Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing, and has been compared to Thomas Paine as being "one of the great American leaders of the nonsocialist left."^[4] He is often noted for his book Rules for Radicals.

In the course of nearly four decades of political organizing, Alinsky received much criticism, but also gained praise from many public figures. His organizing skills were focused on improving the living conditions of poor communities across North America. In the 1950s, he began turning his attention to improving conditions of the African-American ghettos, beginning with Chicago's and later traveling to other ghettos in California, Michigan, New York City, and a dozen other "trouble spots".

His ideas were later adapted by some U.S. college students and other young organizers in the late 1960s and formed part of their strategies for organizing on campus and beyond.^[5] Time magazine once wrote that "American democracy is being altered by Alinsky's ideas," and conservative author William F. Buckley said he was "very close to being an organizational genius."^[4]

Early life and family[link]

Alinsky was born in Chicago, Illinois in 1909 to Russian Jewish immigrant parents, the only surviving son of Benjamin Alinsky's marriage to his second wife, Sarah Tannenbaum Alinsky.^[6] Alinsky stated during an interview that his parents never became involved in the "new socialist movement." He added that they were "strict orthodox, their whole life revolved around work and synagogue ... I remember as a kid being told how important it was to study."^[4]

Because of his strict Jewish upbringing, he was asked whether he ever encountered antisemitism while growing up in Chicago. He replied, "it was so pervasive you didn't really even think about it; you just accepted it as a fact of life." He considered himself to be a devout Jew until the age of 12, after which time he began to fear that his parents would force him to become a rabbi. "I went through some pretty rapid withdrawal symptoms and kicked the habit ... But I'll tell you one thing about religious identity," he added. "Whenever anyone asks me my religion, I always say—and always will say—Jewish."^[4]

Education[link]

He worked his way through the University of Chicago, where he majored in archaeology, a subject that fascinated him.^[4] His plans to become a professional archaeologist were changed due to the ongoing economic Depression. He later stated, "Archaeologists were in about as much demand as horses and buggies. All the guys who funded the field trips were being scraped off Wall Street sidewalks."^[4]

Early jobs[link]

After attending two years of graduate school he dropped out to accept work for the state of Illinois as a criminologist. On a part-time basis, he also began working as an organizer with the Congress of Industrial Organizations (C.I.O.). After a few years, by 1939, he became less active in the labor movement and became more active in general community organizing, starting with the slums of Chicago. His early efforts to "turn scattered, voiceless discontent into a united protest aroused the admiration of Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson, who said Alinsky's aims 'most faithfully reflect our ideals of brotherhood, tolerance, charity and dignity of the individual.'"^[4]

As a result of his efforts and success at helping slum communities, he spent the next 10 years repeating his organization work across the nation, "from Kansas City and Detroit to the barrios of Southern California." By 1950 he turned his attention to the African American ghettos of Chicago, where his actions would later earn him the hatred of Mayor Richard J. Daley, although Daley would later say that "Alinsky loves Chicago the same as I do."^[4] He traveled to California at the request of the San Francisco Bay Area Presbyterian Churches to help organize the black ghetto in Oakland. Hearing of his plans, "the panic-stricken Oakland City Council promptly introduced a resolution banning him from the city."^[4]

Community organizing and politics[link]

In the 1930s, Alinsky organized the Back of the Yards neighborhood in Chicago (made infamous by Upton Sinclair's novel The Jungle for the horrific working conditions in the Union Stock Yards). He went on to found the Industrial Areas Foundation while organizing the Woodlawn neighborhood, which trained organizers and assisted in the founding of community organizations around the country. In Rules for Radicals (his final work, published in 1971 one year before his death), he addressed the 1960s generation of radicals, outlining his views on organizing for mass power. In the opening paragraph of the book Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."^[7] Alinsky did not join political parties. When asked during an interview whether he ever considered becoming a Communist party member, he replied:

Not at any time. I've never joined any organization—not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism. One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right.' If you don't have that, if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide.^[4]

Nor did he have much respect for mainstream political leaders who tried to interfere with growing black–white unity during the difficult years of the Great Depression. In Alinsky's view, new voices and new values were being heard in the U.S., and "people began citing John Donne's 'No man is an island.'" He observed that the hardship affecting all classes of the population was causing them to start "banding together to improve their lives," and discovering how much in common they really had with their fellow man.^[4] Alinsky once explained that his reasons for organizing in black communities included:

Negroes were being lynched regularly in the South as the first stirrings of black opposition began to be felt, and many of the white civil rights organizers and labor agitators who had started to work with them were tarred and feathered, castrated—or killed. Most Southern politicians were members of the Ku Klux Klan and had no compunction about boasting of it.^[4]

