Matsura's take on 1st Samuel is that the Masoretic Text (MT hereafter) is far less corrupt than other commentaries would have you believe. Operating under assumption that the book is the record of an aural story, he makes his case via some less than common grammatical maneuvers and through identifying structures within MT passages (often labeled as corrupt) that he claims show that the apparent mistakes and less than well preserved sections are actually quite intelligible without readings from the Septuagint (LXX hereafter) or (gurk) reconstructions. The particulars are spelled out in his introduction, but beware: the intro is graduate level, and while it's comparatively nice as such things go, it does assume a certain competency with Hebrew and its nuances which may put you in a coma if you're not careful.

I admit my bias: the MT rates a solid reading, including the hard parts (and there are hard parts), before looking to the LXX or other sources, or providing willy-nilly reconstructions. Despite Tsumura's obvious leaning towards Fundamental Christianity, I found that his reading of the MT was more than solid, and that he was able to make a compelling case for the tough passages. A fine example is his reading of 23:10-11 (pp. 554-555), where he shows that the passages are actually chiastically structured, successfully putting to rest any notion of corruption for this passage. Like I said, solid.

On the other hand, the commentary is pretty much tightly limited to the plan laid out in the introduction. That's a good thing, don't get me wrong, but I was hoping for a bit more discursiveness and meandering in the notes a la Hamilton. Alas.

Too, he has an axe to grind with McCarter (P. Kyle McCarter. I Samuel : a new translation ... Garden City : Doubleday, 1980. Anchor Bible 8. ISBN 0385067607). Mr. McCarter, as some of you may know, had frequent occasion to declare passages corrupt and/or provide (hurk) reconstructions, and Tsumura takes issue with this approach on virtually every page of his commentary. That's not hyperbole; the title of Tsumura's work could just as easily be Contra McCarter. It's a little unfair, this treatment. P. Kyle is certainly out in the weeds often enough, but he makes some solid contributions and by no means is his work without merit. Also he is by no means the worst of those who cry "Corrupt!" (Looking at you, Bolling), and he does try to bring other things besides translation and textual criticism to his commentary. And sometimes, he's even correct vis a vis textual corruption, but I hasten to add that there's a special layer of Hell for people who create "textual reconstructions (yurk)," even if said work is intended for good.

This commentary will have limited value unless you're doing textual criticism. If the latter is the case, then Tsumura should be right at the top of your list though you'll want to flesh out your reading with some second opinion literature, and McCarter is not a bad choice. ( )

Tsumura's entry in Eerdman's NICOT commentary series is strong. Here is where it's most useful:

1. Ancient Hebrew: The core of this commentary is Tsumura's ability to bring out the meaning of the original language. Interconnections within the text and play-on-words come to life in English under Tsumura's hand.
2. Geography: There are many military exploits in 1 Samuel where the geography is taken for granted. Tsumura describes the relationship between towns and how the landscape would either benefit or imperil a military assault.
3. Modern Translation Discrepancies: If you read 1 Samuel in a variety of English translations, you discover a number of different interpretive options. This is especially noticeable in a small group setting, where each participant has their own favored translation at hand. More than most Old Testament books, there are a number of differences between the MT and the LXX, which in turn leads to a plethora of English interpretations. Tsumura's an expert guide at navigating the MT and LXX options.

My only real issue with Tsumura's book was his lack of narrative perspective. The significance and theological implications of many events were passed over quite quickly. If you're looking to wrestle with the implications of the narrative, read Brueggemann's First and Second Samuel from the Interpretation commentary series alongside the NICOT offering. (Conversely, Brueggemann passes over a lot of the technical information that Tsumura has mastered.)

David Tsumura's commentary is an excellent resource for any pastor or serious parishioner who wants to dive deeply into the Samuel, Saul, and David stories. ( )

http://evepheso.wordpress.com/2007/08/07/book-review-the-first-book-of-samuel-pa... ( )