Skip to main content

Full text of "The Bible history"

See other formats 


■:-;?.>>>; -<^;-:-<-b'. 


HISTORY 

OF 

JUDAH  AND  ISRAEL 


DR.  EDERSHEIM 


BIBLE  HISTORY    YOL.  V. 


0^^«  »o%i,,,|^^^ 


PRINCETON,    N.    J. 


""S, 


Shelf. 


Division. ,. .L^^. W  W 

Section    ..>  .l^.Crr). 

Number V.*..Q 


HISTORY 


OF 


JUDAH   AND   ISRAEL 


FROM   THE 


BIRTH  OF  SOLOMON  TO  THE  REIGN  OF  AHAB. 


BY 


ALFRED    EDERSHEIM,  D.D.,   Ph.D., 

author  of 

"  The  Temple  :  its  Ministry  and  Services," 

"  Sketches  of  Jewish  Social  Life  at  the  Time  of  Christ,"  etc. 


THE    RELIGIOUS    TRACT    SOCIETY, 

56,  Paternoster  Row  ;  65,  St.  Paul's  Churchyard  ; 
and  164,  Piccadilly. 


THE    BIBLE    HISTORY. 

By  the  Rev.  Dr.  Edersheim. 
Crown  Svo.,  2s.  6d.  each  Volume,  cloth  boards. 


1.  T/ie  World  before  the  Flood,  and  the  History  of  the 

PatriarcJis.     With  Map. 
'•  It  gives  a  clearer  idea  of  the  external  circumstances  of  the  story 
of  the  Patriarchs  than  any  other  book  we  know." 

Literary  Churchman. 

2.  The  Exodus  and  the  Wanderings  in  the  Wilderness. 

"  In  the  easiest,  simplest  way  imaginable,  in  unostentatious  popu- 
lar language,  he  embodies  the  results  of  a  large  literature." 

Clergyman's  Magazine. 

3.  Israel  in  Canaan,  under  Joshua  and  the  Judges. 

"  Dr.  Edersheim  has  succeeded  in  throwing  a  freshness  of  meaning 
over  these  histories."  Irish  Ecclesiastical  Gazette. 

4.  Israel  under  Samuel,  Saul,  and  David,  to  the  Birth 

of  Solomon. 
**  Dr.  Edersheim  writes  with  fulness  of  knowledge  and  in  an  easy 
pleasing  style,  and  these  half-crown  books  will  be  a  great  help  to 
many  readers  of  the  Bible."  Literary  World. 

5.  History  ofjudah  and  Israel  from  the  Birth  of  Solomon 

to  t/ie  Reign  c/  Ahab. 

6.  Frojn  the  Sacrifice  of  Elijah  on  Mount  Carmel  to  the 

Babylonian  Captivity.  With  a  copious  Alphabetical  Index 
to  the  Six  Volumes,  a  Chronological  List  of  the  High  Priests, 
etc.     In  preparatio7i. 


London  :  The  Religious  Tract  Society. 


/  I. 

THaOLGGIOAL 


The  period  of  Israel's  history  treated  in  this  Volume  has  a  two- 
fold special  interest :  political  and  religious.  Beginning  with  the 
later  years  of  David's  reign,  when  the  consciousness  and  the  con- 
sequences of  the  great  sin  of  his  life  had,  so  to  speak,  paralysed  the 
strong  hand  which  held  the  reins  of  government,  we  are,  first,  led 
to  see  how,  in  the  Providence  of  God,  the  possibility  of  a  great 
military  world-monarchy  in  Israel  (comp.  Ps.  xviii.  43-45) — such 
as  those  of  heathen  antiquity — was  for  ever  frustrated.  Another  era 
began  with  Solomon  :  that  of  peaceful  development  of  the  internal 
resources  of  the  country ;  of  rapid  increase  of  prosperity ;  of  spread 
of  culture  ;  and,  through  friendly  intercourse  with  other  nations,  of 
introduction  of  foreign  ideas  and  foreign  civilisation.  When  it  is 
remembered  that  the  building  of  the  Temple  preceded  the  legis- 
lation of  Lycurgus  in  Sparta  by  about  one  hundred  and  twenty 
years  ;  that  of  Solon  in  Athens  by  more  than  four  hundred  years  ; 
and  the  building  of  Rome  by  about  two  hundred  and  fifty  years,  it 
will  be  perceived  that  the  kingdom  of  Solomon  presented  the  dim 
possibility  of  the  intellectual,  if  not  the  political  Empire  of  the  world. 
What  Jerusalem  was  in  the  high-day  of  Solomon's  glory  is  described 
in  a  chapter  of  this  history.  But,  in  the  Providence  of  God,  any 
such  prospect  passed  away,  when,  after  only  eighty  years'  duration, 
the  Davidic  kingdom  was  rent  into  two  rival  and  hostile  states. 
Yet,  although  this  catastrophe  was  intimated  by  prophecy,  as 
Divine  judgment  upon  Solomon's  unfaithfulness,  there  was  nothing 
either  abrupt  or  out  of  the  order  of  rational  causation  in  its 
accomplishment.  On  the  contrary,  the  causes  of  this  separation 
lay  far  back  in   the  tribal   relations  of  Israel ;   they  manifested 


iv  Preface. 

themselves  once  and  again  in  the  history  of  the  Judges  and 
of  Saul ;  made  themselves  felt  in  the  time  of  David ;  appeared 
in  that  of  Solomon  ;  and  only  reached  their  final  issue,  when  the 
difficult  task  of  meeting  them  devolved  upon  the  youthful  inex- 
perience and  misguided  folly  of  a  Rehoboam.  All  this  is  fully 
explained  in  the  course  of  this  history.  After  their  separation,  the 
two  kingdoms  passed,  in  their  relations,  through  three  stages  :  the 
first  one  of  hostihty  ;  the  second  one  of  alliance,  which  commenced 
with  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  and  of  Ahab,  and  ended  with  the 
slaughter  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  by  Jehu  ;  and  the  third 
again  one  of  estrangement  and  of  hostility.  Of  these  three  periods 
the  first  is  fully  traced,  and  the  beginning  of  the  second  marked 
in  the  present  Volume. 

From  the  political  we  turn  to  the  religious  aspect  of  this  history. 
It  was  indeed  true,  that  the  empire  of  the  world  was  to  be  connected 
with  the  Davidic  kingdom  (Ps.  ii.) — but  not  in  the  sense  of  founding 
a  great  military  monarchy,  nor  in  that  of  attaining  universal  intel- 
lectual supremacy,  least  of  all,  by  conformity  to  the  ways  and 
practices  of  heathen  worship,  magic,  and  theurgy.  The  exaltation 
of  Zion  above  the  hills,  and  the  flowing  of  all  nations  unto  it,  was 
to  be  brought  about  by  the  going  forth  of  the  Law  out  of  Zion,  and 
of  the  Word  of  Jehovah  from  Jerusalem  (Is.  ii.  2,  3).  This — to 
confine  ourselves  to  the  present  period  of  our  history — had  been 
distinctly  implied  in  the  great  promise  to  David  (2  Sam.  vii.)  ;  it 
was  first  typically  realised  in  the  choice  of  Jerusalem  as  the  City  of 
God  (Ps.  xlvi. ;  xlviii.  ;  Ixxxvii.) ;  and  further  presented  in  its  aspect 
of  peace,  prosperity,  and  happiness  in  the  reign  of  Solomon  (Ps. 
Ixxii.)  to  which  the  prophets  ever  afterwards  pointed  as  the  emblem 
of  the  higher  blessings  in  the  Kingdom  of  God  (Mic.  iv.  4 ;  Zech. 
iii.  10,  comp,  with  i  Kings  iv.  25).  But  the  great  work  of  that  reign, 
alike  in  its  national  and  typical  importance,  was  the  building  of  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem.  This  also  has  been  fully  described  in  the 
following  pages. 

But  already  other  elements  were  at  work.  The  introduction  of 
heathen  worship  commenced  with  the  decline  of  Solomon's  spiritual 


Preface.  v 

life.  After  his  death,  the  apostasy  from  God  attained  fearful  pro- 
portions, partially  and  temporarily  in  Judah,  but  permanently  in 
Israel.  In  the  latter,  from  the  commencement  of  its  separate 
national  existence  under  Jeroboam,  the  God-chosen  Sanctuary  at 
Jerusalem,  and  the  God-appointed  priesthood  were  discarded  ;  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  transformed  ;  and  by  its  side  spurious  rites 
and  heathen  idolatry  introduced,  till,  under  the  reign  of  Ahab,  the 
religion  of  Baal  became  that  of  the  State.  This  marks  the  high- 
point  of  apostasy  in  Israel.  The  evolving  of  principles  of  con- 
trariety to  the  Divine  Covenant  slowly  but  surely  led  up  to  the 
final  destruction  of  the  Jewish  Commonwealth.  But,  side  by 
side  with  it,  God  in  great  mercy  placed  an  agency,  the  origin, 
character,  and  object  of  which  have  already  been  indicated  in 
a  previous  Volume.  The  Prophetic  Order  may  be  regarded  as 
an  extraordinary  agency,  by  the  side  of  the  ordinary  economy  of 
the  Old  Testament ;  and  as  intended,  on  the  one  hand,  to  com- 
plement its  provisions,  and,  on  the  other,  to  supplement  them, 
either  in  times  of  religious  declension,  or  when,  as  in  Israel,  the 
people  were  withdrawn  from  their  influences.  Hence  the  great  ex- 
tension of  the  Prophetic  Order  in  such  periods,  and  especially  in 
the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes.  But  when,  during  the  reign  of  Ahab, 
the  religion  of  Jehovah  was,  so  to  speak,  repudiated,  and  the 
worship  of  Baal  and  Astarte  substituted  in  its  place,  something 
more  than  even  the  ordinary  exercise  of  the  Prophetic  Office  was 
required.  For  the  prophet  was  no  longer  acknowledged,  and  the 
authority  of  the  God,  Whose  Messenger  he  was,  disowned.  Both 
these  had  therefore  to  be  vindicated,  before  the  prophetic  agency 
could  serve  its  purpose.  This  was  achieved  through  what  must  be 
regarded,  not  so  much  as  a  new  phase,  but  as  a  further  development 
of  the  agency  already  at  work.  We  mark  this  chiefly  in  the 
ministry  of  Elijah  and  EHsha,  which  was  contemporary  with  the 
first  open  manifestation  of  Israel's  national  apostasy. 

Even  a  superficial  reader  will  observe  in  the  ministry  of  these 
two  prophets,  as  features  distinguishing  it  from  that  of  all  other 
prophets — indeed,  we  might  almost    say,  from  the  whole   history 


vi  Preface. 

of  the  Old  Testament — the  frequency  and  the  peculiar  character 
of  their  miracles.  Three  points  here  stand  out  prominently  : 
their  unwo7ited  accumulation j  their  seeming  characteristic  of 
viere  assertio7i  of  power;  and  their  apparent  purpose  of  vin- 
dicating the  authority  of  the  prophet.  The  reason  and  object  of 
these  peculiarities  have  already  been  indicated  in  our  foregoing 
remarks.  But  in  reference  to  the  characteristic  oi power  as  con- 
nected with  these  miracles,  it  may  be  remarked  that  its  exhibition 
was  not  only  necessary  for  the  vindication  of  the  authority  of  the 
prophet,  or  rather  of  Him  in  Whose  Name  he  spake,  but  that  they 
also  do  not  present  a  mere  display  of  power.  For,  it  was  always 
associated  with  an  ultimate  moral  purpose  :  in  regard  to  the  Gentiles 
or  to  Israel — the  believing  or  the  unbelieving  among  them  ;  and  in 
all  the  leading  instances  (which  must  rule  the  rest)  it  was  brought 
about  not  only  in  the  Name  of  Jehovah,  but  by  calling  upon  Him 
as  the  direct  Agent  in  it  (comp.  for  the  present  Volume  i  Kipgs  xvii. 
4,  9,  14,  20-22).  Thus  viewed,  this  extraordinary  display  of  the 
miraculous  appears,  like  that  in  the  first  proclamation  of  Chris- 
tianity among  the  heathen,  "for  a  sign,  not  to  them  that  believe,, 
but  to  them  that  believe  not"  (i  Cor.  xiv,  22)— as  Bengel  explains, 
in  order  that,  drawn  and  held  thereby,  they  might  be  made  to 
listen. 

