Psalms 60 - Introduction

In the title, this psalm is ascribed to David. The occasion on which it is said to have been composed was after he had been engaged in wars in the East - in Aramea - and when he was meditating the completion of his conquests in the subjugation of Idumea. The time of its composition, according to the title, was that referred to in 2 Samuel 8, compare 1 Chronicles 18. The occasion will be best understood by an explanation of the title.

On the phrase “To the chief Musician,” see the notes at the introduction to Psalms 4:1.

The phrase “upon Shushan-eduth” means properly “Lily of Testimony.” The word שׁושׁן shôshân means properly lily. See the notes at the title to Psalms 45, where, as in the titles to Psalms 69; Psalms 80, the plural form of the word occurs. This is the only instance in which it is found in the singular number, when in the title to a psalm. The word עדות ‛êdûth means properly testimony; law; precept; revelation. It is applied to the law of God, as a testimony which God bears to the truth, Psa 19:7; 2 Kings 11:12; and especially to the ark, called “the ark of the testimony,” as containing the law or the divine testimony to the truth. Exodus 25:21 (compare Exodus 16:34); Exodus 26:33; Exodus 30:6, Exodus 30:26; Exodus 31:7. The word occurs frequently, and is uniformly translated testimony. Exodus 27:21; Exodus 30:36; Exodus 31:18, et saepe. See the notes at Psalms 19:7. The lily of the law would properly express the meaning of the phrase here, and it may have been the name of a musical instrument having a resemblance to a lily - open-mouthed like the lily; perhaps some form of the trumpet.

Why the term earth - testimony or law - was connected with this, it is not easy to determine. Gesenius (Lexicon) supposes that the word means revelation, and that the term was used in these inscriptions because the authors of the psalms wrote by revelation. But if this was the reason, it would not explain why the title was prefixed to these psalms rather than others, since all were composed by revelation. Prof. Alexander, somewhat fancifully, supposes that the name lily is used in this title to denote beauty; that the reference is to the beauty of the law, and that the psalm is designed to celebrate that beauty. But it is sufficient to say in reply to this that there is no particular mention of the law in this psalm, and no special commemoration of its beauty. If the title had been prefixed to Psalms 19:1, or to Psalms 119, there would then have been some foundation for the remark. On the whole, it seems impossible to determine the reason of the use of the term here. It would seem most probable that the allusion is to a musical instrument, or to some classes of musical instruments to which the term had been originally applied with reference to the use of those instruments in the services connected with the “ark of the testimony,” or the celebration of the law of God; but on what occasion such instruments were first used, or why the term was applied, we cannot hope now to understand.

On the word Michtan, see the notes at the Introduction to Psalms 16:1. It indicates nothing here in regard to the character of the psalm to which it is prefixed. It may be merely one form of denoting that it was a composition of David.

The word rendered “to teach,” means here that the psalm was adapted to impart instruction, and in this sense it is not unlike the word Maschil (Title to Psalms 32:1), as being a psalm suited to impart valuable information on the subject referred to, or perhaps to be learned and treasured up in the memory. It is not possible for us, however, to understand why the language was applied to this psalm rather than to others.

The psalm is said to have been composed when David “strove with Aramnaharaim and with Aram-zobah, when Joab returned and smote in the valley of salt twelve thousand.” The allusion is to the transactions referred to in 2 Samuel 8 and 1 Chronicles 18. In those chapters we learn that David made extensive conquests in the East, extending his victories over Moab, Syria, and Hamath, and subduing the country as far as the Euphrates. It is to these victories that the psalm refers, see Psalms 60:7. The words rendered Aram-nahaim mean properly Aram (or Aramea) of the two rivers, and the reference is to Syria or Mesopotamia. The compound word occurs elsewhere in the following places, in all of which it is rendered Mesopotamia, Genesis 24:10; Deuteronomy 23:4; Judges 3:8; 1 Chronicles 19:6. The word Aram is of frequent occurrence, and properly refers to Syria. The name comprehended more than Syria proper, and the term Aram-naharaim, or Aram of the two rivers, was used to designate that part of the general country of Aramea which was between the Tigris and the Euphrates. The compound term Aram-zobah refers also to a part of Aramea or Syria. This kingdom was in the neighborhood of Damascus, and perhaps comprehended Hamath, and probably extended as far as the Euphrates. The king of this country is represented as making war with Saul 1 Samuel 14:47, and with David 2 Samuel 8:3; 2 Samuel 10:6. In 2 Samuel 8:3, David is represented as having smitten “Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates.” It is to these wars, and to this conquest, that the title of the psalm alludes.