Alinsky's tactics were often unorthodox. In Rules for Radicals Alinsky wrote, "[t]he job of the organizer is to maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a 'dangerous enemy.'" According to Alinsky, "the hysterical instant reaction of the establishment [will] not only validate [the organizer's] credentials of competency but also ensure automatic popular invitation."^[8] After organizing FIGHT (an acronym for Freedom, Independence [subsequently Integration], God, Honor, Today) in Rochester, New York,^[9] Alinsky once threatened to stage a "fart in" to disrupt the sensibilities of the city's establishment at a Rochester Philharmonic concert. FIGHT members were to consume large quantities of baked beans after which, according to author Nicholas von Hoffman, "FIGHT's increasingly gaseous music-loving members would hie themselves to the concert hall where they would sit expelling gaseous vapors with such noisy velocity as to compete with the woodwinds."^[10] Satisfied with the reaction to his threat, Alinsky would later threaten a "piss in" at Chicago O'Hare Airport. Alinsky planned to arrange for large numbers of well dressed African Americans to occupy the urinals and toilets at O'Hare for as long as it took to bring the city to the bargaining table. According to Alinsky, once again the threat alone was sufficient to produce results.^[10] Conceding that his tactics were "absurd," the community activist rejected the contention that they were frivolous, arguing "[w]hat oppressed person doesn't want, literally or figuratively, to shit on his oppressors? [At the Rochester Philharmonic] was the closest chance they'd have. Such tactics aren't just cute; they can be useful in driving your opponent up the wall. Very often the most ridiculous tactic can prove the most effective."

Alinsky described his plans in 1972 to begin to organize the white middle class across America, and the necessity of that project. He believed that what President Richard Nixon and Vice-President Spiro Agnew called "The Silent Majority" was living in frustration and despair, worried about their future, and ripe for a turn to radical social change, to become politically active citizens. He feared the middle class could be driven to a right-wing viewpoint, "making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday." His stated motive: "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back."^[4]

Alinsky's own words, from his 1946 "Reveille for Radicals",^[11] capture his perspective, his motivation, and his style of engagement:

• A People's Organization is a conflict group, [and] this must be openly and fully recognized. Its sole reason in coming into being is to wage war against all evils which cause suffering and unhappiness. A People’s Organization is the banding together of large numbers of men and women to fight for those rights which insure a decent way of life. . . .

• A People's Organization is dedicated to an eternal war. It is a war against poverty, misery, delinquency, disease, injustice, hopelessness, despair, and unhappiness. They are basically the same issues for which nations have gone to war in almost every generation. . . . War is not an intellectual debate, and in the war against social evils there are no rules of fair play. . . .

• A People's Organization lives in a world of hard reality. It lives in the midst of smashing forces, dashing struggles, sweeping cross-currents, ripping passions, conflict, confusion, seeming chaos, the hot and the cold, the squalor and the drama, which people prosaically refer to as life and students describe as 'society'.

Legacy[link]

The documentary The Democratic Promise: Saul Alinsky and His Legacy,^[12] states that "Alinsky championed new ways to organize the poor and powerless that created a backyard revolution in cities across America." Alinsky formed the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF) in 1940, and Edward T. Chambers became its Executive Director after Alinsky died. Since the IAF's formation, hundreds of professional community and labor organizers and thousands of community and labor leaders have attended its workshops. Fred Ross, who worked for Alinsky, was the principal mentor for Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta. Other organizations following in the tradition of the Congregation-based Community Organizing pioneered by IAF include PICO National Network, Gamaliel Foundation, and Direct Action and Research Training Center (DART).^[13][14] Hillary Clinton's senior honors thesis on Saul Alinsky, written at Wellesley College, noted that Alinsky's personal efforts were a large part of his method.^[15]

Several prominent American leaders have been influenced by Alinsky's teachings,^[14] including Ed Chambers,^[12] Tom Gaudette, Ernesto Cortes, Michael Gecan, Wade Rathke,^[16] and Patrick Crowley.^[17] Alinsky is often credited with laying the foundation for the grassroots political organizing that dominated the 1960s.^[12] Jack Newfield writing in New York magazine included Alinsky among "the purest Avatars of the populist movement," along with Ralph Nader, Cesar Chavez, and Jesse Jackson.^[18]

Biographer Sanford Horwitt has claimed that U.S. President Barack Obama was influenced by Alinsky and followed in his footsteps as a Chicago-based community organizer. Horwitt furthermore has asserted that Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign was influenced by Alinsky's teachings.^[19]

Adam Brandon, a spokesman for the conservative non-profit organization FreedomWorks, which is one of several groups involved in organizing Tea Party protests, says the group gives Alinsky's Rules for Radicals to its top leadership members. A shortened guide called Rules for Patriots is distributed to its entire network. In a January 2012 story that appeared in The Wall Street Journal, citing the organization's tactic of sending activists to town-hall meetings, Brandon explained, "his tactics when it comes to grass-roots organizing are incredibly effective." Former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey also gives copies of Alinsky's book Rules for Radicals to Tea Party leaders.^[20]

In 1969, he was awarded the Pacem in Terris Peace and Freedom Award.

Alinsky died of a sudden, massive heart attack in 1972, on a street corner in Carmel, California, at the age of 63. Two months previously, he discussed life after death in his interview with Playboy:^[4]

ALINSKY: ... if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell.

PLAYBOY: Why?

ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I've been with the have-nots. Over here, if you're a have-not, you're short of dough. If you're a have-not in hell, you're short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I'll start organizing the have-nots over there.

PLAYBOY: Why them?

ALINSKY: They're my kind of people.