But  even  so,  some  further  remarks  may  here  be  allowed  ;  not,, 
indeed,  in  the  way  of  attempted  disquisition  on  what  must  always- 
be  a  prime  postulate  in  our  faith,  but  as  helps  in  our  thinking.  It 
seems  to  me,  that  miracles  require  for  their  (objective)  possibility — 
that  is,  subjectively  viewed  for  their  credibility^ — only  one  postulate  : 
that  of  the  True  and  the  Living  God.  It  is  often  asserted,  that 
miracles  are  not  the  traversing  of  the  established,  but  the  outcome 
of  a  higher  order  of  things.  This,  no  doubt,  must  be  metaphysic- 
ally true  ;  but  practically  it  is  only  a  hypothetical  statement,  since, 
admittedly,  and,  as  the  very  idea  of  miracles  implies,  we  know 
nothing  of  this  higher  nature  or  order  of  things.     But  may  we  not 

1  I  do  not  mean  for  the  credibility  of  one  or  another  special  miracle,  but  for  that  of 
miracles  in  general. 


Preface.  vii 

assert  that  a  miracle  does  not  seem  so  much  an  interference  with 
the  laws  of  Nature — of  which  at  most  we  have  only  partial  and 
empirical  knowledge — as  with  the  laws  and  habits  of  our  own 
thinking  concerning  Nature  ?  And  if  so,  does  not  this  place  the 
question  on  quite  another  footing? 

Given,  that  there  is  a  God  (be  the  seeming  hypothetication  for- 
given !),  and  in  living  connection  with  His  rational  creatures — and 
it  seems  to  follow  that  He  must  teach  and  train  them.  It  equally 
follows,  that  such  teaching  must  be  adapted  to  their  stage  and 
capacity  (power  of  receptiveness).  Now  in  this  respect  all  times 
may  be  arranged  into  two  periods  :  that  of  outward,  and  that  of 
inward  spiritual  communication  (of  Law  and  Persuasion).  During 
the  former  the  miraculous  could  scarcely  be  called  an  extraordinary 
mode  of  Divine  communication,  since  men  generally,  Jews  and 
Gentiles  alike,  expected  miracles.  Outside  this  general  circle 
(among  deeper  thinkers)  there  was  only  a  "feeling  after  God," 
Avhich  in  no  case  led  up  to  firm  conviction.  But  in  the  second 
stage  personal  determination  is  the  great  characteristic.  Reason 
has  taken  the  place  of  sense  ;  the  child  has  grown  to  the  man. 
The  ancient  world  as  much  expected  an  argument  from  the 
miraculous  as  we  do  from  the  purely  rational  or  the  logically 
evidential.  That  was  their  mode  of  apprehension,  this  is  ours. 
To  them,  in  one  sense,  the  miraculous  was  really  not  the  miraculous, 
but  the  expected ;  to  us  it  is  and  would  be  interference  with  our 
laws  and  habits  of  thinking.  It  was  adapted  to  the  first  period ; 
it  is  7iot  to  the  second. 

It  would  lead  beyond  our  present  limits  to  inquire  into  the  con- 
nection of  this  change  with  the  appearance  of  the  God-Man  and 
the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  Church.  As  we  have 
shown  in  a  previous  Volume,  under  the  Old  Testament  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  chiefly  known  and  felt  as  a  power.  The  "still  small 
voice  "  marks  the  period  of  transition.  "  Prophetism  "  was,  so  to 
speak,  the  introduction  of  the  "  still  small  voice  "  into  the  world — 
first  in  a  preparatory  manner  ;  in  the  fulness  of  time,  as  in  all  ful- 
ness, in  the  Christ ;  and  finally  as  indwelling  in  the  Church  of  God. 


viii  Preface. 

These  remarks  will  show  what  kind  of  questions  are  incidentally- 
raised  in  the  course  of  this  history.  Even  in  this  respect  the  reader 
will  have  noticed  progression  in  the  successive  Volumes  of  this 
Bible  History.  Otherwise  also,  it  is  hoped,  he  will  mark  it  in  these 
pages  and  in  the  Notes,  in  the  fuller  and  more  critical  treatment  of 
all  questions.  A  new  feature  here  is  the  introduction  of  a  few  Jewish 
and  Rabbinical  notices,  which  may  prove  interesting  and  useful.  In 
general,  while  I  have  endeavoured  to  make  my  investigations 
thoroughly  independent,  and,  so  far  as  I  could,  original,  it  will, 
I  trust,  be  also  found  that  I  have  not  neglected  any  sources  of  in- 
formation within  my  reach.  But  above  all,  I  would  ever  seek  to 
keep  steadily  in  view,  as  my  main  object,  the  practical  and  spiritual 
interest  of  this  history.  It  all  leads  up  to  the  Person  of  Christ,  the 
Miracle  of  Miracles — the  Miracle  which  gives  meaning  and  unity 
to  all  others,  and  which  is  the  truest  evidence  of  them  all.  Thank 
God,  we  have  sufficient  and  most  firm  historical  ground  for  our 
faith  in  Him,  as  well  as  the  inward  teaching  and  the  assurance  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  sufficient,  not  indeed  to  supersede  the  necessity  of 
faith,  but  to  make  that  "blessed  faith,"  so  well  grounded,  so 
glorious,  so  joyous,  and  so  transforming  in  its  power,  not  only 
reasonable  to  us,  but  of  obligatory  duty  to  all  men. 

ALFRED    EDERSHEIM. 


LoDERS  Vicarage,  Bridport  : 
Easter,  1880. 


PHIHGETOH 
■htC,  iy!AR1882 
THSOLOGIG&L 

CONTENTS, 


CHAPTER   I. 

PAGE 

Jewish  View  of  the  History  of  David — Amnon's  Crime — 
Absalom's  Vengeance— Flight  of  Absalom— The  Wise 
Woman  of  Tekoah — Absalom  returns  to  Jerusalem — 
His  Conspiracy — David's  Flight 9 

CHAPTER  II. 

Ahithophel's  twofold  Advice — Hushai  prevents  imminent 
Danger — David  is  informed,  and  crosses  the  Jordan — 
The  Battle  in  the  Forest — Death  of  Absalom — Mourn- 
ing OF  David — David's  Measures — Return  to  Gilgal — • 
Barzillai  and  Joab  as  Representative  Men  of  their 
Period— Federal  Republican  Rising  under  Sheba — 
Murder  of  Amasa — Death  of  Sheba        ....      22 

CHAPTER   III. 

^^^tnVxx  io  the  Ijistorj)  oi  5^^^^- 

The  Famine — The  Pestilence — The  Temple  Arrangements 

— David's  Last  Hymn  and  Prophetic  Utterance  .        .      37 


CHAPTER  IV. 

^eigit  oi  §olomon. 

Adonijah's  Attempt  to  Seize  the  Throne— Anointing  of 
Solomon — Great  Assembly  of  the  Chiefs  of  the  People 
— Dying  Charge  of  David — Adonijah's  Second  Attempt 
and  Punishment— Execution  of  Joab  and  of  Shimei    . 

B  2 


49 


X  ConteJits. 

CHAPTER  V. 

PAGE 

Solomon  Marries  the  Daughter  of  Pharaoh — His  Sacrifice 
AT  GiBEON — His  Dream  and  Prayer — Solomon's  Wisdom 
— Solomon's  Officers  and  Court— Prosperity  of  the 
Country — Understanding  and  Knowledge  of  the  King      6i 

CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Building  of  Solomon's  Temple — Preparations  for  it — 
Plan  and  Structure  of  the  Temple — Internal  Fittings 
— History  of  the  Temple— Jewish  Traditions       .        .      70 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Dedication  of  the  Temple — When  it  took  place — Con- 
nection WITH  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles — The  Conse- 
cration Services— The  King's  part  in  them— Symbolical 
meaning  of  the  great  Institutions  in  Israel — The 
Prayer  of  Consecration — Analogy  to  the  Lord's  Prayer 
— The  Consecration — Thanksgiving  and  Offerings      .      85 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  Surroundings  of  the  Temple — Description  of  Jeru- 
salem AT  the  time  of  Solomon — The  Palace  of  Solomon — 
Solomon's  fortified  Cities — External  relations  of  the 
Kingdom — Internal  State — Trade — Wealth — Luxury 
— The  Visit  of  the  Queen  of  Sheba        ....      96 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Solomon's  Court — His  Polygamy— Spread  of  Foreign  Ideas 
in  the  Country  —  Imitation  of  Foreign  Manners  — 
Growing  Luxury — Solomon's  Spiritual  Decline — ^Judg- 
ment predicted — Solomon's  Enemies  :  Hadad,  Rezon, 
Jeroboam  —  Causes  of  popular  discontent  —  Ahijah's 
Prediction  of  the  Disruption — Jeroboam's  Rebellion 
and  Flight  into  Egypt — Death  of  Solomon         .        .     108 

CHAPTER   X. 

Family  of  Solomon— Age  of  Rehoboam— His  Character — 
Religious  History  of  Israel  and  Judah— The  Assembly 


Contents.  xi 

PAGE 

AT  Shechem— Jeroboam's  return  from  Egypt — Reiio- 
boam's  Answer  to  the  ])eputies  in  Shechem — Revolt  of 
the  Ten  Tribes— The  Reigns  of  Rehoboam  and  of  Jero- 
boam— Invasion  of  Judah  by  Shishak — Church  and 
State  in  Israel — Rehoboam's  attempt  to  recover  rule 
over  the  Ten  Tribes — His  Family  History — Religious 
Decline  in  Israel,  and  its  consequences        .        ,        .     120 

CHAPTER  XI. 

Jcr0b0nm,  f  rst  Jving  of  Israel. 

Political  Measures  of  Jeroboam — The  Golden  Calves — The 
New  Priesthood  and  the  New  Festival — The  Man  of 
Elohim  from  Judah — His  Message  and  Sign— Jeroboam 
Struck  by  Jehovah  and  miraculously  Restored — Invi- 
tation to  the  Man  of  Elohim  —  Heathen  view  of 
Miracles— The  Old  Prophet — Return  of  the  Man  of 
Elohim  to  Bethel — ^Judgment  on  his  Disobedience — 
Character  of  the  Old  Prophet  and  of  the  Man  of 
Elohim — Sickness  of  the  Pious  Child  of  Jeroboam — 
Mission  of  his  Mother  to  Ahijah — Predicted  Judgment 
— Death  of  the  Child — Remaining  Notices  of  Jeroboam    136 

CHAPTER  XII. 

Accession  of  Abijah— His  Idolatry— War  between  Judah 
and  Israel— Abijah's  Address  to  Israel  and  Victory — 
Deaths  of  Jeroboam  and  of  Abijah — Accession  of  Asa — 
Religious  Reformation  in  Judah — Invasion  by  Zerah 
the  Ethiopian— Victory  of  Zephathah — Azariah's  Mes- 
sage TO  the  Army  of  Asa— Great  Sacrificial  Feast  at 
Jerusalem — Renewal  of  the  Covenant  with  Jehovah  .     157 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

3,0a,  ^tng  of  Juliah.— Ilabab,  gjaasha,  €Iah,  Btmrt, 
^ibni,  anil  ©mri,  '§x\i^'3>  qI  Israel. 