The language in the title “when Joab returned,” would seem to imply that these conquests were achieved not by David in person, but by Joab - a circumstance not at all improbable, as he was the leader of the armies of David; 2 Samuel 20:23, “Now Joab was over all the host of Israel.” David had thus subdued Syria, and Moab, and the children of Ammon, and the Philistines, and the Amalekites, and Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and had dedicated to the Lord the silver and the gold which he had taken in these conquests 2 Samuel 8:11; but it would seem probable that Edom or Idumea stilt held out, or that at the time of composing the psalm that country had not been subdued. But the subjugation of that land was necessary to complete the conquests of David, and to make his kingdom safe. It was at this time probably, in the interval between 2 Samuel 8:12 and 2 Samuel 8:14, that the psalm was composed, or in view of the strong desire of David to subdue Edom; see Psalms 60:8, “Over Edom will I cast out my shoe,”...”Who will lead me into Edom?” It would seem that there were some special difficulties in the conquest of that country; or that there had been some partial discomfiture in attempting it Psalms 60:1, and David was now fearful that he had in some way incurred the divine displeasure after all his conquests, and that Edom - a place so strong and so important - was likely to remain unsubdued. And yet the conquest was made, for it is said in the title “that Joab smote of Edom in the valley of salt twelve thousand.” Compare 2 Samuel 8:13.

The phrase “the Valley of Salt” is explained by the fact that not a few valleys are found in Arabia and Syria, which are at certain periods - in the wet seasons - stagnant pools; but which, when they are dried up, leave an incrustation of salt, or a saline deposit on the sand. Travelers make mention of such pools, from which they obtain their supplies of salt. Van Hamelsveld, Bib. Geog., i. p. 402. What valley is here referred to is not certain. It would seem most probable that it was the valley in which the Dead Sea is situated, as being eminently the valley of salt, or the valley in which such deposits abounded. Dr. Robinson (Researches in Palestine, vol. ii. p. 483), supposes that this “valley of salt” is situated at the southern end of the Dead Sea - the Ghor south of the Dead Sea; and adjacent to the Mountain of Salt - “the whole body of the mountain being a solid mass of rock-salt” p. 482. This valley separates the ancient territories of Judah and Edom, and would, therefore, be the place where the battle would naturally be fought.

This victory is said in the title of the psalm to have been achieved by Joab; in 2 Samuel 8:13, it is attributed to David; in the parallel place in 1 Chronicles 18:12, it is said to have been achieved by Abishai - in the margin, Abshai. There is no discrepancy between the account in 2 Samuel, where the victory is ascribed to David, and that in the title to the psalm where it is ascribed to Joab, for though the battle may have been fought by Joab, yet it was really one of the victories of David, as Joab acted under him and by his orders - as we speak of the conquests of Napoleon, attributing to him the conquests which were secured by the armies under his command. There is greater difficulty in reconciling the account in 1 Chronicles with the title to the psalm, where one ascribes the victory to Joab, and the other to Aibishai. Some have supposed that either in the title to the psalm or in 1 Chronicles there has been an error in transcribing. But such an error could hardly have occurred. The most probable opinion seems to be that the victory was achieved by the joint action of the forces under Joab and his brother Abishai, and that with propriety it may be spoken of as the victory of either of them. We know that on one occasion Joab thus divided his forces, retaining the command of a portion of the army to himself, and assigning the other portion to his brother Abishai 2 Samuel 10:9, and it is possible that there may have been such a division of the army here, and that the victory may have been so connected with the skill and valor of Abishai that it might without impropriety be spoken of as his victory, while there was no impropriety also in ascribing it to Joab, as entrusted with the general command, or to David who had planned and directed the expedition.