Published works[link]

• Reveille for Radicals. Vintage Books. 1946 [1969, 2nd edn]. ISBN 0-679-72112-6.  paperback
• John L. Lewis: An Unauthorized Biography. 1949. ISBN 0-394-70882-2. 
• Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. Random House. 1971. ISBN 0-394-44341-1.  Vintage books paperback: ISBN 0-679-72113-4

Biographies and works on Alinsky[link]

• Let Them Call Me Rebel: Saul Alinsky: His Life and Legacy, by Sanford D. Horwitt, (1989) Alfred Knopf, ISBN 0-394-57243-2; Vintage Books paperback: ISBN 0-679-73418-X
• The Democratic Promise: Saul Alinsky and His Legacy, 1999, Chicago Video Project, co-produced by Bruce Orenstein.
• The Professional Radical: Conversations with Saul Alinsky by Marion K. Sanders, (New York: Harper & Row, 1970).
• The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, a play by Tony-nominee Herb Schapiro, originally produced in Chicago in 1998 by Terrapin Theatre, directed by Pam Dickler and with Gary Houston as Alinsky. Script has since been published by Samuel French: ISBN 978-0-573-65129-8
• The Radical Vision of Saul Alinsky, by P. David Finks, (1984) Paulist Press, paperback: ISBN 0-8091-2608-7
• Radical: A Portrait of Saul Alinsky, by Nicholas von Hoffman. New York: Nation Books, 2010. ISBN 978-1-56858-439-3

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Saul Alinsky

• Works by or about Saul Alinsky in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• Website of a documentary about Alinsky and his legacy, Democratic Promise
• Watch the National Film Board of Canada documentary Encounter with Saul Alinsky
• Interview with Alinsky, published in Playboy in 1972. The interview is in twelve parts. The entire text is copied onto one page, here [1].
• Santow, Mark Edward (January 1, 2000). Saul Alinsky and the dilemmas of race in the post-war city (Dissertation abstract). http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI9989649/. 
• Chambers, Whittaker (February 25, 1946). "Books: Problem of the Century". TIME. http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,852734,00.html. Retrieved 2011-09-09.  Book review of Reveille for Radicals. Chambers is not named.
• Behrent, Michael C. (10/06/2008). "Saul Alinsky, la campagne présidentielle et l’histoire de la gauche américaine [Saul Alinsky, the presidential campaign, and the history of the American left]" (in (French)). La Vie des Idées. http://www.laviedesidees.fr/Saul-Alinsky-la-campagne.html. Retrieved 2011-09-08. 
• Behrent, Michael C. (11-05-2011). "Obama as Philosopher" (PDF). La Vie des Idées, a/k/a Books & ideas.net. "Obama: the one who embraces a realistic understanding of power and of the role of self-interest in social life; the disciple of Saul Alinsky, the father of “community organizing,” for whom power is the “very essence, the dynamo of life”"  Book review of James T. Kloppenberg, Reading Obama: Dreams, Hope, and the American Political Tradition, Princeton University Press, 2010.

King Saul
King of Israel
David Plays the Harp for Saul, by Rembrandt van Rijn, c. 1658.
Reign	c.1049 BC to 1007 BC (42 years)
Coronation	at Gilgal
Born	1079 BC
Birthplace	possibly Gibeah
Died	c.1007 BC (aged 72)
Place of death	Battle of Mount Gilboa
Successor	David (Judah), Ish-bosheth (Israel)
Consort	Ahinoam, daughter of Ahimaaz
Father	Kish according to the Tanakh of the family of the Matrites, and a member of the tribe of Benjamin, one of the tribes of Israel.

Saul (Hebrew: שָׁאוּל, Šāʼûl ; "asked for, prayed for"; Arabic: طالوت‎, Ṭālūt; Greek: Σαούλ Saoul; Latin: Saul) (circa 1079 BC – 1007 BC) was the first king of the united Kingdom of Israel. He was anointed by the prophet Samuel and reigned from Gibeah. He fell on his sword to avoid capture in the battle against the Philistines at Mount Gilboa, during which three of his sons were also killed. The succession to his throne was contested by Ish-bosheth, his only surviving son, and his son-in-law David, who eventually prevailed. The main account of Saul's life and reign is found in the Books of Samuel.

The Biblical account[link]

House of King Saul[link]

According to the Tanakh, Saul was the son of Kish, of the family of the Matrites, and a member of the tribe of Benjamin, one of the twelve Tribes of Israel. (1 Samuel 9:1-2; 10:21; 14:51; Acts 13:21) It appears that he came from Gibeah.

David and Saul (1885) by Julius Kronberg.

Saul married Ahinoam, daughter of Ahimaaz. They had four sons and two daughters. The sons were Jonathan, Abinadab, Malchishua and Ish-bosheth. Their daughters were named Merab and Michal.^[1]

Saul also had a concubine named Rizpah, daughter of Aiah, who bore him two sons, Armoni and Mephibosheth. (2 Samuel 21:8)

Saul offered Merab to David as a wife after his victory over Goliath, but David does not seem to have been interested in the arrangement. (1 Samuel 18:17-19) Saul then gave his other daughter Michal in marriage to David, (1 Samuel 18:20-27) but when David became Saul's rival to the kingship, Saul gave Michal in marriage to Palti, son of Laish. (1 Samuel 25:44)

Saul died at the Battle of Mount Gilboa (1 Samuel 31:3-6; 1 Chronicles 10:3-6), and was buried in Zelah, in the region of Benjamin in modern-day Israel. (2 Samuel 21:14) When Saul first became king, he followed Samuel's bidding. Eventually, as Saul disobeyed God, God told Samuel to anoint a new king.