Reign  of  Nadab— His  Murder  by  Baasha— War  between 
Judah  and  Israel— Baasha's  Alliance  with  Syria— Asa 
gains  over  Ben-Hadad — Prophetic  Message  to  Asa — 
Resentment  of  the  King— Asa's  Religious  Decline— 


xii  Contents. 

PAGE 

Death  of  Asa— Death  of  Baasha— Reign  of  Elah— His 
Murder  by  Zimri — Omri  dethrones  Zimri — War  between 
Omri  and  Tibni— Rebuilding  of  Samaria        .        .        .     167 

CHAPTER   XIV. 

^vinrj:  xif  Israel. 

Accession  of  Ahab — Further  Religious  Decline  in  Israel — 
Political  Relations  between  Israel  and  Judah — Acces- 
sion OF  Jehoshaphat — Ahab's  Marriage  with  Jezebel 
— The  Worship  of  Baal  and  Astarte  established  in 
Israel  —  Character  of  Ahab  —  Religious  Reforms  in 
Judah— Jehoshaphat  joins  affinity  with  Ahab— Mar- 
riage OF  Jehoram  with  Athaliah,  and  its  consequences    176 

CHAPTER  XV. 

^hnb,  lling;  qI  Isntcl. 

Rebuilding  of  Jericho — The  Mission  of  Elijah — His  Cha- 
racter and  Life — Elijah's  First  Appearance— Paral- 
lelism with  Noah,  Moses,  and  John  the  Baptist — 
Elijah's  Message  to  King  Ahab — Sojourn  by  the  Brook 
Cherith— Elijah  with  the  Widow  of  Sarepta — The 
Barrel  of  Meal  wastes  not,  nor  does  the  Cruse  of 
Oil  fail — Lessons  of  his  Sojourn — Sickness  and  Death 
of  the  Widow's  Son— He  is  miraculously  restored  to 
Life 184 


i5^,r^  THE  ^i^^^.::^ 

HISTORY  OF  JUDAH  AND  ISRAEL 

FROM    THE    BIRTH    OF    SOLOMON. 


CHAPTER    I. 

Jewish  View  of  tfie  History  of  David—Amnon's  Crime— Absalom's  Ven- 
geance—Flight of  Absalom— The  Wise  Woman  of  Tekoah— Absalom 
returns  to  Jerusalem— His  Conspiracy— David's  Flight. 

(2  Sam.  XIII. — XVI.) 

IN  Studying  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament,  every  thought- 
ful Christian  must  feel  that  a  special  interest  attaches  to 
the  views  and  interpretations  of  the  ancient  Synagogue.  Too 
often  they  are  exaggerated,  carnal,  and  even  contrary  to  the 
real  meaning  of  Holy  Scripture.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
there  are  subjects  on  which  we  may  profitably  learn  from 
Jewish  teaching.  Among  them  are  some  of  the  opinions 
expressed  by  the  Rabbis  on  the  history  and  character  of 
David.  A  brief  review  of  these  may  be  helpful,  and  serve 
both  as  retrospect  of  the  past,  and  as  preparation  for  the  study 
of  the  closing  years  of  his  reign. 

Considering  the  important  part  which  David  sustains  in 
the  history  of  Israel,  the  views  expressed  by  the  ancient 
Synagogue  are,  on  the  whole,  remarkably  free  from  undue 
partiality.  But  beyond  this  there  is  a  shrewd  discernment  of 
real  under  apparent  motives,  and  a  keen  appreciation  of  the 
moral  bearing  of  actions.  The  bright  side  of  David's  character 
is  dwelt  upon :  his  true  humiUty,^  the  affectionateness  of  his 

^  Tradition  instances  this  curious  (if  not  historically  accurate)  evidence 
of  it,  that  the  coins  which  he  had  struck  bore  on  one  side  the  emblem  of 
a  shepherd's  staff  and  scrip,  and  on  the  reverse  a  tovi^er  {Ber.  E.  39). 


10  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

disposition,  the  faithfulness  of  his  friendship,  and,  above  all, 
his  earnest  heart-piety,  which  distinguished  him  not  only  from 
the  monarchs  of  heathen  nations,  but  from  all  his  contem- 
poraries, and  made  him  for  all  time  one  of  the  heroes  of  faith. 
On  the  other  hand,  his  failings  and  sins  are  noted,  and  traced 
to  self-indulgence,  to  rashness  in  arriving  at  conclusions,  to 
suspiciousness  in  listening  to  every  breath  of  slander,  and  even 
to  a  tendency  to  revengefulness, — all,  we  may  observe,  truly 
Oriental  failings,  the  undisguised  account  of  which  is,  of  course, 
evidential  of  the  truthfulness  of  the  narrative.  But  what  the 
Rabbis  lay  special'  stress  upon  is,  that,  while  David  kept 
indwelling  sin  in  check,  he  failed  in  the  full  subdual,  or  rather 
in  the  moral  renovation,  of  the  heart.  This  led  to  his  final 
and  terrible  sin.  Of  course,  the  Rabbis  take  a  defective  view 
of  the  case,  since  it  would  be  more  correct  to  reverse  their 
statement.  Nor  should  we  omit  to  notice  their  conception  of 
the  higher  aspects  of  his  history.  The  typical  bearing  of  his 
life  is  not  lost  sight  of,  and  in  every  phase  of  it  they  point 
forward  to  "  David's  better  Son."  They  also  delight  in  marking 
throughout  the  overruling  guidance  of  God :  how  the  early 
training  and  history  of  David  were  intended  to  fit  him  for  his 
calling;  how,  in  Divine  Providence,  his  failings  and  sins  were, 
so  to  speak,  ever  reflected  in  their  punishment, — as,  for 
example,  his  rashness  in  dividing  the  inheritance  of  Mephi- 
bosheth  with  his  unworthy  servant  in  the  similar  loss  sustained 
by  Rehoboam,  David's  grandson ;  how  his  life  is  full  of  deeper 
lessons ;  and  how  in  the  fifteenth  Psalm  he  embodies  in  brief 
summary  the  whole  spiritual  outcome  of  the  Law  (this  is 
noticed  in  Mace.   24  a). 

But  of  special  interest  in  this  history  are  the  views  taken  of 
David's  repentance,  and  of  the  consequences  which  followed 
from  his  great  sin.  David  is  here  set  before  us  as  the  model 
and  ideal  of,  and  the  encouragement  to,  true  repentance.  In 
fact,  tradition  goes  even  further.  It  declares  that  the  sin  of 
Israel  in  making  the  golden  calf  and  the  fall  of  David  were 
only  recorded — it  might   almost   seem,  that   they  were   only 


AmnoiUs  Crime,  ii 

allowed — for  the  sake  of  their  lessons  about  repentance.  The 
former  showed  that,  even  if  the  whole  congregation  had  erred 
and  strayed,  the  door  of  mercy  was  still  open  to  them;  the 
latter,  that  not  only  for  Israel  as  a  whole,  but  for  each  individual 
sinner,  however  low  his  fall,  there  was  assurance  of  forgiveness, 
if  with  true  penitence  he  turned  to  God.  The  one  case  proved 
that  nothing  was  too  great  for  God  to  pardon ;  the  other  that 
there  was  not  any  one  beneath  His  gracious  notice.  Be  they 
many,  or  only  one  solitary  individual,  the  ear  of  God  was 
equally  open  to  the  cry  of  the  repentant  (comp.  Av.  Sar.  4. 
b,  5.  a).  The  other  point  to  which  the  Rabbis  call  attention 
is,  that  all  the  trials  of  David's  later  life,  and  all  the  judgments 
which  overtook  him  and  his  house,  might  be  traced  up  to  his 
great  sin,  which,  though  personally  pardoned,  made  itself  felt 
in  its  consequences  throughout  the  whole  of  his  after-history 
(comp.  especially  Sa7ih,  107.  «  and  h,  where  there  are  some 
interesting  notices  about  David). 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  there  is  deep  truth  in  this  view. 
For,  although  David  was  graciously  forgiven,  and  again  received 
into  God's  favour,  neither  he  nor  his  government  ever  wholly 
recovered  from  the  moral  shock  of  his  fall.  It  is  not  merely 
that  his  further  history  was  attended  by  an  almost  continuous 
succession  of  troubles,  but  that  these  troubles,  while  allowed 
of  God  in  judgment,  were  all  connected  with  a  felt  and  per- 
ceptible weakness  on  his  part,  which  was  the  consequence  of 
his  sin.  If  the  figure  may  be  allowed :  henceforth  David's 
hand  shook,  and  his  voice  trembled ;  and  both  what  he  did  and 
what  he  said,  alike  in  his  own  household  and  in  the  land, 
bore  evidence  of  it. 

As  we  reckon,  it  must  have  been  about  the  twentieth  year  of 
his  reign,!  when  the  sin  of  his  son  Amnon  proved  the  begin- 
ning of  a  long  series  of  domestic  and  public  troubles.     In 

^  Both  Absalom  and  Tamar  were  the  children  of  Maacah,  daughter  of 
the  king  of  Geshur,  whom  David  married  after  his  enthronement  in 
Hebron  (2  Sam.  iii.  3).  Amnon  was  the  son  of  Ahinoam,  the  Jezreelitess 
(2  Sam.  iii.  2). 


12  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

this  instance  also  it  was  carnal  lust  which  kindled  the  de- 
vouring flame.  The  gloss  of  the  lxx.  is  likely  to  be  correct, 
that  David  left  unpunished  the  incest  of  Amnon  with  Tamar, 
although  committed  under  peculiarly  aggravating  circumstances, 
on  account  of  his  partiality  for  him  as  being  his  first-born 
son.  This  indulgence  on  the  part  of  his  father  may  also 
account  for  the  daring  recklessness  which  marked  Amnon's 
crime.  The  sentence  of  the  Divine  law  upon  such  sin  was, 
indeed,  unmistakeable  (Lev.  xx.  17).  But  a  doting  father, 
smitten  with  moral  weakness,  might  find  in  the  remembrance  of 
his  own  past  sin  an  excuse  for  delay,  if  not  a  barrier  to  action ; 
for  it  is  difficult  to  wield  a  heavy  sword  with  a  maimed  arm. 

Two  years  had  passed  since  this  infamous  deed.  But  there 
was  one  who  had  never  forgiven  it.  Absalom  had  not  for- 
gotten the  day  when  his  brave  and  noble  sister,  after  having 
vainly  offered  such  resistance  as  she  could,  driven  with  her 
shame  from  the  door  of  her  heartless  brother,  had  brought 
back  the  tale  of  her  disgrace, — her  maiden-princess's  "  sleeved 
upper  garment "  ^  rent,  in  token  of  mourning,  her  face  defiled 
with  ashes,  her  hand  upon  her  head,  as  if  staggering  under 
its  burden,2  and  bitterly  lamenting  her  fate.  So  fair  had  she 
gone  forth  on  what  seemed  her  errand  of  mercy ;  so  foully 
had  she  been  driven  back  !  These  two  years  had  the  presence 
in  his  home  of  a  loved  sister,  now  "  desolate "  for  ever,  kept 
alive  the  remembrance  of  an  irreparable  wrong.  The  king  had 
been  "  very  wroth  " — no  more  than  that ;  but  Absalom  would 
be  avenged,  and  his  revenge  should  not  only  be  signal,  but  over- 
take Amnon  when  least  suspecting  it,  and  in  the  midst  of  his 
pleasures.  Thus  Amnon's  sin  and  punishment  would,  so  to  speak, 
be  in  equipoise.  Such  a  scheme  could  not,  however,  be  imme- 
diately carried  out.  It  required  time,  that  so  all  suspicion 
might  be  allayed.    But  then,  as  Absalom's  plan  of  revenge  was 

^  This  is  the  correct  rendering,  and  not  "garment  of  divers  colours,"  as 
in  our  Authorised  Version  (2  Sam.  xiii.  18,  19).  The  maiden  princesses 
seem  to  have  worn  as  mark  of  distinction  a  sleeved  cloak-like  upper  gar- 
ment.    Comp.  the  Hebrew  of  ver.    18. 

