Sa 26:25 .<\/p>\n It is fashionable at present to regard this incident and the other instance of David’s sparing Saul, when in his power, as two versions of one event. But it if not improbable that the hunted outlaw should twice have taken refuge in the same place, or that his hiding-place should have been twice betrayed. He had but a small choice of safe retreats, and the Ziphites had motive for a second betrayal in the fact of the first, and of its failure to secure David’s capture. The whole cast of the two incidents is so different that it is impossible to see how the one could have been evolved from the other, and either they are both true, or they are both unhistorical, or, at best, are both the product of fancy working on, and arbitrarily filling up, a very meagre skeleton of fact. Many of the advocates of the identity of the incident at the bottom of the two accounts would accept the latter explanation; we take the former.<\/p>\n Saul had three thousand men with him; David had left his little troop ‘in the wilderness,’ and seems to have come with only his two companions, Ahimelech and his own nephew, Abishai, to reconnoitre. He sees, from some height, the camp, with the transport wagons making a kind of barricade in the centre-just as camps are still arranged in South Africa and elsewhere,-and Saul established therein as in a rude fortification. A bold thought flashes into his mind as he looks. Perhaps he remembered Gideon’s daring visit to the camp of Midian. He will go down, and not only into the camp, but ‘to Saul,’ through the ranks and over the barrier. What to do he does not say, but the two fierce fighters beside him think of only one thing as sufficient motive for such an adventure. Abishai volunteers to go with him; no doubt Ahimelech would have been ready also, but two were enough, and three would only have increased risk. So they lay close hid till night fell, and then stole down through the sleeping ranks with silent movements, like a couple of Indians on the war-trail, climbed the barricade, and stood at last where Saul lay, with his spear, as the emblem of kingship, stuck upright at his head, and a cruse of water for slaking thirst, if he awoke, beside him. Those who should have been his guards lay sleeping round him, for a ‘deep sleep from Jehovah was fallen upon them.’ What a vivid, strange picture it is, and how characteristic of the careless discipline of unscientific Eastern warfare!<\/p>\n The tigerish lust for blood awoke in Abishai. Whatever sad, pitying, half-tender thoughts stirred in David as he looked at the mighty form of Saul, with limbs relaxed in slumber, and perhaps some of the gloom and evil passions charmed out of his face, his nephew’s only thought was,’ What a fair mark! what an easy blow!’ He was brutally eager to strike once, and truculently sure that his arm would make sure that once would be enough. He was religious too, after a strange fierce fashion. God-significantly he does not say ‘Jehovah’; his religion was only the vague belief in a deity-had delivered Saul into David’s hands, and it would be a kind of sin not to kill him. How many bloody tragedies that same unnatural alliance of religion and murderous hate has varnished over! Very beautifully does David’s spirit contrast with this. Abishai represents the natural impulse of us all-to strike at our enemies when we can, to meet hate with hate, and do to another the evil that he would do to us.<\/p>\n David here, though he could be fierce and cruel enough sometimes, and had plenty of the devil in him, listens to his nobler self, which listens to God, and, at a time when everything tempted him to avenge himself, resists and overcomes. He is here a saint after the New Testament pattern. Abishai had, in effect, said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.’ David’s finely-tuned ear heard, long before they were spoken on earth, the great Christian words, 11 say unto you, Love your enemies; do good to them that hate you.’ He knew that Saul had been ‘rejected,’ but he was ‘Jehovah’s anointed,’ and the unction which had rested on that sleeping head lingered still. It was not for David to be the executor of God’s retribution. He left himself and his cause in Jehovah’s hands, and no doubt it was with sorrow and pitying love, not altogether quenched by Saul’s mad hate, that he foresaw that the life which he spared now was certain one day to be smitten. We may well learn the lesson of this story, and apply it to the small antagonisms and comparatively harmless enmities which may beset our more quiet lives. David in Saul’s ‘laager,’ Stephen outside the wall, alike lead up our thoughts to Jesus’ prayer,’ Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.’<\/p>\n The carrying off of the spear and the cruse was a couch of almost humour, and it, with the ironical taunt flung across the valley to Abner, gives relief to the strain of emotion in the story. Saul’s burst of passionate remorse is morbid, paroxysmal, like his fits of fury, and is sure to foam itself away. The man had no self-control. He had let wild, ungoverned moods master him, and was truly ‘possessed.’ One passion indulged had pushed him over the precipice into insanity, or something like it. Let us take care not to let any passion, emotion, or mood get the upper hand. ‘That way madness lies.’ ‘He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, without walls.’<\/p>\n And let us not confound remorse with repentance ‘The sorrow of the world worketh death.’ Saul grovelled in agony that day, but tomorrow he was raging again with more than the old frenzy of hate. Many a man says, ‘I have played the fool,’ and yet goes on playing it again when the paroxysm of remorse has stormed itself out. David’s answer was by no means effusive, for he had learned how little Saul’s regrets were to be trusted. He takes no notice of the honeyed words of invitation to return, and will not this time venture to take back the spear and cruse, as he had done, on the previous occasion, the skirt of Saul’s robe. He solemnly appeals to Jehovah’s righteous judgment to determine his and Saul’s respective ‘righteousness and faithfulness.’ He is silent as to what that judgment may have in reserve for Saul, but for himself he is calmly conscious that, in the matter of sparing Saul’s life, he has done right, and expects that God will deliver him ‘out of all tribulation.’ That is not self-righteous boasting, although it does not exactly smack of the Christian spirit; but it is faith clinging to the confidence that God is ‘not unrighteous to forget’ his servant’s obedience, and that the innocent will not always be the oppressor’s victim.<\/p>\n What a strange, bewildered, self-contradictory chaos of belief and intention is revealed in poor, miserable Saul’s parting words! He blesses the man whom he is hunting to slay. He knows that all his wild efforts to destroy him are foredoomed to failure, and that David ‘shall surely prevail’; and yet he cannot give up fighting against the inevitable,-that is, against God. How many of us are doing the very same thing-rushing on in a course of life which we know, when we are sane, to be dead against God’s will, and therefore doomed to utter collapse some day!<\/p>\n trench, or, barricade. <\/p>\n Abner: 1Sa 9:1, 1Sa 14:50, 1Sa 14:51, 1Sa 17:55, 2Sa 2:8-12, 2Sa 3:7, 2Sa 3:8, 2Sa 3:27, 2Sa 3:33-38, 1Ch 9:39 <\/p>\n trench: or, midst of his carriages, 1Sa 17:20, The word maugal never signifies a ditch or rampart, but a chariot or waggon way. Nor does it seem to denote a ring of carriages, as Buxtorf and others interpret the word; for it is not probable that Saul would encumber his army with baggage in so rapid a pursuit, nor that so mountainous a country was practicable for waggons. It appears simply to mean here, the circular encampment (from agal, “round”) which these troops formed, in the midst of which, as being the place of honour, Saul reposed. An Arab camp, D’Arvieux informs us, is always circular, when the disposition of the ground will permit, the prince being in the middle, and the troops at a respectful distance around him. Add to which, their lances are fixed near them in the ground all the day long, ready for action.<\/p>\n 1Sa 26:5. David came to the place where Saul had pitched Within sight of it; where he might observe how he lay. Saul lay in a trench Hebrews bammanggal, in the carriage, or rather, within the circle of the carriages, that he might be safe from any sudden attack.<\/p>\n And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched: and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host: and Saul lay in the trench, and the people pitched round about him. 5 12. Saul’s life again in David’s power 5. in the … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 26:5”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7922","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7922","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7922"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7922\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7922"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7922"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7922"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"