Ish-bosheth[link]

Three of Saul's sons – Jonathan, and Abinadab, and Malchishua – died with him at Mount Gilboa (1 Samuel 31:2; 1 Chronicles 10:2). Ish-bosheth became king of Israel, at the age of forty. (2 Samuel 2:10) Michal was returned as wife to David.

Ish-bosheth reigned for two years and was killed by two of his own captains. (2 Samuel 4:5) The only male descendant of Saul to survive was Mephibosheth, Jonathan's son, (2 Samuel 4:4) who had been five when his father and grandfather Saul had died in battle. In time, he came under the protection of David. (2 Samuel 9:7-13) Mephibosheth had a young son, Micah, (2 Samuel 9:12) of whom nothing more is heard.

Armoni and Mephibosheth (Saul's sons with his concubine, Rizpah) were given by David along with the five sons of Merab (Saul's daughter)^[2] to the Gibeonites, who killed them. (2 Samuel 21:8-9) Michal was childless. (2 Samuel 6:23)

Anointed as king[link]

"Death of King Saul", 1848 by Elie Marcuse (Germany and France, 1817-1902)

Samuel, the Judge, had sons who were dishonest and not trustworthy of the faith. The leaders of the Israelites feared that it would be disastrous if his sons were to be judge over them and requested that Samuel give them a king. God warned that if he appointed a king over them, they would suffer from the dealings of the king. Saul, a young Israelite, was commanded by his father, Kish, to go and locate their lost donkeys. Saul obeyed and Samuel saw him walking toward him. God revealed to Samuel that Saul would be the one anointed as the "first" King of Israel. Peter J. Leithart observes:

Saul, the first king, begins as an ideal choice to lead and judge Israel ..... Saul cares for his father's animals (as did Joseph and Moses, and as David will), and he is a dutiful son ..... Saul is a handsome man and a head taller than any Israelite (1 Samuel 9:2)^[3]

In the Books of Samuel, Saul is not referred to as a king (melech), but rather as a “leader” or “commander” (nagid) (1 Samuel 9:16; 1 Samuel 10:1).^[4] However (possibly representing an opposing literary strain^{[citation needed]}), Saul is said to be made a "king" (melech) at Gilgal (1 Samuel 11:15). Even David, before he was anointed king, was referred to only as a future nagid, or military commander (1 Samuel 13:14).

The Israelite people generally used the term “king,” because their desire, 1 Samuel recounts, was to be like the other nations (1 Samuel 8:5; 10:19). This may be indicative of the tension between what a certain faction of the people wanted, and a definite reluctance of certain leaders (e.g., the prophet Samuel) to break with the old tribal order. But Saul was finally crowned as "king" (melech) in Gilgal. (1 Samuel 11:14-12:2)

The Books of Samuel give three events in Saul's rise to the throne:

• (1 Samuel 9:1-10:16) Saul was sent with a servant to look for his father's donkeys, who had strayed; leaving his home at Gibeah, they eventually wandered to the district of Zuph, at which point Saul suggested abandoning their search. Saul's servant however, remarked that they happened to be near the town of Ramah, where a famous seer was located, and suggested that they should consult him first. The seer (later identified by the text as Samuel), having previously had a vision instructing him to do so, offered hospitality to Saul when he entered Ramah, and later anointed him in private.

• (1 Samuel 10:17-24 and 12:1-5) Reflecting a desire to be like other nations, there was a popular movement to establish a centralised monarchy. Samuel therefore assembled the people at Mizpah in Benjamin, and despite having strong reservations, which he made no attempt to hide, allowed the appointment of a king. Samuel used cleromancy to determine who it was that God desired to be the king, whittling the assembly down into ever smaller groups until Saul was finally identified. Saul, hiding among the baggage^[5], was then publicly affirmed.

• (1 Samuel 11:1-11 and 11:15) The Ammonites, led by Nahash, laid siege to Jabesh-Gilead, which was forced to surrender. Under the terms of surrender, the occupants of the city would be forced into slavery, and have their right eyes removed as a sign of this. The city's occupants sent out word of this to the other tribes of Israel, and the tribes west of the Jordan assembled an army under the leadership of Saul. Saul led the army to victory against the Ammonites, and, in gratitude and appreciation of his military skill, the people congregated at Gilgal, and acclaimed Saul as king.

Rejection[link]

Saul and the Witch of Endor by Gustave Dore.

According to 1 Samuel 10:8, Samuel had told Saul to wait for seven days after which they would meet; Samuel giving Saul further instructions. But as Samuel did not arrive after 7 days (1 Samuel 13:8) and with the Israelites growing restless, Saul started preparing for battle by offering sacrifices. Samuel arrived just as Saul finished offering his sacrifices and reprimanded Saul for not obeying his instructions. As a result of not keeping God's instructions, and for taking the duties of a Levite priest into his own hands, God took away Saul's kingship (1 Samuel 13:14). After the battle with the Philistines was over, the text describes Samuel as having instructed Saul to kill all the Amalekites, which was in accordance with the mitzvah to do so. Having forewarned the Kenites who were living among the Amalekites to leave, Saul went to war and defeated the Amalekites. Saul killed all the babies, women, children, poor quality livestock and men, and left alive the king and best livestock.

