2-17).  And  this  dogmatic  assertion  Well-
hausen  does  not  hesitate  to  make.  He  says
that  "there  cannot  be  a  word  of  truth  in
the  entire  narrative."  Driver  does  not  ex
plicitly  deny  that  the  event  occurred,  but  he
admits  that  chaps,  ix.  and  x.  do  not  connect
directly  with  vii.  1,  and  says  that  "it  is
probable  that  the  original  sequel  of  iv.  lb  to
vii.  1,  has  here  been  omitted  to  make  room
for  vii.  2  if."  In  other  words,  vii.  2-17  and
viii.  afford  a  consistent  picture  of  the  times,
as  has  been  already  shown  ;  and  it  is  -the
theory  of  the  divisive  critics  which  fails  to
explain  the  existing  phenomena.  (2)  The
original  narrative  in  xi.  implies  the  public
selection  of  Saul  to  be  king  which  is  related
in  the  alleged  later  narrative  (x.  17-27).  If,
as  asserted,  Saul  had  only  been  anointed  in
private  (x.  1),  what  gave  him  such  respect  in
the  eyes  of  the  people  a  month  later  that
men  from  all  the  tribes  sprang  to  arms  at  his
summons  and  followed  him  to  the  relief  of
Jabesh  in  Gilead?  Chapter  xi.  requires  that
some  event  preceded  like  that  which  is  re
corded  in  the  alleged  later  narrative  (x.  17-27).
