The Occasion for the Writing of the Psalm

The occasion on which Psalm 33 was composed is indicated in its title: a psalm of David, when he changed his appearance before Abimelech; and he dismissed him, and he departed. The event is described in 1Sam 21:11–13. Pursued by Saul, David, after a brief stay in Nob where the ark of the covenant was kept and where he took the bread of the Presence and Goliath’s sword, withdrew into the land of the Philistines. There he was recognized by the Philistines, whom he had previously so humiliated by slaying Goliath, and was brought before the king in Gath. In this extremity, David conceived the idea of feigning madness in the hope that it would save him. God blessed this means, in itself very dubious: the king dismissed David as a free man. Remembering this deliverance from peril, holy David sings a grateful hymn of praise to God. (Psalm 55 also relates to this same occasion. But there the prophet sets forth the prayer he offered to God in that extremity; here he gives thanks for the salvation received and glorifies the grace of God.) Saint Basil the Great says: “he changed his appearance when he was surrounded by enemies, because he heard them talking among themselves and preparing for vengeance. And the servants of Anchous said to one another, it is written: is this not David, the king of the land? Is it not to him that the women sang as they danced, saying: David has struck down his tens of thousands, and Saul his thousands? And David was afraid of Anchous and changed his appearance before them (1Sam 21:11–13). Having changed his appearance, David was carried by the household servants to Anchous, beat on the city gates, and let his saliva run down his beard, so that Anchous said to his servants: why have you brought him to me? I have no need of madmen, since you have brought him to rave before me (1Sam 21:15). And so David, dismissed from there, escaped, as it is said, to the cave of Adullam (1Sam 22:1). It is for this deliverance that he now gives thanks to God”.

Blessed Augustine also relates this psalm to the same occasion. Here are his words: “the title of the psalm is: a psalm of David, when he changed his appearance before Abimelech. We look in the history of the kings for the event corresponding to this, and find the following: when David fled from Saul, his persecutor, he crossed over to Anchous, king of the neighboring people, and hid there to escape from Saul’s snares. The memory was still fresh of how he, by slaying Goliath, had won glory and safety for the kingdom, king, and people of Judah. When Goliath was still to be slain, David was dear to Saul; but when Goliath was struck down, Saul envied David’s glory and became the enemy of the very one who had delivered him from his enemy. How, Saul thought, did this youth by a single victory acquire such fame that his name went across the whole kingdom and songs were being composed about him? And so he began to pursue him. When David crossed over into the neighboring land, the king (Abimelech) was told: such a one is in our land. Unfriendly words of theirs reached David’s ears; and he thought: if Saul, to whom I did good, pursues me—then this king, whom I have put to shame, will be glad to destroy a man from whom he may fear still greater harm if left alive. He was afraid, and changed his appearance—he beat upon the gate, walked on his hands, and let saliva flow upon his beard. Seeing him in this state, the king turned from him with contempt and dismissed him. And so the saved prophet sings a hymn of thanksgiving to God”.

Jerome, Euthymius Zigabenus, Patriarch Anthimus of Jerusalem, and Irenaeus of Pskov are of the same opinion. But Blessed Theodoret, following Athanasius the Great, refers the change of appearance and the psalm to the occasion when David, fleeing from Saul, came to Nob, where the ark of the covenant was kept, and from the priest Abimelech took the bread of the Presence and Goliath’s sword. He told the priest that he had been sent urgently by Saul on a certain matter and had taken nothing with him, concealing the fact that he was being pursued by the king. This concealment of the true reason for his arrival at Nob Blessed Theodoret considers a change of appearance, and holds that the psalm relates to this occasion. But on that occasion there was no actual change of appearance. David remained in his usual guise; and the words he spoke cannot be taken for a change of appearance. This is all the more so since the historical books of the kings clearly identify the occasion when David actually changed his appearance. There, in the description of David’s stay in Nob, there is no mention of David’s changing his appearance; it is mentioned in connection with another occasion, when David, after this, crossed into the land of the Philistines and was seized by the people there and brought before the king. David was afraid, it says there, and changed his appearance (1Sam 21:12–13); and this is why the opinion of Blessed Theodoret cannot be accepted.

But someone may say: the title reads he changed his appearance before Abimelech, and by this name was called the priest who received David in Nob. How then is the psalm not to be referred to that occasion? The name does indeed recall that priest and the event with David in Nob; but the words he changed his appearance direct the mind to a different person and a different occasion; for it was not before the priest in Nob that David changed his appearance, but before the king in Gath. But it may be said again: the king of Gath is named Anchous in the book of Kings, not Abimelech. How then are the change of appearance and the psalm to be referred to that occasion? Be that as it may: King Anchous could also bear the name Abimelech. Once it is explained how the Anchous of the book of Kings could be called Abimelech in the title of the psalm, every difficulty will be resolved.

This difficulty, arising from the discrepancy between the name of the Gathite king in the book of Kings and the name given in the psalm’s title, occupied all those who have commented on this psalm, and all resolve it by observing that among the Philistines kings bore two designations: one common to all kings, and another personal or proper name for each individual. The common designation of all their kings was Abimelech, just as among the Egyptians it was Pharaoh, among the ancient Jerusalemites Adonizedek or Melchizedek, among the Amalekites Agag, among the people of Gaza Jabin, and among the Yemenites Toba. That this was indeed so is demonstrated by the fact that in the book of Genesis the kings of the Philistines, both in the time of Abraham and in the time of Isaac, are identically named Abimelech (Gen 20 and 26). Given the distance of time, one cannot suppose these to be one and the same king, and therefore that Abimelech was his proper name. The proper name of the Gathite king, a contemporary of David, was Anchous. In the book of Kings, where history is written requiring definite precision, the proper name of the king at that time—Anchous—is used; but in the title of the psalm the common name of the kings of that land—Abimelech—is employed.