When Samuel found out that Saul had not killed them all, he became angry and launched into a long and bitter diatribe about how God regretted making Saul king, because Saul was disobedient. When Samuel turned away, Saul grabbed Samuel by his clothes and tore a small piece off them, which Samuel states is a prophecy about what will happen to Saul's kingdom. Samuel then commands that the Amalekite king (who, like all other Amalekite kings in the Hebrew Bible, is named Agag) should be brought forth. Samuel proceeds to kill the Amalekite himself and makes a final departure.

Saul and David[link]

It is at this point that David, a son of Jesse, from the tribe of Judah, enters the story:

• (1 Samuel 16:1-13) Samuel is surreptitiously sent by God to Jesse. While offering a sacrifice in the vicinity, Samuel includes Jesse among the invited guests. Dining together, Jesse's sons are brought one by one to Samuel, each time being rejected by him, speaking for God; running out of sons, Jesse sends for David, the youngest, who was tending sheep. When brought to Samuel, David is anointed by him in front of his other brothers.

• (1 Samuel 16:14-23) Saul is troubled by an evil spirit sent by God (some translations euphemistically just describe God not preventing an evil spirit from troubling Saul^{[citation needed]}). Saul requests soothing music, and a servant recommends David the son of Jesse, who is renowned as a skillful harpist and soldier. When word of Saul's needs reach Jesse, he sends David, who had been looking after a flock, and David is appointed as Saul's armor bearer. David remains at court playing the harp as needed by Saul to calm his moods.

• (1 Samuel 17:1-18:5) The Philistines return with an army to attack Israel, but, having amassed on a hillside opposite to the Israelite forces, suggest that to save effort and lives on both sides, it would be better to have a proxy combat between their champion, a Rephaim from Gath named Goliath, and someone of Saul's choosing. David, a young shepherd boy, happens to be delivering food to his three eldest brothers, who are in the Israelite army, at the time that the challenge is made. David, who is faithful of God's power to defeat his enemies, talks to the nearby soldiers mocking the Philistines, but is reprimanded by his brothers for doing so. David's speech is overheard and reported to Saul, who summons David and on hearing David's views decides to fit him out with his (Saul's) own armour. Saul then appoints David as his champion, and David defeats Goliath with a single shot from a sling, which hits him in between the eyes. Goliath falls forward and David decapitates him with his own sword.

Saul's love of glory[link]

"Saul Throws Spear at David" by George Tinworth

In the text, Saul's son Jonathan becomes David's dearest friend. Eventually, David becomes Jonathan's brother-in-law by Michal. Jonathan recognises David as the rightful king, and 1 Samuel 18 states "Jonathan made a covenant with David, because he loved him as his own soul."^[6] Jonathan even gives David his military clothes, symbolizing David's position as successor to Saul.

God makes David successful wherever Saul sends him. Therefore Saul sets David in charge of the army. After David returns from battle, the women heap praise upon him and refer to him as a greater military hero than Saul...who becomes jealous, fearing David as a rival to the throne.

Another day, while David is playing the harp, Saul - possessed by an evil spirit - throws a spear at him but misses on two occasions. Saul removes David from the court and appoints him an officer, but David becomes increasingly successful...which makes Saul even more resentful of him. In return for being his champion, Saul offers his daughter Merob to David as a wife. But David is too humble to accept, so Merob is married to a different man. When Saul's other daughter Michal falls in love with David, Saul repeats the offer. Again David turns it down, claiming he lacks the wealth of a suitable husband. Saul persuades David that the bride price would only be 100 foreskins from the Philistines; he secretly hopes that David will be slain trying to achieve this. Instead, David obtains 200 foreskins and is consequently married to Michal.

The narrative continues as Saul plots against David, but Jonathan dissuades Saul from this course of action; he also tells David of it. Saul tries to have David killed during the night, but Michal helps him escape and tricks his pursuers by using a household idol to make it seem that David is still in bed. David flees to Jonathan, who wasn't living near Saul. Jonathan returns to Saul, hoping to discover his father's ultimate intent. While dining with Saul, Jonathan pretends that David has been called away to his brothers. But Saul sees through the ruse and castigates Jonathan for being David's protector; clearly, Saul wants David slain. The next day, Jonathan meets with David and tells him Saul's intent. The two friends say their goodbyes, and David flees into the countryside. Saul later marries Michal to another man.

Saul is later informed by his head shepherd, an Edomite named Doeg, that Ahimelech assisted David. A henchman is sought to kill Ahimelech and the other priests of Nob. None of Saul's henchmen are willing to do this, so Doeg offers to do it instead...killing 85 priests. Saul also kills every man, woman and child living in Nob.