2  In  the  East  burdens  are  carried  on  the  head. 


Absalom  s   Vengeance.  13 

peculiarly  Oriental,  these  long  delays  to  make  sure  of  a  victim 
are  also  characteristic  of  the  lands  of  still,  deep  passion.  At  the 
same  time,  the  readiness  with  which  Jonadab,  Amnon's  cousin 
(xiii.  3)  and  clever  adviser  in  wickedness,  could  suggest,  be- 
fore it  was  correctly  known,  what  had  taken  place  (vers.  32,  -^^t^), 
shows  that,  despite  his  silence,  Absalom  had  not  been  able 
effectually  to  conceal  his  feelings.  Perhaps  the  king  himself 
was  not  quite  without  suspicion,  however  well  Absalom  had 
played  his  part.  And  now  follows  the  terrible  history.  It  is 
the  time  of  sheep-shearing  on  Absalom's  property,  not  very  far 
from  Jerusalem — a  merry,  festive  season  in  the  East.  Absalom 
pressingly  invites  to  it  the  king  and  his  court,  well  knowing 
that  such  an  invitation  would  be  declined.  But  if  the  king 
himself  will  not  come,  at  least  let  the  heir-presumptive  be 
there ;  and,  if  the  king  somewhat  sharply  takes  up  this  sus- 
picious singling  out  of  Amnon,  Absalom  does  not  ask  him 
only,  but  all  the  king's  sons. 

The  consent  has  been  given,  and  the  rest  of  the  story  is 
easily  guessed.  Absalom's  well-concerted  plan ;  the  feast ;  the 
merriment ;  the  sudden  murder ;  the  hasty  flight  of  the  af- 
frighted princes ;  the  exaggerated  evil  tidings  which  precede 
them  to  Jerusalem ;  the  shock  to  the  king  and  his  courtiers ; 
then  the  partial  relief  on  the  safe  arrival  of  the  fugitives,  followed 
by  the  horror  produced  as  they  tell  the  details  of  the  crime — 
all  this  is  sketched  briefly,  but  so  vividly  that  we  can  almost 
imagine  ourselves  witnesses  of  the  scene.  It  was  well  for 
Absalom  that  he  had  fled  to  his  maternal  grandfather  at  Geshur. 
For  all  his  life  long  the  king  could  not  forget  the  death  of  his 
firstborn,  although  here  also  time  brought  its  heahng.to  the 
wound.  Absalom  had  been  three  years  in  Geshur — and 
"  King  David  was  restrained  from  going  out  after  Absalom,^ 
because  he  was  comforted  concerning  Amnon." 

Great  as  Absalom's  crime  had  been,  we  can  readily  understand 

^  That  is,  in  a  hostile  sense,  as  the  same  expression  is  used  in  Deut. 
xxviii.  7.  The  Hebrew  text  seems  to  admit  no  other  translation  than  that 
which  we  have  given.  The  Authorised  Version,  through  following  the 
Rabbis,  is  evidently  incorrect. 


14  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

that  popular  sympathy  would  in  large  measure  be  on  the  side  of 
the  princely  offender.  He  had  been  provoked  beyond  endurance 
by  a  dastardly  outrage,  which  the  king  would  not  punish  be- 
cause the  criminal  was  his  favourite.  To  the  popular,  especially 
the  Eastern  mind,  the  avenger  of  Tamar  might  appear  in  the 
light  of  a  hero  rather  than  of  an  offender.  Besides,  Absalom 
had  everything  about  him  to  win  the  multitude.  Without  any 
bodily  blemish  from  head  to  foot,  he  was  by  far  the  finest- 
looking  man  in  Israel.  Common  report  had  it  that,  when 
obliged  once  a  year,  on  account  of  its  thickness,  to  have  his 
long  flowing  hair  cut,  it  was  put,  as  a  matter  of  curiosity,  in  the 
scales,  and  found  amounting  to  the  almost  incredible  weight 
of  twenty  shekels.^  How  well  able  he  was  to  ingratiate  himself 
by  his  manners,  the  after  history  sufficiently  shows.  Such  was 
the  man  who  had  been  left  in  banishment  these  three  years, 
while  Amnon  had  been  allowed — so  far  as  the  king  was  con- 
cerned— to  go  unpunished  ! 

Whether  knowledge  of  this  popular  sympathy  or  other 
motives  had  induced  Joab's  interference,  there  seems  no  * 
doubt  that  he  had  repeatedly  interceded  for  Absalom  ;  ^  till  at 
last  he  felt  fully  assured  that  "  the  heart  of  the  king  was 
against^  Absalom"  (xiv.  i).  In  these  circumstances  Joab 
resorted  to  a  not  uncommon  Eastern  device.  At  Tekoah, 
about  two  hours  south  of  Bethlehem,  lived  "a  wise  woman," 
specially  capable  of  aiding  Joab  in  a  work  which,  as  we 
judge,  also  commanded  her  sympathy.  Arrayed  in  mourning, 
she  appeared  before  the  king  to  claim  his  interference  and  pro- 
tection.    Her  two  sons — so  she  said — had  quarrelled ;  and  as 

^  The  Hebrew  "200  shekels"  must  depend  on  a  copyist's  mistake,  the 
lower  stroke  of  3,  20,  having  been  obliterated,  thereby  making  the 
numeral  "3,  200. 

2  We  infer  this  not  only  from  2  Sam.  xiv.  22,  but  also  from  the  ready 
guess  of  the  king  (ver.   19). 

^  This  is  certainly  the  correct  translation.  Comp.  the  similar  use  of  the 
expression  in  Dan.  xi.  28.  If,  as  the  Authorised  Version  puts  it,  the  king's 
heart  had  been  toward  Absalom,  there  would  have  been  no  need  to  employ 
the  woman  of  Tekoah,  nor  would  the  king  have  afterwards  left  Absalom 
for  two  full  years  without  admitting  him  to  his  presence  (xiv.  28). 


The   Wise   Woman  of  Tekoah.  15 

no  one  was  present  to  interpose,  the  one  had  killed  the  other. 
And  now  the  whole  family  sought  to  slay  the  murderer  ! 

True,  he  was  guilty — but  what  mattered  the  "avenging  of 
blood  "  to  her,  when  thereby  she  would  lose  her  only  remaining 
son,  and  so  her  family  become  extinct  ?  Would  the  death  of 
the  one  bring  back  the  life  of  the  other — "gather  up  the 
water  that  was  spilt "  ?  Was  it  needful  that  she  should  be 
deprived  of  both  her  sons  ?  Thus  urged,  the  king  promised  his 
interference  on  her  behalf.  But  this  was  only  the  introduction 
to  what  the  woman  really  wished  to  say.  First,  she  pleaded, 
that  if  it  were  wrong  thus  to  arrest  the  avenging  of  blood, 
she  would  readily  take  the  guilt  upon  herself  (ver.  9).  Follow- 
ing up  this  plea,  she  next  sought  and  obtained  the  king's 
assurance  upon  oath,  that  there  should  be  no  further  "de- 
stroying" merely  for  the  sake  of  avenging  blood  (ver.  11). 
Evidently  the  king  had  now  yielded  in  principle  what  Joab  had 
so  long  sought.  It  only  remained  to  make  clever  application 
of  the  king's  concession.  This  the  woman  did;  and,  while 
still  holding  by  the  figment  of  her  story  (vers.  16,  17),  she 
plied  the  king  with  such  considerations,  as  that  he  was  always 
acting  in  a  public  capacity;  that  lost  life  could  not  be  re- 
stored ;  that  pardon  was  God-like,  since  He  "  does  not  take 
away  a  soul,  but  deviseth  thoughts  not  to  drive  away  one 
driven  away;"^  and,  lastly,  that,  to  her  and  to  all,  the  king 
was  like  the  Angel  of  the  Covenant,  whose  "  word  "  was  ever 
"for  rest." 

David  could  have  no  further  difficulty  in  understanding  the 
real  meaning  of  the  woman's  mission.  Accordingly,  Joab  ob- 
tained permission  to  bring  back  Absalom,  but  with  this  con- 
dition, that  he  was  not  to  appear  in  the  royal  presence.  We 
regard  it  as  evidence  of  the  prince's  continued  disfavour,  that 
Joab  after^vards  twice  refused  to  come  to  him,  or  to  take  a 
message  to  the  king.  It  was  a  grave  mistake  to  leave  such  a 
proud,  violent  spirit  to  brood  for  two  years  over  supposed 
wrongs.     Absalom  now  acted   towards  Joab  like  one  wholly 

1  This  is  the  correct  rendering  of  the  latter  clauses  of  2  Sam.  xiv.  14. 


1 6  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

reckless — and  the  message  which  Joab  finally  undertook  to 
deliver  was  in  the  same  spirit.  At  last  a  reconciliation  took 
place  between  the  king  and  his  son — but  only  outwardly,  not 
really,  for  already  Absalom  had  other  schemes  in  view. 

Once  more  we  notice  here  the  consequences  of  David's 
fatal  weakness,  as  manifest  in  his  irresolution  and  half-measures. 
Morally  paralysed,  so  to  speak,  in  consequence  of  his  own 
guilt,  his  position  sensibly  and  increasingly  weakened  in  popular 
estimation,  that  series  of  disasters,  which  had  formed  the 
burden  of  God's  predicted  judgments,  now  followed  in  the 
natural  sequence  of  events.  If  even  before  his  return  from 
Geshur  Absalom  had  been  a  kind  of  popular  hero,  his  pre- 
sence for  two  years  in  Jerusalem  in  semi-banishment  must 
have  increased  the  general  sympathy.  Whatever  his  enemies 
might  say  against  him,  he  was  a  splendid  man — every  inch 
a  prince  :  brave,  warm-hearted,  and  true  to  those  whom  he  loved 
— witness  even  the  circumstance,  told  about  Jerusalem,  that  he 
had  called  that  beautiful  child,  his  only  daughter,  after  his  poor 
dishonoured  sister  (2  Sam.  xiv.  27),  while,  unhke  an  Oriental, 
he  cared  not  to  bring  his  sons  prominently  forward.^  Daring 
he  was — witness  his  setting  Joab's  barley  on  fire ;  but  an 
Eastern  populace  would  readily  forgive,  rather  like  in  a  prince, 
what  might  almost  be  called  errors  on  the  side  of  virtue. 
And  now  Absalom  was  coming  forward  like  a  real  prince  ! 
His  state-carriage  and  fifty  outrunners  would  always  attract 
the  admiration  of  the  populace.  Yet  he  was  not  proud — quite 
the  contrary.  In  fact,  never  had  a  prince  taken  such  cordial 
interest  in  the  people,  nor  more  ardently  wished  to  see 
their  wrongs  redressed;  nor  yet  was  there  one  more  con- 
descending. Day  by  day  he  might  be  seen  at  the  entering  of 
the  royal  palace,  where  the  crowd  of  suppliants  for  redress 
were  gathered.  Would  that  he  had  the  power,  as  he  had  the 
will,  to  see  them  righted  !  It  might  not  be  the  king's  blame ; 
but  there  was  a  lack  of  proper  officials  to  take  cognisance  of 

^  It  is  remarkable  and  exceptional  that  the  name  of  his  daughter  is 
mentioned,  and  not  those  of  his  sons. 


