Analysis of 1 Samuel 13:1 Textual Variants and Chronological Implications

Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

Introduction to the Textual Issue

The text of 1 Samuel 13:1, as presented in the Updated American Standard Version (UASV), reads: “Saul was […] years old when he began to reign, and for […] he reigned over Israel.” The ellipses indicate lacunae—gaps in the text—reflecting a recognized corruption in the Masoretic Text (MT), the authoritative Hebrew manuscript tradition. The UASV footnote highlights the complexity of this verse, noting variants across ancient witnesses: the MT’s “a son of a year,” the Septuagint (LXX) with “thirty” in some manuscripts, the Syriac (SYR) with “twenty-one,” and the 1901 ASV’s conjectural “forty.” This analysis examines these variants, their historical and textual context, and their implications for Old Testament textual criticism, maintaining a high view of Scripture’s trustworthiness while addressing the challenges posed by this passage.

The Masoretic Text and Its Corruption

The MT of 1 Samuel 13:1 literally reads ben-šanah šā’ûl bəmolkô (“Saul was a son of a year when he began to reign”) and ûšətê šānîm mālak ‘al-yiśrā’ēl (“and two years he reigned over Israel”). The phrase “a son of a year” is nonsensical in context, implying Saul was one year old at his accession, which is impossible given his son Jonathan’s role as a military leader in 1 Samuel 13:2. The subsequent “two years” is also problematic, as Saul’s reign, based on biblical and historical data, likely spanned decades, not merely two years. Scholars widely agree that the MT here is corrupt, with numbers likely dropped or garbled during transmission.

This corruption does not undermine the MT’s overall reliability but reflects the reality of scribal errors in copying over centuries. The Hebrew text, lacking vowels until the Masoretic pointing (circa 600–1000 C.E.), relied on consonants alone, making numerical data particularly vulnerable to loss or misinterpretation. The UASV footnote rightly labels this a “corrupt reading,” signaling the need for comparative analysis with other textual witnesses.

The Septuagint Variants

The LXX, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures from circa 250 B.C.E., offers multiple readings for 1 Samuel 13:1. Some manuscripts suggest Saul was “thirty” (triákonta) years old when he began to reign, while most omit the verse entirely, and a few align with the MT’s “one year.” The “thirty” reading, found in a minority of LXX manuscripts, is plausible but not definitive. A 30-year-old Saul could have a son old enough to lead troops (e.g., Jonathan at 15–20), though this compresses the timeline. The omission in most LXX copies likely reflects translators’ uncertainty about the Hebrew text’s corruption, opting to skip rather than guess.

The LXX’s divergence from the MT is not uncommon, as it sometimes preserves alternate readings or fills gaps. However, its inconsistency here—ranging from omission to “thirty”—suggests no single LXX tradition resolves the issue conclusively. The “thirty” reading, while possible, lacks broad attestation and may reflect an early scribal attempt to correct the MT.

The Syriac and Other Witnesses

The Syriac Peshitta (SYR) renders Saul as “twenty-one years old” at his accession. This is historically implausible, as Jonathan’s military role in 1 Samuel 13:2 implies he was at least in his late teens, making Saul’s age at 21 too young to be a father of a commander. The SYR likely represents a later interpretive adjustment, perhaps influenced by a desire to harmonize the text, but it conflicts with the narrative context.

The Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), dated 250 B.C.E.–68 C.E., offer potential insight, though no complete 1 Samuel 13:1 survives. Fragments like 4QSam^a (circa 50 B.C.E.) include portions of 1 Samuel, but the verse’s specific numbers are missing or damaged. Some scholars suggest DSS readings support “thirty” or a higher figure, but this remains speculative without clear evidence.

The 1901 ASV Conjectural Emendation

The 1901 American Standard Version proposes “forty years” as a conjectural emendation, adopted by the UASV as a reasonable hypothesis. This assumes Saul was 40 at his accession, allowing Jonathan to be 20 or older, consistent with his military leadership. If Saul reigned 40 years (per Acts 13:21, discussed below), a reign beginning at 40 would end at 80, fitting a lifespan plausible for the period. This emendation lacks direct manuscript support but aligns with the narrative and chronological demands, making it a scholarly inference rather than a preserved reading.

Biblical Chronology and Acts 13:21

Acts 13:21 states, “Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years.” This New Testament reference, from Paul’s speech, suggests Saul’s reign lasted 40 years, contradicting the MT’s “two years.” The “forty” in Acts likely reflects a reliable tradition, possibly derived from sources like the Book of Jashar (Joshua 10:13) or oral history preserved in the early church. If Saul reigned 40 years, the MT’s “two years” is an error, perhaps a scribal transposition (e.g., šənayim for ’arba‘îm, “two” for “forty”) or a loss of text.

Assuming Saul’s reign began circa 1070 B.C.E. (adjusted from a 4004 B.C.E. creation date and 1 Kings 6:1’s 480 years from the Exodus to Solomon’s temple), a 40-year reign ends circa 1030 B.C.E., aligning with David’s accession. A 40-year-old Saul in 1070 B.C.E. would be born circa 1110 B.C.E., with Jonathan born circa 1090 B.C.E., making him 20 by 1070 B.C.E.—a viable age for a military leader.

Akkadian Influence and Textual Parallels

Akkadian writing, maturing by 2200 B.C.E., provides a comparative lens. Akkadian texts, like royal annals, often record reigns with precise ages and durations, yet variants occur (e.g., šarru as šar-ru or šar). This suggests numerical data in ancient records was prone to error, a phenomenon mirrored in 1 Samuel 13:1. While Akkadian does not directly resolve this verse, its scribal practices highlight the challenges of transmitting exact figures, reinforcing the need for critical analysis of biblical variants.

Implications for Textual Criticism

Old Testament textual criticism seeks the most accurate reading without questioning Scripture’s inspiration (2 Timothy 3:16). The MT’s corruption in 1 Samuel 13:1 does not negate its authority elsewhere; it reflects human fallibility in copying, not divine error in revelation. The “forty” emendation, supported by Acts 13:21 and narrative logic, is the strongest candidate, though “thirty” remains possible. The evangelical perspective holds that such variants affect minor details, not doctrine, preserving confidence in JHVH’s Word.

Conclusion of the Analysis

1 Samuel 13:1’s textual issue stems from a corrupt MT, with “one year” and “two years” untenable. The LXX’s “thirty,” SYR’s “twenty-one,” and ASV’s “forty” offer alternatives, but “forty” best fits Acts 13:21 and Jonathan’s age. This reconstruction—Saul at 40, reigning 40 years—upholds the text’s historical coherence, affirming its reliability despite scribal challenges.

You May Also Enjoy

Who Were the Masoretes, and What Is the Masoretic Text?

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).