David had already left Nob by this point and had amassed about 400 disaffected men including a group of outlaws. With these men David launches an attack on the Philistines at Keilah. Saul realises he could trap David and his men by laying the city to siege. Yet David hears about this and, having received divine counsel (via the Ephod), finds that the citizens of Keilah would betray him to Saul. He flees to Ziph. Saul discovers this and pursues David on two occasions:

• Some of the inhabitants of Ziph betray David's location to Saul, but David hears about it and flees with his men to Maon. Saul follows David, but while Saul travels along one side of the gorge, David travels along the other, and Saul is forced to break off pursuit when the Philistines invade. This is supposedly how the place became known as the gorge of divisions. David hides in the caves at Engedi and after fighting the Philistines, Saul returns to Engedi to attack him. Saul eventually enters the cave in which David had been hiding, but as David is in the darkest recesses Saul doesn't spot him. David cuts off a piece of Saul's robe; yet David restrains himself and his associates from going further, due to a taboo against killing an anointed king...and also due to the risk of rationalizing Saul's jealousy and paranoia. David then leaves the cave, revealing himself to Saul, and gives a speech that persuades Saul to reconcile.

• On the second occasion, Saul returns to Ziph with his men. When David hears of this he sneaks into Saul's camp by night, and thrusts his spear into the ground near where Saul is sleeping. David prevents his associates from killing Saul, because doing so would prove the former no more worthy than the latter; Instead, David merely steals Saul's spear and water jug. The next day, David stands atop a slope opposite Saul's camp; he shows the jug and spear as proof that he could have slain Saul but did not. David then persuades Saul to reconcile with him; the two swear never to harm one another.

Saul is among the prophets[link]

The phrase Saul is among the prophets, is mentioned by the text in a way that suggests it was a proverb in later Israelite culture. Two accounts of its origin are given:

• (1 Samuel 10:11 etc.) Having been anointed by Samuel, Saul is told of signs he will receive to know that he has been divinely appointed. The last of these signs is that Saul will be met by an ecstatic group of prophets leaving a high place and playing music on lyre, tambourine, and flutes. The signs come true (though the text skips the first two, suggesting that a portion of the text has been lost, or edited out for some reason), and Saul joins the ecstatic prophets, hence the phrase.

• (1 Samuel 19:24 etc.) Saul sends men to pursue David, but when they meet a group of ecstatic prophets playing music on lyre, tambourine, and flute, they become possessed by a prophetic state and join in. Saul sends more men, but they too join the prophets. Eventually Saul himself goes, and also joins the prophets, hence the phrase.

Battle of Gilboa and the death of King Saul[link]

The Battle of Gilboa, by Jean Fouquet, the protagonists depicted anachronistically with 15th Century armour

Despite the oath(s) of reconciliation, David felt insecure, and so made an alliance with the Philistines, becoming their vassal. Emboldened by this, the Philistines prepared to attack Israel, and Saul led out his army to face them at Mount Gilboa, but before the battle decided to consult the witch of Endor for advice. The witch, unaware of who he was, reminded Saul that the king (i.e. Saul himself) had made witchery a capital offence, but after being assured that Saul wouldn't harm her, the witch conjures up the spirit of Samuel. Upon seeing the spirit of Samuel Saul fell with his face to the ground and Samuel asked Saul "Why have you disquieted me, to bring me up?" Saul told Samuel's spirit of the forthcoming battle with Philistine and that God will not answer him anymore when he prays, and asks for understanding. Samuel then told Saul that he will lose the battle and his life. Broken in spirit, Saul returned to face the enemy, and the Israelites were duly defeated. To escape the ignominy of capture, Saul asked his armour bearer to kill him, but was forced to commit suicide by falling on his sword when the armour bearer refuses. An Amalekite then claimed to have killed Saul, and the Amalekite told David. Infuriated, David ordered the Amalekite to be put to death as punishment for killing God's anointed, despite Saul's earlier assassination attempt upon David. The body of Saul, with those of his sons, was fastened to the wall of Beth-shan, and his armor was hung up in the house of Ashtaroth (an Ascalonian temple of the Canaanites). The inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead (the scene of Saul's first victory) rescued the bodies and took them to Jabesh-gilead, where they burned their flesh and buried the bones.

Classical Rabbinical views[link]

Two opposing views of Saul are found in classical rabbinical literature. One is based on the reverse logic that punishment is a proof of guilt, and therefore seeks to rob Saul of any halo which might surround him; typically this view is similar to the republican source. The passage referring to Saul as a choice young man, and goodly (1 Samuel 9:2) is in this view interpreted as meaning that Saul was not good in every respect, but goodly only with respect to his personal appearance (Num. Rashi 9:28). According to this view, Saul is only a weak branch (Gen. Rashi 25:3), owing his kingship not to his own merits, but rather to his grandfather, who had been accustomed to light the streets for those who went to the bet ha-midrash, and had received as his reward the promise that one of his grandsons should sit upon the throne (Lev. Rashi 9:2).