Absalom  s  Conspiracy.  \j 

such  appeal-cases — in  short,  the  government  was  wrong,  and 
the  people  must  suffer  in  consequence.  As  we  realize  the 
circumstances,  we  can  scarcely  wonder  that  thus  "Absalom 
stole  the  hearts  of  the  men  of  Israel."^ 

How  long  this  intrigue  was  carried  on  we  cannot  accurately 
determine,^  and  only  once  more  wonder  at  the  weakness 
of  the  king  who  left  it  so  entirely  unnoticed.  That  the  con- 
spiracy which  Absalom  had  so  carefully  prepared,  though  kept 
very  secret,  was  widely  ramified,  appears  from  the  circumstance, 
that,  immediately  on  its  outbreak,  he  could  send  "  spies  through- 
out all  the  tribes,"  to  ascertain  and  influence  the  feelings  of 
the  people  generally,  and  to  bid  his  adherents,  on  a  precon- 
certed signal,  gather  around  him.  More  than  that,  it  seems 
likely  that  Ahithophel,  one  of  David's  privy  councillors,  and 
deemed  the  ablest  of  his  advisers,  had,  from  the  first,  been  in 
the  secret,  and,  if  so,  probably  directed  the  conspiracy.  This 
would  explain  the  strange  coincidence  of  Ahithophel's  absence 
from  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  outbreak,  and  his  presence 
at  his  native  Giloh,  not  far  from  Hebron  (Josh.  xv.  51).  Nor 
is  it  likely  that  a  man  like  Ahithophel  would  so  readily  have 
obeyed  the  summons  of  Absalom  if  he  had  been  till  then  a 
stranger  to  his  plans,  and  had  not  had  good  reason  to  expect 
success.  And,  indeed,  if  his  advice  had  been  followed,  the 
result  would  have  answered  his  anticipations. 

The  place  chosen  for  the  rising  was  Hebron,  both  on  account 
of  the  facilities  it  offered  for  retreat  in  case  of  failure,  and 
as  the  city  where  formerly  (in  the  case  of  David)  a  new  royalty 
had  been  instituted;  perhaps  also  as  the  birthplace  of  Absalom, 
and,  as  has  been  suggested,  because  the  transference  of  the 
royal  residence  to  Jerusalem    may    have   left    dissatisfaction 

^  Keil  notices  that  by  similar  means  Agamemnon  obtained  the  supreme 
command  of  the  Greek  army  {Euripides,  Iphigenia,  v.  337,  seq.). 

-  The  notice  in  the  text :  "after  forty  years"  (2  Sam.  xv.  7)  is  mani- 
festly a  clerical  error.  Most  interpreters  (with  the  Syrian,  Arabic,  and 
Josephus)  read  ' '  four  years  ;  "  but  it  is  impossible  to  offer  more  than  a 
hypothesis. 

C 


1 8  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

in  Hebron.  Absalom  obtained  the  king's  permission  to  go 
thither,  on  pretence  of  paying  a  vow  made  at  Geshur.  It 
was  a  clever  device  for  entrapping  two  Hundred  influential 
persons  from  Jerusalem  to  invite  them  to  accompany  him,  on 
pretext  of  taking  part  in  the  sacrificial  feast.  Arrived  at 
Hebron,  the  mask  was  thrown  off,  and  the  conspiracy  rapidly 
assumed  most  formidable  proportions.  Tidings  of  what  had 
passed  speedily  reached  Jerusalem.  It  was  a  wise  measure 
on  the  part  of  the  king  to  resolve  on  immediate  flight  from 
Jerusalem,  not  only  to  avoid  being  shut  up  in  the  city,  and  to 
prevent  a  massacre  in  its  streets,  but  to  give  his  adherents 
the  opportunity  of  gathering  around  him.  Indeed,  in  the  hour 
of  danger,  the  king  seemed,  for  a  brief  space,  his  old  self 
again.  We  can  quite  understand  how,  in  David's  peculiar  state 
of  mind,  trials  in  which  he  recognised  the  dealings  of  God 
would  rouse  him  to  energy,  while  the  even  tenor  of  affairs  left 
him  listless.  No  weakness  now — outward  or  inward  !  Prudence, 
determination,  and  courage  in  action ;  but,  above  all,  a  con- 
stant acknowledgment  of  God,  self-humiliation,  and  a  continuous 
reference  of  all  to  Him,  marked  his  every  step.  In  regard 
to  this,  we  may  here  notice  the  progress  of  David's  spiritual 
experience,  marking  how  every  act  in  this  drama  finds  expression 
in  the  Book  of  Psalms.  As  Abraham  perpetuated  his  progress 
through  the  land  by  rearing  an  altar  unto  Jehovah  in  every  place 
where  he  sojourned,  so  David  has  chronicled  every  phase  in  his 
inner  and  outer  life  by  a  Psalm — a  waymark  and  an  altar  for 
lone  pilgrims  in  all  ages.  First,  we  turn  to  Psalms  xli.  and 
Iv. — the  former  in  which  the  designation  Jehovah,  the  latter 
in  which  that  of  Elohim,  prevails,^ — which  become  more  full  of 
meaning  if  (with  Professor  Delitzsch)  we  infer  from  them,  that 
during  the  four  years  Absalom's  plot  was  ripening,  the  king 
was  partially  incapacitated  by  some  illness.  These  two  Psalms, 
then,  mark  the  period  before  the  conspiracy  actually  broke 
out,  and  find  their  typical  counterpart  in  the  treachery  of  Judas 

^  The   circumstance   that  some  are  "Jehovah"  and  some    "Elohim" 
Psalms  often  determines  their  position  in  the  Psalter. 


David's  Flight.  19 

Iscariot.^  Read  in  this  light,  these  Psalms  afford  an  in- 
sight into  the  whole  history  of  this  rising — political  as  well  as 
religious.  Other  two  Psalms,  iii.  and  Ixiii.,  refer  to  David's 
flight ;  while  the  later  events  in,  and  the  overthrow  of  the 
conspiracy,  form  the  historical  background  of  Psalms  Ixi.. 
xxxix.,  and  Ixii. 

When  leaving  Jerusalem  in  their  flight,  the  king  and  his  fol- 
lowers made  a  halt  at  "the  far  house." ^  Besides  his  family, 
servants  and  officials,  his  body-guard  (the  Cherethi  and  Pelethi)^ 
and  the  six  hundred  tried  warriors,  who  had  been  with  him  in 
all  his  early  wanderings,  accompanied  him.^  In  that  hour  of 
bitterness  the  king's  heart  was  also  cheered  by  the  presence  and 
stedfast  adherence  of  a  brave  Philistine  chieftain,  Ittai,  who 
had  cast  in  his  lot  with  David  and  with  David's  God.  He  had 
brought  with  him  to  Jerusalem  his  family  (2  Sam.  xv.  22)  and  a 
band  of  adherents  (ver.  20);  and  his  fidelity  and  courage  soon 
raised  him  to  the  command  of  a  division  in  David's  army 
(xviii.  2). 

It  was  winter,  or  early  spring,*  when  the  mournful  procession 
passed  through  a  crowd  of  weeping  spectators  over  the  Kidron, 
to  take  the  way  of  the  wilderness  that  led  towards  Jericho  and 
the  Jordan.  At  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  they  again 
paused.  Here  the  Levites,  headed  by  Zadok  the  priest,  put 
down  the  Ark,  which  had  accompanied  David,  until  the  high- 
priest  Abiathar,  and  the  rest  of  the  people  who  were  to  join  the 
king,  came  up  out  of  the  city.  They  were  wise  as  well  as 
good  words  with  which  David  directed  the  Ark  of  God  to  be 

^  Psa.  Iv.  22,  in  the  version  of  the  Lxx.,  is  quoted  by  St.  Peter 
(I  Pet.  V.  7). 

-  Probably  the  last  house  in  the  suburbs  of  Jerusalem.  The  rendering  in 
our  Authorised  Version  {2  Sam.  xv.  17) :  "in  a  place  that  was  far  off,"  is 
not  only  incorrect,  but  absolutelv  meaningless. 

^  It  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  these  six  hundred  were  natives  of 
Gath.  Ever>'thing  points  to  his  old  companions-in-arms,  probably  popu- 
larly called  "  Gathites,"  as  we  might  speak  of  our  Crimean  or  Abyssinian 
warriors. 

^  Kidron — "  the  dark  flowing" — was  only  a  brook  during  the  winter  and 
early  spring  rains. 


20  Close  of  David's  Reign, 

taken  back.  At  the  same  time  he  established  communication 
with  the  city  through  the  priests. ^  He  would  wait  by  "  the 
fords  "  of  the  wilderness  ^  till  the  sons  of  the  two  priests  should 
bring  him  trustworthy  tidings  by  which  to  guide  his  further 
movements. 

It  reads  almost  like  prophecy,  this  description  of  the  pro- 
cession of  weeping  mourners,  whom  Jerusalem  had  cast  out, 
going  up  "the  ascent  of  the  olive-trees,"  and  once  more  halting 
at  the  top,  "where  it  was  wont  to  worship  God  !"^  A  little 
before,  the  alarming  news  had  come  that  Ahithophel  had  joined 
the  conspiracy.  But  now  a  welcome  sight  greeted  them. 
Hushai,  the  Archite  (comp.  Josh.  xvi.  2),  David's  friend  and 
adviser,  came  to  meet  the  king,  and  offered  to  accompany  him. 
But  the  presence  of  unnecessary  non-combatants  would  mani- 
festly have  entailed  additional  difficulties,  especially  if  of  the 
age  of  Hushai.  Besides,  a  man  like  the  Archite  might  render 
David  most  material  service  in  Jerusalem,  if,  by  feigning  to 
join  the  conspirators,  he  could  gain  the  confidence  of  Absalom, 
and  so,  perhaps,  counteract  the  dreaded  counsels  of  Ahithophel. 
Accordingly,  Hushai  was  sent  back  to  the  city,  there  to  act  in 
concert  with  the  priests. 

Twice  more  David's  progress  was  interrupted  before  he  and 
his  men  reached  Ayephim.^  First  it  was  Ziba,  who,  deeming 
this  a  good  opportunity  for  securing  to  himself  the  coveted 
property  of  his  master,  came  on  pretext  of  bringing  provisions 
for  the  fugitives,  but  really  to  falsely  represent  Mephibosheth 

^  The  expression  {2  Sam.  xv.  27),  rendered  in  the  Authorised  Version : 
*'Art  thou  not  a  seer?"  is  very  difficult.  Keil  and  others,  by  slightly 
altering  the  punctuation,  translate  :  "Thou  seer  !" 

2  So  the  Chcihib,  or  written  text,  has  it ;  the  Keri,  or  emendated  text,  has 
"plains."  The  former  seems  the  moi-s  correct.  The  "fords"  were,  of 
course,  those  where  the  Jordan  was  crossed. 

3  This  is  the  correct  rendering,  and  not  as  in  the  Authorised  Version 
(2  Sam.  XV.  32)  :  "where  he  worshipped  God." 

*  The   Authorised   Version   translates  2    Sam.    xvi.  14:    "they   came 

weary ;"  but  the  word  Ayephijn  is  evidently  intended  as  the  name  of  a 

place,  though  it  may  mean  "weary,"  somewhat  in  the  sense  of  our 
*' Traveller's  Rest." 


