SAMSON săm’ sən (שִׁמְשֹׁ֑ון; LXX Σαμψών, G4907, meaning debated; sunny, sun’s man or sun’s child have been proposed). Judge and hero of Israel famous for his prodigious strength displayed against the Philistines (Judg 13-16).

1. Name. The Biblical account gives no explanation, etymology, or significance to the name Samson. Nevertheless, it derives from shemesh, meaning “sun.” This is not unexpected, since Samson was born only a few m. from Beth-Shemesh, the city whose name means “house of the sun.” The city was presumably once the site of a shrine of the sungod. Probably both names are survivals from earlier Canaanite, which reflect Canaanite sun worship before Israel settled the land. This has led some to interpret the Samson story as a solar myth. However, this interpretation cannot be sustained (see Gaster, Myth, Legend and Custom in the Old Testament, 434ff. for refutation).

While the derivation of Samson from shemesh is clear, the function of the -ōn ending of the name is not so clear. It prob. indicates a meaning like “sunny, solar,” or “sun’s man,” though it could be a diminutive ending meaning “sun’s child.” In any event, Ugaritic names with a similar ending are common. This would also support the suggestion above that Samson was originally a Canaanite name.

2. Historical background. Samson was born during the period of the judges, prob. around the beginning of the 11th cent. b.c. During this period God raised up national heroes to deliver His people from their enemies. These deliverers were termed judges (שֹֽׁפְטִ֑ים); Samson is the last one mentioned before the transition of Eli and Samuel to the monarchy. Israel’s most formidable enemy at this time was the Philistines, whom God had used to oppress Israel because of their evil deeds (Judg 13:1). Into this situation Samson was born in order to begin to deliver Israel from the hand of the Philistines (13:5).

3. Birth. The four chs. of Judges (chs. 13-16) devoted to Samson were built on the theme of a broken vow—a time-honored motif in the history of lit. Even before he was born, Samson was designated as a Nazirite, and the writer took a full chapter to emphasize that (Judg 13).

Samson was born into a family from the tribe of Dan. His parents had been childless because his mother was barren (13:2). In the ancient world, childlessness was considered one of the worst things that could happen to a couple, and particularly to the woman, who could be divorced for this reason. Male children were more desirable for three reasons: (1) they carried on the family name (note the frequent mention of X son of Y throughout the Bible); (2) their labor was more valuable in an agricultural society; (3) they were not as expensive as girls, because a girl of marriageable age had to have a dowry from her father. It is not surprising then that there is frequent mention of the birth of a son to a previously barren woman: cf. Sarah (Gen 16:1; 18:1-15; 21:1-3); Rebekah (Gen 25:21-26); Rachel (Gen 30:1, 2, 22-24); Hannah (1 Sam 1); and Elizabeth (Luke 1:5-25). Since births to barren women were unusual, the birth often was divinely announced ahead of time. Both Abraham, the husband of Sarah, and Zechariah, the husband of Elizabeth, were told that their barren wives would conceive. However, the annunciation of Samson did not come to his father, Manoah, but to his mother, who remains unnamed. Manoah prayed for an additional visit of the man of God, and when the request was granted he asked for instructions regarding the nurture of the promised son. Eventually Manoah presented a sacrifice to the angel and asked his name (Judg 13:15-17). He received no answer (cf. Jacob, Gen 32:29) since names were considered the essence of a person, and to know the name would have carried with it the ability to control the person. Only after the angel disappeared in the flame of the sacrifice did Manoah and his wife realize that they had been talking to an angel (Judg 13:21-23).

Central to the promise of a son were the instructions which the angel gave. The boy to be born was to be consecrated to God as a Nazirite from birth. The Nazirite vow involved three prohibitions: (1) against eating or drinking the fruit of the vine; (2) against contamination by any unclean thing; (3) against cutting the hair. Three times the injunction was repeated, each time addressed to his mother (13:4, 5, 7, 14). The implication is that the boy was to be so completely consecrated to God that his mother had to refrain from these things while he was still in the womb. The repetitions were clearly purposeful, and leave the reader with no uncertainty regarding the theme of the story.

The regulations for a Nazirite are given in Numbers 6:2-21, but in Judges the order was changed so that the prohibition against the cutting of the hair came last. This again was purposeful, since the climax of the story came when Samson broke his vow and allowed his hair to be cut.

4. Life. Samson’s life was the story of his breaking of the three prohibitions of the Nazirite vow. Hebrew storytelling is at its best in describing how Samson violated these prohibitions, climaxing with Delilah cutting his hair.