The second view of Saul makes him appear in the most favourable light as man, as hero, and as king. This view is similar to that of the monarchical source. In this view it was on account of his modesty that he did not reveal the fact that he had been anointed king (1 Samuel 10:16; Meg. 13b); and he was extraordinarily upright as well as perfectly just. Nor was there any one more pious than he (M. Q. 16b; Ex. Rashi 30:12); for when he ascended the throne he was as pure as a child, and had never committed sin (Yoma 22b). He was marvelously handsome; and the maidens who told him concerning Samuel (cf 1 Samuel 9:11-13) talked so long with him that they might observe his beauty the more (Ber. 48b). In war he was able to march 120 miles without rest. When he received the command to smite Amalek (1 Samuel 15:3), Saul said: For one found slain the Torah requires a sin offering [Deuteronomy 21:1-9]; and here so many shall be slain. If the old have sinned, why should the young suffer; and if men have been guilty, why should the cattle be destroyed? It was this mildness that cost him his crown. And while Saul was merciful to his enemies, he was strict with his own people; when he found out that Avimelech, a kohen, had assisted David with finding food, Saul, in retaliation, killed the rest of the 85 kohanim of the family of Avimelech and the rest of his hometown, Nov. (Yoma 22b; Num. Rashi 1:10) The fact that he was merciful even to his enemies, being indulgent to rebels themselves, and frequently waiving the homage due to him, was incredible as well as deceiving. But if his mercy toward a foe was a sin, it was his only one; and it was his misfortune that it was reckoned against him, while David, although he had committed much iniquity, was so favored that it was not remembered to his injury (Yoma 22b; M. Q. 16b, and Rashi ad loc.). In some respects Saul was superior to David, e.g., in having only one concubine {Rizpah}, while David had many. Saul expended his own substance for the war, and although he knew that he and his sons would fall in battle, he nevertheless went forward, while David heeded the wish of his soldiers not to go to war in person (2 Samuel 21:17; Lev. Rashi 26:7; Yalq., Sam. 138).

According to the Rabbis, Saul ate his food with due regard for the rules of ceremonial purity prescribed for the sacrifice (Yalq., l.c.), and taught the people how they should slay cattle (cf 1 Samuel 14:34). As a reward for this, God himself gave Saul a sword on the day of battle, since no other sword suitable for him was found (ibid 13:22). Saul's attitude toward David finds its excuse in the fact that his courtiers were all tale-bearers, and slandered David to him (Deut. Rashi 5:10); and in like manner he was incited by Doeg against the priests of Nob (1 Samuel 22:16-19; Yalq., Sam. 131) - this act was forgiven him, however, and a heavenly voice (bat qol) was heard, proclaiming: Saul is the chosen one of God (Ber. 12b). His anger at the Gibeonites (2 Samuel 21:2) was not personal hatred, but was induced by zeal for the welfare of Israel (Num. Rashi 8:4). The fact that he made his daughter remarry (1 Samuel 25:44), finds its explanation in his (Saul's) view that her betrothal to David had been gained by false pretenses, and was therefore invalid (Sanhedrin 19b). During the lifetime of Saul there was no idolatry in Israel. The famine in the reign of David (cf 2 Samuel 21:1) was to punish the people, because they had not accorded Saul the proper honours at his burial (Num. Rashi 8:4). In Sheol, Samuel reveals to Saul that in the next world, Saul would dwell with Samuel, which is a proof that all has been forgiven him by god('Er. 53ba]

Biblical criticism[link]

Saul's name and Samuel's birth-narrative[link]

The birth-narrative of the prophet Samuel is found at 1 Samuel 1-28. It describes how Samuel's mother Hannah requests a son from Yahweh, and dedicates the child to God at the shrine of Shiloh. The passage makes extensive play with the root-elements of Saul's name, and ends with the phrase hu sa'ul le-Yahweh, "he is dedicated to Yahweh." Hannah names the resulting son Samuel, giving as her explanation, "because from God I requested him." Samuel's name, however, means "name of God," and the etymology and multiple references to the root of the name seems to fit Saul instead. The majority explanation for the discrepancy is that the narrative originally described the birth of Saul, and was given to Samuel in order to enhance the position of David and Samuel at the former king's expense.^[7]

Divine Rejection or Judgement[link]

The main challenge Saul encounters is his lack of divine approval; he is portrayed negatively as soon as David is added to the narrative.^[8] At this point Saul is rejected and the Spirit of the Lord is replaced by an "evil spirit" explained in 1 Samuel 16:14. In contrast, once David is anointed, "the spirit of the Lord comes upon [him]."^[8] David's anointment differs from Saul's because it is relatively unfailing throughout the narrative despite David's shortcomings, such as his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah.

In Islam[link]

Muslims believe Saul (Arabic: طالوت, Tālūt‎) was the commander of Israel, as do Jews and Christians. According to the Qur'an, Saul was chosen by the prophet Samuel (not mentioned by name explicitly but rather as "a Prophet" of Israelites) after being asked by the people of Israel for a king to lead them into war. The Israelites criticized Samuel for appointing Saul because Saul was not wealthy so they had no respect for him. Samuel rebuked the people for this and told them that Saul was far more favored than they were. Saul led the Israelites to victory over the army of Goliath who was killed by David. Saul is not considered a prophet generally but rather a divinely appointed king.

Name[link]

The name Tālūt has uncertain etymological origins. It is not similar to the Hebrew name (Sha'ul), like most Qur'anic figures. According to Muslim exegetes, the name Tālūt means 'tall' (from the Arabic "tūl") and refers to the extraordinary stature of Saul - in consonance with Biblical accounts, Muslim exegetes explain that Saul's remarkable feature was his stature.^[9] In explanation of the name, exegetes such as Tha'labi hold that at this time, the future king of Israel was to be recognised by his height; Samuel set up a measure, but no one in Israel reached its height except Tālūt (Saul).