David's  Flight.  21 

as  engaged  in  schemes  for  recovering  the  throne  of  Israel 
amidst  the  general  confusion.  The  story  was  so  manifestly 
improbable,  that  we  can  only  wonder  at  David's  haste  in 
giving  it  credence,  and  according  to  Ziba  what  he  desired. 
Another  and  sadder  interruption  was  the  appearance  of  Shimei, 
a  distant  kinsman  of  Saul.  As  David,  surrounded  by  his  soldiers 
and  the  people,  passed  Bahurim,  on  the  farther  side  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  Shimei  followed  on  the  opposite  slope  of  the 
hill,  casting  earth  and  stones  at  the  king,  and  cursing  him  with 
such  words  as  these  :  "  Get  away  !  get  away  !  thou  man  of 
blood  !  thou  wicked  man  !"  thus  charging  him,  by  implication, 
with  the  death,  if  not  of  Saul  and  Jonathan,  yet  of  Abner  and 
Ishbosheth.  Never  more  truly  than  on  this  occasion  did  David 
act  and  speak  like  his  old  self,  and,  therefore,  also  as  a  type  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  similar  circumstances  (comp.  Luke 
ix.  52-56).  At  that  moment,  when  he  realised  that  all  which  had 
come  upon  him  was  from  God,  and  when  the  only  hope  he 
wished  to  cherish  was  not  in  human  deliverance,  but  in  God's 
mercy,  he  would  feel  more  than  ever  how  little  he  had  in 
common  with  the  sons  of  Zeruiah,  and  how  different  were 
the  motives  and  views  which  animated  them  (2  Sam.  xvi.  10). 
Would  that  he  had  ever  retained  the  same  spirit  as  in  this  the 
hour  of  his  deepest  humiliation,  and  had  not,  after  his  success, 
relapsed  into  his  former  weakness  !  But  should  not  all  this 
teach  us,  that,  however  necessary  a  deep  and  true  sense  of 
guilt  and  sin  may  be,  yet  if  sin  pardoned  continueth  sin  brooded 
over,  it  becomes  a  source,  not  of  sanctification,  but  of  moral 
weakness  and  hindrance  ?  Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead,  but 
let  ns  arise  and  follow  Christ — and,  "forgetting  those  things 
which  are  behind,  and  reaching  forth  unto  those  things  which 
are  before,"  let  us  "  press  toward  the  mark  for  the  prize  of  the 
high  calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Phil.  iii.  13,  14). 


22  Close  of  David's  Reign, 


CHAPTER    II. 

Ahithophel's  twofold  Advice— Hushai  prevents  imminent  Danger — David  is 
informed,  and  crosses  tiie  Jordan — Ttie  Battle  in  the  Forest — Death  of 
Absalom — Mourning  of  David — David's  Measures— Return  to  Gilgal^ 
Barziliai  and  Joab  as  Representative  Men  of  their  Period  —  Federal 
Republican  Rising  under  Sheba — Murder  of  Amasa — Death  of  Sheba. 

(2  Sam.  XVI. — xx.) 

Tn\AviD  had  not  left  the  capital  a  moment  too  soon.  He 
^^  had  scarcely  quitted  the  city  when  Absalom  and  his 
forces  appeared,  and  took  possession  of  it.  Hushai  the 
Archite  was  one  of  the  first  to  welcome  him  with  feigned 
allegiance.  There  was  a  touch  of  boastful  self-confidence  about 
the  manner  in  which  the  new  king  received  his  father's  old 
counsellor,  which  the  experienced  man  of  the  world  well  knew 
how  to  utilise.  By  skilful  flattery  of  his  vanity,  Absalom  was 
soon  gained,  and  Hushai  obtained  access  to  his  counsels. 
Thus  far  everything  had  prospered  with  Absalom.  Jerusalem 
had  been  occupied  without  a  struggle ;  and  the  new  king  now 
found  himself  at  the  head  of  a  very  large  force,  though  of 
wholly  undisciplined  troops.  But  iVhithophel  at  least  must  have 
known  that,  though  David  had  fled,  his  cause  was  far  from  lost. 
On  the  contrary,  he  was  at  the  head  of  veteran  warriors,  filled 
with  enthusiasm  for  their  leader,  and  commanded  by  the  ablest 
generals  in  the  land.  Besides,  account  must  also  be  taken  of 
the  reaction  which  would  undoubtedly  set  in.  The  flush  of 
confidence  on  the  part  of  Absalom's  raw  levies,  caused  by 
success  where  no  resistance  had  been  offered,  would  pass  away 
in  measure  as  the  real  difficulties  of  their  undertaking  daily 
more  and  more  appeared ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  sympathy 


The  Counsel  of  Ahithophel.  23 

with  David,  and  adherents  to  his  cause,  would  increase  in 
the  same  proportion.  In  these  circumstances  even  a  much 
less  sagacious  adviser  than  Ahithophel,  whose  counsel  was 
regarded  in  those  days  as  if  a  man  had  inquired  of  the  oracle 
of  God,  would  have  felt  that  Absalom's  chief,  if  not  his  sole 
chance  of  success,  lay  in  a  quick  and  decisive  stroke,  such 
as  should  obviate  the  necessity  of  a  protracted  campaign. 
But  first  Ahithophel  must  secure  himself,  and,  indeed,  all  the 
adherents  of  Absalom. 

Considering  the  vanity  and  folly  of  Absalom,  of  which  his 
easy  reception  of  Hushai  must  have  afforded  fresh  evidence 
to  Ahithophel,  and  David's  well-known  weakness  towards  his 
children,  it  was  quite  possible  that  a  reconciliation  might 
yet  take  place  between  the  usurper  and  his  father.  In  that 
case  Ahithophel  would  be  the  first,  the  other  leaders  in  the 
rebellion  the  next,  to  suffer.  The  great  aim  of  an  unscrupulous 
politician  would  therefore  be  to  make  the  breach  between 
father  and  son  publicly  and  absolutely  permanent.  This  was 
the  object  of  the  infamous  advice  which  Ahithophel  gave 
Absalom  (2  Sam.  xvi.  21,  22),  though,  no  doubt,  he  represented 
it  as  affording,  in  accordance  with  Oriental  custom,  public 
evidence  that  he  had  succeeded  to  the  throne.  While  recoiling 
with  horror  from  this  unnatural  crime,  we  cannot  but  call  to 
mind  the  judgment  predicted  upon  David  (2  Sam.  xii.  11,  12), 
and  note  how,  as  so  often  was  the  case,  the  event,  super- 
naturally  foretold,  happened,  not  by  some  sudden  interference, 
but  through  a  succession  of  natural  causes. 

Having  thus  secured  himself  and  his  fellow-conspirators, 
Ahithophel  proposed  to  select  12,000  men,  make  a  rapid 
march,  and  that  very  night  surprise  David's  followers — weary, 
dispirited,  greatly  outnumbered,  and  not  yet  properly  organised. 
Had  this  advice  been  followed,  the  result  would  probably 
have  been  such  as  Ahithophel  anticipated.  A  panic  would  have 
ensued,  David  fallen  a  victim,  and  with  his  death  his  cause 
been  for  ever  at  an  end.  But  a  higher  power  than  the  wisdom 
of  the  renowned  Gilonite  guided  events.     In  the  language  of 


24  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

Holy  Scripture,  "Jehovah  had  appointed  to  defeat  the  good 
counsel  of  Ahithophel"  (2  Sam.  xvii.  14).  But,  as  first 
explained  to  Absalom  and  the  council  of  Israelitish  elders,  Ahi- 
thophel's  advice  at  once  commended  itself  to  their  acceptance. 
Hushai  seems  not  to  have  been  present  at  that  meeting.  He 
was  too  prudent  to  intrude  unbidden  into  the  king's  council- 
chamber.  Besides,  he  had  made  arrangements  for  communica- 
ting with  David  before  any  measure  of  his  enemies  could  have 
been  executed.  Just  outside  the  city-wall,  by  the  "  Eii-Ro^l^'' 
"  the  Fuller's  Fountain  " — for  they  dared  not  show  themselves 
in  the  city — the  two  young  priests,  Jonathan  and  Ahimaaz 
the  swift-footed  (2  Sam.  xviii.  23),  waited  in  readiness  to 
carry  tidings  to  David. 

Although  Absalom  had  followed  Ahithophel's  vile  advice,  by 
which  no  immediate  danger  was  incurred,  it  was  another  thing 
to  take  so  decisive  a  step  as  to  risk  the  flower  of  his  army  in 
a  night  attack  upon  David.  If  Ahithophel  had  retired  from  the 
royal  presence  in  the  expectation  of  seeing  his  counsel  imme- 
diately carried  out,  he  was  soon  to  find  himself  disappointed. 
Hushai  was  next  sent  for,  and  consulted  as  to  the  measure 
proposed  by  Ahithophel.  It  was  easy  for  the  old  statesman  to 
conjure  up  difficulties  and  dangers  to  one  so  inexperienced 
and  so  irresolute  as  Absalom,  and  still  more,  by  means  of 
unlimited  flattery,  to  turn  one  so  vain  into  another  course. 
Absalom  had  only  to  speak,  and  all  Israel  would  gather  to 
him  from  Dan  even  to  Beer-sheba, — they  would  light  upon 
David  like  the  dew  upon  the  grass ;  or  if  he  fled  into  a  city, 
why,  cart-ropes  would  suffice  to  drag  it,  to  the  smallest  stone, 
into  the  nearest  river  !  On  the  other  hand,  this  was  the  worst 
time  for  attacking  David  and  his  men  when  they  were  desperate. 
The  idea  of  a  night  surprise  was  altogether  inadmissible,  bearing 
in  mind  David's  great  experience  in  such  warfare ;  while  any 
mishap,  however  small,  would  be  fatal  to  Absalom's  cause.  We 
scarcely  wonder,  even  taking  the  merely  rational  view  of  it,  that 
in  such  a  council-chamber  the  advice  of  Hushai  should  have 
prevailed,  although  we  recognise  none  the  less  devoutly,  the 


The  Course  of  the  Rebellion.  25 

Hand  of  God  in  ordering  all.  There  was  one,  however,  who 
did  not  deceive  himself  as  to  the  consequences  of  this  fatal 
mistake.  Ahithophel  knew,  as  if  he  had  already  witnessed  it, 
that  from  this  hour  Absalom's  cause  was  lost.  His  own  course 
was  soon  and  decisively  chosen.  He  returned  to  his  city,  set 
his  affairs  in  order,  and,  with  the  deliberate  cynicism  of  a  man 
who  has  lost  all  faith,  committed  that  rare  crime  in  Israel, 
suicide.  Typical  as  the  history  of  David  is  throughout,  we 
cannot  fail  to  see  here  also  a  terrible  prefigurement  of  the  end 
of  him,  who,  having  been  the  friend  and  companion  of  the 
Lord  Jesus — perhaps  regarded  as  the  "  wise  adviser "  among 
the  simple  disciples — betrayed  his  Master,  and,  like  Ahithophel, 
ended  by  hanging  himself  (Matt,  xxvii.  5). 

Meanwhile,  Hushai  had  communicated  with  the  priests  in 
Jerusalem.  His  counsel  had,  indeed,  been  adopted;  but  it 
was  impossible  to  know  what  one  so  irresolute  as  Absalom 
might  ultimately  do.  At  any  rate,  it  was  necessary  David 
should  be  informed,  so  as  to  secure  himself  against  a  surprise. 
A  trusty  maidservant  of  the  priest  carried  the  message  to  the 
young  men  by  the  "  Fuller's  Fountain."  At  the  last  moment 
their  enterprise  was  almost  defeated.  A  lad — probably  one  of 
those  stationed  to  watch  any  suspicious  movement — noticed 
their  hurried  departure  in  the  direction  of  David's  camp. 
Happily,  the  young  men  had  observed  the  spy,  and  got  the  start 
of  those  sent  after  them.  It  was  not  the  first  nor  yet  the  last 
time  that  an  Israelitish  woman  wrought  deliverance  for  her 
people,  when  at  Bahurim  the  two  young  priests  were  success- 
fully hidden  in  an  empty  well,  and  their  pursuers  led  astray 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  18-20).  And  here  we  gladly  mark  how  different 
from  the  present  inmates  of  Eastern  harems  were  the  mothers, 
wives,  and  daughters  of  Israel,  —  how  free  in  their  social 
intercourse,  and  how  powerful  in  their  influence  :  the  religious 
and  social  institutions  of  the  Old  Testament  forming  in  this 
respect  also  a  preparation  for  the  position  which  the  New  Testa- 
ment would  assign  to  woman.  But  to  return.  Coming  out  of 
their  concealment,  the  two  priests  reached  the   encampment 


26  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

safely,  and  informed  David  of  his  danger.  Ere  the  morning  light 
he  and  all  his  followers  had  put  the  Jordan  between  them  and 
their  enemies ;  and  anything  like  a  surprise  was  henceforth 
impossible. 