Samson’s first adventure, or misadventure, involved a trip down to Timnah (14:1-4). Timnah was in Philistine territory but not more than a few m. from Samson’s house in Zorah. Passage between Israel and Philistia was easy because the Philistines controlled SW Israel (Judg 15:11). In Timnah Samson fell in love with a Philistine woman. This was to be the first of three women who were to prove his undoing. Samson came home to his parents with the request that they acquire her as his wife. Although his parents objected, preferring instead an Israelite for a daughter-in-law, it was all in God’s purpose (14:4).

Two additional trips to Timnah to see his girl friend brought the first violation of his Nazirite vow (14:5-9). On one occasion he met a lion on his way and killed it with his bare hands (14:6). He stopped to see the carcass of the lion on his next trip, and found it full of honey. So he took some, ate it, and brought some home to his parents. Numbers 6:6 specifically indicates that a Nazirite was not to go near a dead body. Since the text says that Samson did not tell his parents what he had done (Judg 14:6, 9), the implication is that he knew he was breaking his vow.

Samson’s fourth trip to Timnah was to marry the Philistine woman (14:10-20). He gave a feast to celebrate the occasion. The Heb. word for feast (misteh) implies a drinking bout which the Philistines would have enjoyed. Though the text does not specifically say that Samson drank, the clear implication is that he did, and thereby broke the second regulation of his Nazirite vow.

Also at the wedding festivities Samson proposed a riddle which turned on a play of words (14:14, 18). Both “honey” and “lion” are outwardly identical in Heb. (see J. R. Porter, JTS 13 [1962], 106-109). His friends answered the riddle, apparently waiting until the last moment before the marriage was to be consummated (14:18). Enraged, Samson went to Ashkelon, killed thirty men and used their garments to pay off the wager he had made with his friends. He then returned home without consummating his marriage. Some have argued that the intended marriage was a type of matriarchal marriage known as sadiqâ, where the husband either lives with his wife’s family or makes periodic visits to her. However, since Samson left in a rage (14:19) we do not know whether he intended to bring his bride home after the ceremonies were over or live at her house.

When he returned to Timnah to visit his wife, he was prevented by her father; she had been married to Samson’s best man (15:1, 2). According to Canaanite law, influenced by Sumerian and Babylonian law, the father could give his daughter away to someone else when the first bridegroom left before the consummation of the marriage. But it was expressly forbidden to give her to the best man who was to protect the groom’s interests. Samson’s revenge was to burn the corn fields of the Philistines in heroic fashion by attaching torches to the tails of 150 pairs of foxes (15:3-5). Ovid tells that it was customary to send foxes into the fields with firebrands tied to their tails at the annual festival of Ceres (Fasti iv. 680ff.). A similar tactic was employed by Hannibal when he scared the Rom. troops by sending oxen into their fields with firebrands tied to their horns (Livy xxii. 16ff.). The Philistines, knowing that the law was on Samson’s side, took revenge on the bride and her father by burning them—the common treatment of an adulterer (15:6). So Samson responded by killing many Philistines (15:8). Later, on another occasion, he killed a thousand Philistines with only the jawbone of an ass (15:15, 16).

Samson’s second woman was a harlot he found in Gaza (16:1-3). While Samson was having sexual relations with her, the Philistines plotted his death. But despite their welllaid plans, he escaped by carrying the city gates to a hill near Hebron, some forty miles away. This was the worst humiliation, because city gates symbolized national strength.

Samson’s breaking of his third vow brought his downfall. The Philistines were desperate, and plotted his end continuously. Their opportunity came when Samson fell in love with Delilah, the third woman in his life (16:4-22). She lived in the valley of Sorek, only a few m. from his home. The Philistine lords, who were five in number (cf. Judg 3:3) and ruled the Philistine pentapolis, now came to Delilah with a fantastic bribe. Each offered her eleven hundred pieces of silver, a sum with purchasing power well into five figures. She is nowhere named as a Philistine and perhaps she was not, since the bribe was so high. Yet her collaboration seems to indicate she was a Philistine; the size of the bribe would then show how valuable Samson was. Delilah immediately went to work with all her womanly charms, seeking the key to Samson’s strength. For awhile she failed, as Samson deceived her three times: (1) by snapping seven fresh bowstrings (16:6-9); (2) by breaking new ropes (16:10-12); (3) by removing a whole loom woven into his seven locks of uncut hair (16:13, 14). This last event brought the story to the point of climax in two ways: (1) three climaxed by four is a common climaxing device (cf. Amos 1:3ff.); (2) Samson’s deception regarding his hair came close to revealing the truth. The climax came when Samson succumbed to Delilah’s coaxing and told her that his strength resided in his hair. She lulled him to sleep and cut off his seven locks, depriving Samson of his strength. In addition, Samson was made a captive of the Philistines. His eyes were put out (a customary penalty, cf. 1 Sam 11:2 and 2 Kings 25:7), and he was set to grinding in a prison at Gaza (Judg 16:21). Here his hair began to grow again (16:22).