Saul as the first King[link]

In the Qur'an, Israel demanded a king after the time of Moses. God appointed Saul king, but the people did not find him worthy of the throne. Saul was distinguished for the greatness of his knowledge and for his great physique; it was a sign of his role as King to rule that God brought back the Ark of the Covenant for Israel. Saul tested his people at a river; whoever drank from it, would not follow him in battle. Many drunk but only the faithful ventured on. In the battle, however, David slew Goliath and was made the subsequent King of Israel. The Qur'anic account differs slightly from the Biblical account in that the sacred ark was recaptured in the Bible before Saul's accession and the test by drinking water is made in the Bible not by Saul but by Gideon.^[10]

Notes[link]

See also[link]

• Midrash Samuel
• Islamic view of David

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Saul

Further reading[link]

• Wellhausen, Julius, Der Text der Bücher Samuelis
• Budde, Die Bücher Richter und Samuel, 1890, pp. 167–276
• Driver, S. R., Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, 1890
• Cheyne, T. K., Aids to the Devout Study of Criticism, 1892, pp. 1–126
• Smith, H. P., Old Testament History, 1903, ch. vii.
• Cheyne, T. K., and Black, (eds.) Encyclopedia Biblica
• SAMUEL AND SAUL: A NEGATIVE SYMBIOSIS by Rabbi Moshe Reiss
• Hudson, J. Francis, 'Rabshakeh' [Lion Publishing 1992] is a fictionalisation of Saul's tragedy.
• Green, A., 'King Saul, The True History of the First Messiah' [Lutterworth Press 2007]

 This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Joseph Jacobs, Ira Maurice Price, Isidore Singer, and Jacob Zallel Lauterbach (1901–1906). "Saul". Jewish Encyclopedia. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=275&letter=S. 

David Horowitz
Horowitz in February 2011
Born	(1939-01-10) January 10, 1939 (age 73) Forest Hills
Occupation	Conservative activist, writer
Nationality	United States
Spouse(s)	Elissa Krauthamer (deceased) Sam Moorman (divorced) Shay Marlowe (divorced) April Mullvain Horowitz (current)
Children	Jonathon Daniel, Benjamin Horowitz, Anne Pilat, Sarah Rose Horowitz (deceased)[1]

David Joel Horowitz (born January 10, 1939) is an American conservative writer and policy advocate. He is a founder and current president of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and edits FrontPage Magazine. Horowitz also founded the organization Students for Academic Freedom, whose self-stated goal is combating "leftist indoctrination" in academia.

Horowitz was raised by parents who were members of the Communist Party USA. Between 1956 and 1975, Horowitz was an outspoken adherent of the New Left before rejecting Leftism completely. Horowitz has recounted his ideological journey in a series of retrospectives, culminating with his 1996 memoir Radical Son: A Generational Odyssey.

Family[link]

Horowitz was born to a Secular Jewish family in Forest Hills, New York City. His parents, Phil and Blanche Horowitz, were high school teachers. Phil taught English and Blanche taught stenography.^[2] Horowitz majored in English and received a BA from Columbia University in 1959 and a master's degree in English literature at University of California, Berkeley.

Phil and Blanche Horowitz were long-standing members of the American Communist Party and avid supporters of Joseph Stalin.^[3][4]

According to Horowitz,

"Underneath the ordinary surfaces of their lives, my parents and their friends thought of themselves as secret agents. The mission they had undertaken, and about which they could not speak freely except with each other, was not just an idea to them. It was more important to their sense of themselves than anything else they did. Nor were its tasks of a kind they could attend or ignore, depending on their moods. They were more like the obligations of a religious faith. Except that their faith was secular, and the millennium they awaited was being instituted, at that moment, in the very country that had become America's enemy. It was this fact that made their ordinary lives precarious and their secrecy necessary. If they lived under a cloud of suspicion, it was the result of more than just their political passions. The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima had created a terror in the minds of ordinary people. Newspapers reported on American spy rings working to steal atomic secrets for the Soviet state. When people read these stories, they inevitably thought of progressives like us. And so did we ourselves. Even if we never encountered a Soviet agent or engaged in a single illegal act, each of us knew that our commitment to socialism implied the obligation to commit treason, too."^[5]

After the death of Stalin in 1953, Phil Horowitz, commenting on how the numerous official titles held by Stalin had to be divided among his successors, told his son, "You see what a genius Stalin was. It took five men to replace him."^[6]

Career in the New Left[link]

The Horowitz family broke with the American Communist Party after the publication of Nikita Khrushchev's Secret Speech in 1956. According to Horowitz,

"The publication of the Khrushchev Report was probably the greatest blow struck against the Soviet Empire during the Cold War. When my parents and their friends opened the morning Times and read its text, their world collapsed -- and along with it their will to struggle. If the document was true, almost everything they had said and believed was false. Their secret mission had led them into waters so deep that its tide had overwhelmed them, taking with it the very meaning of their lives."^[7]

In the early 1960s, Horowitz lived in London as an employee of the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation.^[8] He regarded himself as a serious Marxist intellectual. In 1966, Ralph Schoenman persuaded Bertrand Russell to convene a war crimes tribunal to judge American involvement in the Vietnam War.^[9] Horowitz developed serious reservations about the process when the tribunal's judges, who included Isaac Deutscher, Jean-Paul Sartre, Stokely Carmichael, Simone de Beauvoir, James Baldwin, and Vladimir Dedijer, degenerated into a feuding rabble.^[10] See Russell Tribunal.