It  all  happened  as  Ahithophel  had  anticipated.  The  revolution 
now  changed  into  a  civil  war,  of  which  the  issue  could  not  be 
doubtful.  David  and  his  forces  fell  back  upon  Mahanaim, 
"a  strong  city  in  a  well-provisioned  country,  with  a  moun- 
tainous district  for  retreat  in  case  of  need,  and  a  warlike  and 
friendly  population."  1  Here  adherents  soon  gathered  around 
him,  while  wealthy  and  influential  heads  of  clans  not  only 
openly  declared  in  his  favour,  but  supplied  him  with  all  neces- 
saries. We  are  inclined  to  regard  the  three  mentioned  in  the 
sacred  narrative  (2  Sam.  xvii.  27)  as  representative  men  :  Shobi^ 
of  the  extreme  border-inhabitants,  or  rather  foreign  tributaries 
(comp.  2  Sam.  x.  2);  Machir^  of  the  former  adherents  of  Saul; 
and  Barzillai,  of  the  wealthy  land-owners  generally. 

With  Absalom  matters  did  not  fare  so  well.  Intrusting 
the  command  of  his  army  to  a  relative,  Amasa,  the  natural 
son  of  one  Ithra,  an  Ishmaelite,^  and  of  Abigail,  David's  step- 
sister,^ he  crossed  the  Jordan  to  offer  battle  to  his  father's 
forces.  These  must  have  considerably  increased  since  his 
flight  from  Jerusalem  (comp.  2  Sam.  xviii.  i,  2),  though,  no 
doubt,  they  were  still  greatly  inferior  in  number  to  the  undis- 
ciplined multitude  which  followed  Absalom.  David  divided 
his  army  into  three  corps,  led  by  Joab,  Abishai,  and  Ittai — the 
chief  command  being  entrusted  to  Joab,  since  the  people  would 
not  allow  the  king  himself  to  go  into  battle.  The  field  was 
most  skilfully   chosen  for  an  engagement   with  undiscii^lined 

■^  Speaker's  Commentary,  Vol.   II.  p.  429. 

-  This  is  the  correct  reading,  as  in  i  Chron.  ii.  17.  The  word 
*'  Israelite  "  in  2  Sam,  xvii.  25  is  evidently  a  clerical  error. 

^  From  2  Sam.  xvii.  25,  it  appears  that  both  Abigail  and  Zeruiah,  though 
David's  sisters,  were  not  the  daughters  of  Jesse,  David's  father,  but  of 
Nahash.  It  follows,  that  David's  mother  had  been  twice  married  :  first  to 
Nahash  and  then  to  Jesse,  and  that  Abigail  and  Zeruiah  were  David's  step- 
sisters. 


Death  of  Absalom.  27 

superior  numbers,  being  a  thick  forest  near  the  Jordan,^  which, 
with  its  pitfalls,  morasses,  and  entanglements,  destroyed  more 
of  Absalom's  followers  than  fell  in  actual  contest.  From  the 
first  the  battle  was  not  doubtful;  it  soon  became  a  carnage 
rather  than  a  conflict. 

One  scene  on  that  eventful  day  had  deeply  and,  perhaps, 
painfully  impressed  itself  on  the  minds  of  all  David's  soldiers. 
As  they  marched  out  of  Mahanaim  on  the  morning  of  the 
battle,  the  king  had  stood  by  the  side  of  the  gate,  and  they 
had  defiled  past  him  by  hundreds  and  by  thousands.     One 
thing  only  had  he  been  heard  by  all  to  say,  and  this  he  had 
repeated  to  each  of  the  generals.     It  was  simply :  "  Gently,^ 
for  my  sake,  with  the  lad,  with  Absalom  !''     If  the  admonition 
implied  the  existence  of  considerable  animosity  on  the  part  of 
David's  leaders  against  the  author  of  this  wicked  rebellion,  it 
showed,  on  the  other  hand,  not  only  weakness,  but  selfishness, 
almost  amounting  to  heartlessness,  on  the  part  of  the  king.     It 
was,  as  Joab  afterwards  reproached  him,  as  if  he  had  declared 
that  he  regarded  neither  princes  nor  servants,  and  that  it  would 
have  mattered  little  to  him  how  many  had  died,  so  long  as  his 
own  son  was  safe  (2  Sam.  xix.  6).     If  such  w^as  the  impression 
produced,  we  need  not  wonder  that  it  only  increased  the  general 
feeling  against  Absalom.     This  was  soon  to  be  brought  to  the 
test.     In  his  pursuit  of  the  rebels,  one  of  Joab's  men  came 
upon  a  strange  sight.     It  seems  that,  while  Absalom  was  riding 
rapidly  through  the  dense  wood  in  his  flight,  his  head  had 
somehow  been  jerked  in  between  the  branches  of  one  of  the 
large  spreading  terebinths — perhaps,  as  Josephus  has  it  {Ant 
vii.  10,  2),  having  been  entangled  by  the  flowing  hair.     In  this 
position  the  mule  which  he  rode — perhaps  David's  royal  mule 
■ — had  run  away  from  under  him;   while  Absalom,  half  suf- 
focated and  disabled,  hung  helpless,  a  prey  to  his  pursuers. 

1  It  is  impossible  to  decide  whether  this  "Wood  of  Ephraim  "  was  west 
or  east  of  the  Jordan.  From  the  context,  the  latter  seems  the  more 
probable. 

-  So  literally  in  the  Hebrew  text. 


28  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

But  the  soldier  who  first  saw  him  knew  too  well  the  probable 
consequences  of  killing  him,  to  be  tempted  to  such  an  act  by 
any  reward,  however  great.  He  only  reported  it  to  Joab,  but 
would  not  become  his  tool  in  the  matter.  Indeed,  Joab  him- 
self seems  to  have  hesitated,  though  he  was  determined  to  put 
an  end  to  Absalom's  schemes,  which  he  must  have  resented 
the  more,  since  but  for  his  intervention  the  prince  would  not 
have  been  allowed  to  return  to  Jerusalem.  And  so,  instead 
of  killing,  he  only  wounded  Absalom  with  pointed  staves,^ 
leaving  it  to  his  armour-bearers  finally  to  despatch  the  unhappy 
youth.  His  hacked  and  mangled  remains  were  cast  into  a 
great  pit  in  the  wood,  and  covered  by  a  large  heap  of  stones. 
A  terrible  contrast,  this  unknown  and  unhonoured  criminal's 
grave,  to  the  splendid  monument  which  Absalom  had  reared 
for  himself  after  the  death  of  his  sons  !  Their  leader  being 
dead,  Joab,  with  characteristic  love  for  his  countrymen, 
sounded  the  rappel,  and  allowed  the  fugitive  Israelites  to 
escape. 

But  who  was  to  carry  to  the  king  tidings  of  what  had 
happened  ?  Joab  knew  David  too  well  to  entrust  them  to  any 
one  whose  life  he  specially  valued.  Accordingly,  he  sent  a 
stranger,  a  Cushite ;  and  only  after  repeated  entreaty  and  warn- 
ing of  the  danger,  allowed  Ahimaaz  also  to  run  with  the  news 
to  Mahanaim.  Between  the  outer  and  the  inner  gates  of  that  city 
sat  the  king,  anxiously  awaiting  the  result  of  that  decisive  day. 
And  now  the  watchman  on  the  pinnacle  above  descried  one 
running  towards  the  city.  Since  he  was  alone,  he  could  not 
be  a  fugitive,  but  must  be  a  messenger.  Soon  the  watchman 
saw  and  announced  behind  the  first  a  second  solitary  runner. 
Presently  the 'first  one  was  so  near  that,  by  the  swiftness  of 
his  running  the  watchman  recognised  Ahimaaz.  If  so,  the 
tidings  which  he  brought  must  be  good,  for  on  no  other 
errand  would  Ahimaaz  have  come.  And  so  it  was !  With- 
out giving  the  king  time  for  question,  he  rapidly  announced 

1  The  Hebrew  word  here  used  {Shevet)  generally  means  sceptre,  or  else 
staff  or  rod,  but  not  dart,  as  in  the  Authorised  Version  {2  Sam.  xviii.  14). 


Return  of  David  to  Jerusalem.  29 

the  God-given  victory.  Whatever  reHef  or  comfort  the  news 
must  have  carried  to  the  heart  of  David,  he  did  not  express 
it  by  a  word.  Only  one  question  rose  to  his  Hps,  only  one  idea 
of  peace  ^  did  his  mind  seem  capable  of  contemplating :  "  Peace 
to  the  lad,  to  Absalom  ?"  Ahimaaz  could  not,  or  rather 
would  not,  answer.  Not  so  the  Cushite  messenger,  who  by  this 
time  had  also  arrived.  From  his  language — though  even  he 
feared  to  say  it  in  so  many  words — David  speedily  gathered  the 
fate  of  his  son.  In  speechless  grief  he  turned  from  the  two 
messengers,  and  from  the  crowd  which,  no  doubt,  was  rapidly 
gathering  in  the  gateway,  and  crept  up  the  stairs  leading 
to  the  chamber  over  the  gate,  while  those  below  heard  his 
piteous  groans,  and  these  words,  oft  repeated  :  "  My  son  Ab- 
salom— my  son  !  My  son  Absalom !  Oh,  would  that  I  had 
died  for  thee  !     Absalom,  my  son — my  son!" 

That  was  not  a  joyous  evening  at  Mahanaim,  despite  the 
great  victory.  The  townsmen  went  about  as  if  there  were 
public  mourning,  not  gladness.  The  victorious  soldiers  stole 
back  into  the  city  as  if  ashamed  to  show  themselves — as  if 
after  a  defeat,  not  after  a  brilliant  and  decisive  triumph. 
It  was  more  than  Joab  could  endure.  Roughly  forcing 
himself  into  the  king's  presence,  he  reproached  him  for  his 
heartless  selfishness,  warning  him  that  there  were  dangers, 
greater  than  any  he  had  yet  known,  which  his  recklessness  of 
all  but  his  own  feelings  would  certainly  bring  upon  him.  What 
he  said  was,  indeed,  true,  but  it  was  uttered  most  unfeelingly — 
especially  remembering  the  part  which  he  himself  had  taken 
in  the  death  of  Absalom — and  in  terms  such  as  no  subject, 
however  influential,  should  have  used  to  his  sovereign.  No 
doubt  David  felt  and  resented  all  this.  But,  for  the  present, 
it  was  evidently  necessary  to  yield ;  and  the  king  received  the 
people  in  the  gate  in  the  usual  fashion. 

1  The  first  word  of  Ahimaaz  as  he  came  close  to  the  king  was  :  "  Shalom, " 
*'  Peace"  (in  our  Authorised  Version  "All  is  well").  David's  first  word 
to  Ahimaaz  also  was  "Shalom."  Only  Ahimaaz  referred  to  the  public 
weal,  David  to  his  personal  feelings. 