Saint Basil the Great says of this: “why does the title name Abimelech while the history records the name Anchous, king of Gath? For this we have the following explanation, which has reached us by tradition: Abimelech was the common name of the Philistine kings, but each of them also had a personal name. Something similar may be seen in the Roman state, where kings are generally called Caesars and Augusti yet retain their own personal names. So too is the name Pharaoh among the Egyptians. For the Egyptian king in Joseph’s time is called Pharaoh; the king of Egypt four generations later, in Moses’ time, is also called Pharaoh; there was a Pharaoh in Solomon’s time as well, for it is written: he took the daughter of Pharaoh (1King 3:1); and one who reigned in Egypt during the period of Jeremiah’s prophetic ministry was also called Pharaoh (2King 23:29). So too there was an Abimelech in the days of Abraham, in the days of Isaac, and one is now named in the time of David. Of Abraham it is written: and Abimelech said to Abraham and so forth (Gen 21:22). And likewise of Isaac: Abimelech looked out through a window and saw Isaac (Gen 26:8). So here too, in the title, the Abimelech of David’s time is named by the common royal designation; while history transmits his name as Anchous, which was the personal name given him at birth”.

But having resolved this first difficulty arising from the discrepancy between the title and the history, we encounter another, which is raised by the supposed incompatibility of the title with the content of the psalm. In the psalm, it is said, there is no specific reference to the event indicated in the title. One might therefore suppose that the title was added by someone afterward, by conjecture, and does not belong to the prophet David himself; one might even carry this conclusion further to a denial of the psalm’s authenticity. But: 1) even if it were true that the content of the psalm contains no reference to the event mentioned in the title, no difficulty concerning the authenticity of the title or the psalm can be drawn from this, when it is known from the psalm itself that in composing it the holy Prophet did not intend to depict the particular event, but to express his own grateful and praising feelings toward God, with the addition of instructive counsels for others as well. Toward this end, holy David, having indicated the event in the title and thereby enabling the reader to understand the state of his spirit when remembering that event, turns the entire song to depicting that state and, even more, to setting forth the general laws of divine Providence and to drawing from them lessons for the life of devout people. A psalm, though written on a particular occasion, could take the form of a general hymn of thanksgiving and instruction, without reference to particular events. But: 2) it is also untrue that the psalm contains no references at all to the event mentioned in the title. One cannot fail to see such a reference in the words: this poor man cried out. All commentators refer these words to David himself. But when was holy David poor, if not in the occasion described? Driven from home, separated from his wife, stripped of property and shelter, having nowhere to lay his head or anything with which to feed himself—and, to crown all, threatened with the extreme danger of losing his life. All of this comes to mind when one reads: this poor man cried out. The holy Prophet sketched his situation with these few words—as much as served the purposes of the psalm. For those who wish more tangible references, it may be noted that here it is not a history that is being written but a song, where the very nature of the discourse obliges one to be content with even less clear allusions; 3) moreover, from the supposed lack of references in the psalm’s content to the title’s event—even were this truly so—the conclusion drawn is not what follows, but the contrary. It is said: there are no references—therefore the title was added by someone other than the prophet David; and perhaps the psalm itself was not written by him. What should be said is the precise opposite: for the very reason that there are no palpable references, one must conclude that the title, and consequently the psalm itself, belong to holy David. How could an outside party have conceived the idea of making such a title? Only the Psalmist himself knew what the song referred to and expressed that in the title of the song. Relating to the time of David’s persecution by Saul are, besides the present one, seven more psalms (in chronological order — Ps 7, 58, 55, 51, 56, 141, 53). But not all of them contain definite references to the specific events, though their authenticity is not called into question.

The observation that an outside party could have taken a phrase from the book of Kings as a title and applied it to this psalm on the basis of certain reasoning need not be taken seriously; for the tone of that phrase, he changed his appearance, is more suited to poetic speech than to plain historical language. One should therefore more readily conclude that the historical books of Kings took this phrase from the title of the psalm, and not the reverse.

Such is the occasion that gave rise to the writing of the psalm. One should not, however, suppose that this psalm was composed immediately upon David’s escape from the danger described. Against this speaks the calmer tone of the psalm’s speech, whereas psalms written under the impression of fresh events are full of powerful and swift turns of phrase; against this speaks also the dominant wish of the Prophet—to draw from his own experience consolation and instruction for all who fear God and have been humbled by the circumstances of life; against this too speaks the alphabetical order of the verses, which is out of place in a song expressing the living feelings produced by the action of current events. The psalm is not without movement, but as a whole it bears the character of a work in which, having calmly reviewed what has occurred—though not without feeling at its remembrance—the author has nonetheless had chiefly in mind to draw lessons from the event for himself and others, rather than merely to sing. It is therefore more accurate to conclude that this psalm was composed after the occasion indicated in the title, perhaps after many other afflictions as well had passed, in a happier outward circumstance. Recalling that decisive moment in his life and the wondrous deliverance from the extremity in which he then found himself, the holy Prophet makes it the foundation of a special song of praise and instruction, beginning it with words that may indeed have burst from a grateful heart at the very moment when, dismissed by Anchous and having moved away from Gath, he felt himself free of all danger. This explains also why the psalm renders thanks for deliverance from all misfortunes and afflictions, when the title points only to a single event. That event was the beginning of David’s troubles. Giving grateful song for deliverance from this initial trouble, the Singer could not but behold in his mind the whole subsequent chain of trials and afflictions from which the right hand of the Most High—which had always covered him—had long since delivered him.