There is, also, a discrepancy in the numbers mentioned as slain, in the title to the psalm, and in the account in Samuel and Chronicles. In 2 Samuel 8:13, and in 1 Chronicles 18:12, the number is “eighteen thousand;” in the title to the psalm, it is “twelve thousand.” Why the statement varies, it is impossible to determine with certainty. We cannot suppose that the author of the psalm was ignorant of the usual estimate of the number, and we have no evidence that there is an error in the transcription. The probability is, that there may have been, as is often the case, in the account of battles, two estimates. The common and more moderate estimate may have been that the number was twelve thousand - and this was adopted by the author of the psalm. The more accurate and well-ascertained estimate may have been that which was placed in the regular history, in the Books of Samuel and the Chronicles. If the actual number was in fact as great as eighteen thousand, then there is no contradiction - for the greater number includes the less. If eighteen thousand were actually slain, there was no falsehood in the assertion, according to the first estimate, that twelve thousand had fallen in the battle, for that statement was in fact true, though a subsequent and more accurate “return” from the army made the number larger. Both statements were true. In saying that three men were drowned in a flood, or lost at sea in a storm, I do not falsify a declaration which may be made subsequently that not only three perished but six or more.

There is no reference, in the accounts in Samuel and the Chronicles, to the partial discomfiture referred to in the psalm Psalms 60:1; and the impression from those historical narratives would probably be that the armies of David had been uniformly successful. Yet it is possible that some things may have been omitted in the rapid survey of the conquests of David in Samuel and the Chronicles. The design of the authors of those books may have been to give a general summary of the wars or series of wars by which David obtained a final victory over his enemies, and brought into subjection all that he regarded as properly his territory, or all that had been included in the general promise to Abraham and his posterity, without noticing the reverses or disasters that may have occurred in securing those triumphs. Perhaps the most probable supposition in the case is, that during the absence of the armies in the east the Edomites had taken occasion to invade the land of Palestine from the south, and that in endeavoring to repel them, there had been some defeats and losses in the comparatively small forces which David was then able to employ. He now summoned his armies on their return, and made a vigorous and decided effort to expel the Edomites from the land, to carry the warfare into their own country, and to add their territory to that which he had already brought under subjection. In this he was entirely successful. 2 Samuel 8:14; 1 Chronicles 18:13.

The contents of the psalm are as follows:

I. A statement of the disaster which had occurred, as if God had cast his people off, and as if, after all, they might be given up into the hands of their enemies, Psalms 60:1.

II. A statement of the object for which God now summoned his people to war - that of carrying forth the banner of truth, or of bringing nations into subjection to the true religion, Psalms 60:4.

III. A reference to the conquests already made, or to the dominion which David had set up over Shechem, Succoth, Gilead, Manasseh, Ephraim, Judah, Moab, and Philistia, Psalms 60:6.

IV. The expression of a strong desire to complete the series of conquests by subduing Edom or Idumea, Psalms 60:8. That alone remained. That offered formidable resistance to the armies of David. The conquest of that seemed difficult, if not hopeless, and the psalmist, therefore, asks with deep solicitude who would aid him in this war; who would bring him successfully into the strong city - the strong fortifications of Edom, Psalms 60:9.

V. An appeal to God to do it; to that God who had cast them off; to him who had left their armies to go forth alone. David now calls on him to return to those forces, and to render aid - expressing the confident assurance that he would thus return, and that the victory would be secured, Psalms 60:10.