Samson was not the only one whose long hair was associated with heroic strength. Achaean warriors often were called the “long haired” (lliad 2:323, 443, etc.). The fighting strength of the god Phoebus was associated with his unshorn hair (Iliad 20:39). Finally, the Gilgamesh Epic states that the mighty Enkidu had long hair like a woman; and the glyptic art bears this out.

5. Death. Samson’s death came with his final heroic deed. To celebrate Samson’s capture and give glory to Dagon, their god, the Philistines assembled at a temple in Gaza. Samson was called out of prison to make sport before the assembled body. Led by a little lad to a position between two pillars, Samson asked to feel the pillars. He then prayed to God for strength to avenge himself. God answered, and Samson pulled down the supporting pillars of the temple. Though it resulted in his own death, he killed more Philistines with this act than during all of his life. He had judged Israel for twenty years (16:28-31).

6. Character. Samson was a somewhat enigmatic figure, with very little similarity to other judges. He resembled them only by being possessed of the Spirit, which seized him suddenly and drove him to violent action, exhibiting itself in extraordinary strength. But his exploits were always individual. He called no one else to his aid, led no troops to battle, and was in no sense a national leader. In fact, all he did was to avenge his own personal wrongs on the Philistines. Yet the key to the understanding of Samson is to be found in these individual exploits. They are of such extraordinary proportions that Samson must be understood as a heroic figure, living in a heroic age, and recorded in heroic lit. (For evidence, see the writing of C. H. Gordon, esp. The Common Background of Greek and Hebrew Civilizations and the dissertation of C. E. Armerding, The Heroic Ages of Greece and Israel: A Literary-Historical Comparison.) Comparisons with other heroic figures, such as Hercules and Gilgamesh, are very illuminating. But comparisons do not mean point for point parallels. It is stretching the evidence to find twelve labors of Samson to parallel the twelve labors of Hercules, as some have done.

7. Historical significance. The setting of Samson’s exploits was along the border between the Philistines and the tribe of Dan. Thus the primary historical significance of the story is the insight it gives us into life along the border. This information is largely sociological—marriage customs and wedding festivities, relationships with women, riddles, bribes, etc. There is also information about the Philistine domination of Israel. The tribe of Dan at one time had expanded out to the Mediterranean coast (Judg 5:17), but in Samson’s day both Dan and Judah were controlled by the Philistines (Judg 15:11). The pressure was so great that at least part of the tribe of Dan migrated N (chs. 17; 18). The weapons of Samson—a jawbone, his bare hands, and physical strength—clearly indicate that Israel was without the weapons of war and explain the Philistine success. The Philistines had a superior material culture which included the smelting of iron. They specifically guarded this knowledge and prevented the Israelites from learning it and using it to make iron weapons (1 Sam 13:19-23). Thus Israel was no match for the Philistines, unless they had a man of extraordinary strength like Samson fighting for them.

8. Religious significance. Since Samson is a heroic figure living in a heroic age, one must be careful in drawing religious significance from his life. His exploits resulted from the circumstances of a rough and ready life. Thus his virtues and vices were those of the heroic age in which he lived, and should not be imitated or avoided, as the case may be. Samson broke his Nazirite vow and disobeyed God, and therein is his religious significance. His life is a negative example of a charismatic leader who came to a tragic, yet heroic, end. Nevertheless, his partial victory over the enemy was reason to be named with the heroes of the faith (Heb 11:32).

Bibliography G. F. Moore, Judges, ICC (1895), 312-365; P. Carus, The Story of Samson and Its Place in the Religious Development of Mankind (1907); A. S. Palmer, The Samson-Saga and Its Place in Comparative Religion (1913); P. Haupt, “Samson and the Ass’s Jaw,” JBL 33 (1914), 296-298; J. Pedersen, Israel: Its Life and Culture, I and II (1926), III and IV (1940); C. F. Burney, Judges (1930), 335-408; A. Van Selms, “The Best Man and Bride—From Sumer to St. John,” JNES 9 (1950), 65-75; J. R. Porter, “Samson’s Riddle,” JTS 13 (1962), 106-109; J. Blenkinsopp, “Structure and Style in Judges 13-16,” JBL 82 (1963), 65-76; C. H. Gordon, The Common Background of Greek and Hebrew Civilizations (1965); A. G. Van Daalen, Samson (1966); J. Gray, Joshua, Judges and Ruth (1967); T. Dothan, The Philistines and their Material Culture (in Hebrew) (1967); C. E. Armerding, The Heroic Ages of Greece and Israel: A Literary-Historical Comparison (Doctoral Dissertation, University Microfilms) (1968); T. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament (1969), 433-443; G. G. Cohen, “Samson and Hercules: A Comparison Between the Feats of Samson and the Labours of Hercules,” EQ 42 (1970), 131-141.