30  Close  of  David's  Reign, 

The  brief  period  of  insurrectionary  intoxication  over,  the 
reaction  soon  set  in.  David  wisely  awaited  it  in  Mahanaim. 
The  country  recalled  the  national  glory  connected  with  his  reign^ 
and  realised  that,  now  Absalom  had  fallen,  there  was  virtually 
an  interregnum  equally  unsatisfactory  to  all  parties.  It  certainly 
was  neither  politic  nor  right  on  the  part  of  David  under  such 
circumstances  to  employ  the  priests  in  secret  negotiations  with 
the  tribe  of  Judah  for  his  restoration  to  the  throne.  Indeed, 
all  David's  acts  now  seem  like  the  outcome  of  that  fatal  moral 
paralysis  into  which  he  had  apparently  once  more  lapsed. 
Such,  notably,  was  the  secret  appointment  of  Amasa  as  com- 
mander-in-chief in  the  room  of  Joab,  a  measure  warranted 
neither  by  moral  nor  by  military  considerations,  and  certainly, 
to  say  the  least,  a  great  political  mistake,  whatever  provocation 
Joab  might  have  given.  We  regard  in  the  same  light  David's 
conduct  in  returning  to  Jerusalem  on  the  invitation  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  only  (2  Sam.  xix.  14).  Preparations  for  this  were 
made  in  true  Oriental  fashion.  The  men  of  Judah  went  as 
far  as  Gilgal,  where  they  had  in  readiness  a.  ferry-boat,  in 
which  the  king  and  his  household  might  cross  the  river. 
Meantime,  those  who  had  cause  to  dread  David's  return  had 
also  taken  their  measures.  Both  Shimei,  who  had  cursed 
David  on  his  flight,  and  Ziba,  who  had  so  shamefully  deceived 
him  about  Mephibosheth,  went  over  Jordan  "  to  meet  the 
king."^  As  David  was  "  crossing,"^  or,  rather,  about  to  embark, 
Shimei,  who  had  wisely  brought  with  him  a  thousand  men 
of  his  own  tribe,  Benjamin — the  most  hostile  to  David  — 
entreated  forgiveness,  appealing,  as  evidence  of  his  repent- 
ance, to  his  own  appearance  with  a  thousand  of  his  clansmen,  as 
the  first  in  Israel  to  welcome  their  king.  In  these  circum- 
stances it  would  have  been  almost  impossible  not  to  pardon 
Shimei,   though  David's  rebuff  to  Abishai,  read  in  the   light 

■^  This  is  the  correct  rendering,  and  not,  as  in  the  Authorised  Version, 
2  Sam.  xix.  17,  last  clause  :  "They  went  over  Jordan  before  the  king." 

2  This  is  the  proper  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word,  and  not,  as  in  our 
Authorised  Version  (xix.  18)  :  "As  he  was  come  over  Jordan." 


David  and  Barzillai.  3 1 

of  the  king's  dying  injunctions  to  Solomon  (i  Kings  ii.  8,  9), 
sounds  somewhat  like  a  magniloquent  public  rebuke  of  the 
sons  of  Zeruiah,  or  an  attempt  to  turn  popular  feeling  against 
them.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  evident  that  Shimei's  plea  would 
have  lost  its  force,  if  David  had  not  entered  into  separate  secret 
negotiations  with  the  tribe  of  Judah. 

Ziba's  motives  in  going  to  meet  David  need  no  comment. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that,  well-informed  as  David  must  have 
been  of  all  that  had  passed  in  Jerusalem,  he  could  not  but 
have  known  that  the  bearing  and  feelings  of  Mephibosheth  had 
been  the  reverse  of  what  his  hypocritical  servant  had  repre- 
sented them  (comp.  2  Sam.  xix.  24).  All  the  more  unjustifiable 
was  his  conduct  towards  the  son  of  Jonathan.  1  Both  the  lan- 
guage of  irritation  which  he  used  towards  him,  and  the  com- 
promise which  he  attempted  (xix.  29),  show  that  David  felt, 
though  he  would  not  own,  himself  in  the  wrong.  Indeed, 
throughout,  David's  main  object  now  seemed  to  be  to  conciliate 
favour  and  to  gain  adherents — in  short,  to  compass  his  own 
ends  by  his  own  means,  which  were  those  of  the  natural,  not 
of  the  spiritual  man ;  of  the  Oriental,  though  under  the  influence 
of  religion,  rather  than  of  the  man  after  God's  own  heart.  For, 
at  the  risk  of  uttering  a  truism,  we  must  insist  that  there  are 
only  two  courses  possible — either  to  yield  ourselves  wholly  to 
the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  else  to  follow  our  natural 
impulses.  These  impulses  are  not  such  as  we  may,  perhaps, 
imagine,  or  suppose  them  to  have  become  under  the  influence 
of  religion.  For  the  natural  man  always  remains  what  he  had 
been — what  birth,  nationality,  education,  and  circumstances 
had  made  him.  This  consideration  should  keep  us  from  harsh 
and,  probably,  erroneous  judgments  of  others,  and  may  like- 
wise serve  for  our  own  warning  and  instruction. 

Happily,  this  history  also  presents  a  brighter  picture.     It  is 

1  The  Talmud  makes  the  fallowing  significant  application:  "In  the 
hour  when  David  said  to  Mephibosheth,  Thou  and  Ziba  shall  divide  the 
land,  a  Bath  Kol  (voice  of  God)  came  forth  and  said  to  him  :  Rehoboam 
and  Jeroboam  shall  divide  the  kingdom"  [Shabb.  56  b.). 


32  Close  of  David'' s  Reign. 

that  of  the  grand  patriarchal  chieftain,  Barzillai,  who  had  sup- 
ported David  in  his  adversity,  and  now  came,  despite  the 
Aveight  of  his  years,  to  escort  the  king  over  the  Jordan.  No 
reward  or  acknowledgment  did  he  seek — in  fact,  the  suggestion 
seemed  almost  painful.  A  good  and  true  man  this,  happy  in 
his  independence,  though  not  too  proud  to  allow  his  son 
Chimham  to  go  to  court — all  the  more  that  he  had  nothing 
to  gain  by  it.  May  we  not  legitimately  infer,  that  his 
conduct  was  influenced  not  merely  by  loyalty  to  his  earthly 
sovereign,  but  by  the  recognition  of  the  higher  spiritual  truths, 
and  the  hope  for  Israel  and  the  world,  symbolised  by  the  reign 
of  David  ?  For  nearly  eighty  years  Barzillai  had  watched  in 
distant  Rogelim  the  varying  fortunes  of  his  loved  people.  He 
remembered  the  time  when  Samuel  was  "judge  ;"  he  recalled 
the  hopes  enkindled  in  the  hearts  of  Israel  when,  after  the 
brilliant  exploit  in  his  own  Jabesh-gilead,  Saul  was  proclaimed 
king.  He  had  followed  the  waning  glory  of  that  same  Saul — • 
for  far  and  wide  are  tidings  carried  in  the  East,  told  by  watch- 
fires,  and  borne  from  home  to  home — until  hope  had  almost 
died  out  in  his  soul.  Then  came  the  story  of  David,  and 
increasingly,  as  he  followed  his  career,  or  when  some  one 
would  repeat  one  of  those  new  Psalms — so  different  from 
the  old  war-songs  in  which  Jewish  deeds  of  valour  had  been 
recorded — ascribing  all  to  Jehovah,  and  making  man  of  no 
account,  it  all  seemed  to  mark  a  new  period  in  the  history  of 
Israel,  and  Barzillai  felt  that  David  was  indeed  God's  Anointed, 
the  symbol  of  Israel's  real  mission,  and  the  type  of  its  accom- 
plishment. And  at  last,  after  the  shameful  defeat  of  Israel  and 
the  sad  death  of  Saul,  he  had  hailed  what  had  taken  place  in 
Hebron.  The  capture  of  Jerusalem,  the  erection  of  a  central 
sanctuary  there,  and  the  subjection  of  Israel's  enemies  round 
about,  would  seem  to  him  bright  links  in  the  same  chain. 
And  though  David's  sad  fall  must  have  grieved  him  to  the 
heart,  it  could  never  have  influenced  his  views  of  Absalom's 
conduct,  nor  yet  shaken  his  own  allegiance.  And  now  that 
David's  reign,  so  far  as  its  spiritual  bearing  was  concerned,  was 


Federal  Republican  Rising.  33 

evidently  coming  to  a  close  —  its  great  results  achieved,  its 
spiritual  meaning  realised — he  would  feel  that  nothing  could 
undo  the  past,  which  henceforth  formed  part  of  the  spiritual 
inheritance  of  Israel,  or  rather  of  that  of  the  world  at  large. 
And  so,  in  the  spirit  of  Simeon,  when  he  had  witnessed  the 
incipient  fulfilment  of  Israel's  hopes,  Barzillai  was  content 
to  "  turn  back  again  "  to  his  own  city,  to  die  there,  and  be 
laid  in  the  grave  of  his  father  and  mother,  who  had  lived  in 
times  far  more  troubled  than  his  own,  and  had  seen  but  "  far 
off"  that  of  which  he  had  witnessed  the  happy  accomplishment. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  may,  at  this  stage  of  our  inquiries, 
be  allowed  to  place  by  the  side  of  Barzillai  another  repre- 
sentative man  of  that  period.  If  Barzillai  was  a  type  of  the 
spiritual,  Joab  was  of  the  national  aspect  of  Judaism.  He  was 
intensely  Jewish,  in  the  tribal  meaning  of  the  word,  not  in 
its  higher,  world-wide  bearing :  only  Judasan  in  everything 
that  outwardly  marked  Judaism,  though  not  as  regarded  its 
inward  and  spiritual  reality.  Fearless,  daring,  ambitious,  reck- 
less, jealous,  passionate,  unscrupulous,  but  withal  most  loving 
of  his  country  and  people,  faithful  to,  and,  no  doubt,  zealous 
for  his  religion,  so  far  as  it  was  ancestral  and  national — Joab 
represented  the  one  phase  of  Judaism,  as  Barzillai  the  other. 
Joab  stands  before  us  as  a  typical  Eastern,  or  rather  as  the 
typical  Eastern  Judaean.  Nor  is  it  without  deep  symbolical 
meaning,  as  we  trace  the  higher  teaching  of  history,  that  Joab, 
the  typical  Eastern  Judaean, — may  we  not  say,  the  type  of 
Israel  after  the  flesh? — should,  in  carrying  out  his  own  pur- 
poses and  views,  have  at  last  compassed  his  own  destruction. 

David's  difficulties  did  not  end  with  the  crossing  of  Jordan. 
On  the  contrary,  they  seemed  rather  to  commence  anew.  He 
had  been  received  by  the  tribe  of  Judah;  a  thousand  Ben- 
jamites  had  come  for  purposes  of  their  own ;  and  probably  a 
number  of  other  tribesmen  may  have  joined  the  king  during 
his  progress.  1     But  the  tribes,  in  their  corporate  capacity,  had 

^  It  is  thus  that  we  interpret  the  expression — **  half  the  people  of 
Israel " — in  2  Sam.  xix.  40.  Of  course,  it  must  not  "be  taken  literally,  as 
appears  from  the  whole  context. 


34  Close  of  David^s  Reign. 

not  been  asked  to  take  part  in  the  matter,  and  both  David 
and  Judah  had  acted  as  if  they  were  of  no  importance.  Ac- 
cordingly, when  the  representatives  of  Israel  arrived  in  Gilgal, 
there  was  fierce  contention  between  them  and  the  men  of  Judah 
about  this  unjustifiable  slight — the  men  of  Judah  being  the 
more  violent,  as  usual  with  those  who  do  a  wrong. 

It  needed  only  a  spark  to  set  the  combustible  material  on 
fire.  A  worthless  man,  one  Sheba,  a  Benjamite,  who  happened 
to  be  there,  blew  a  trumpet,  and  gave  it  forth  to  the  assembled 
representatives  of  the  tribes  that,  since  they  had  no  part  in 
David,  they  should  leave  him  to  reign  over  those  who  had 
selected  him  as  their  king.  It  was  just  such  a  cry  as  in  the 
general  state  of  excitement  would  appeal  to  popular  feeling. 
David  soon  found  himself  deserted  by  his  Israelitish  subjects, 
obliged  to  return  to  Jerusalem  with  only  his  own  tribesmen, 
and  threatened  by  a  formidable  revolution  in  front.  To  sup- 
press the  movement  before  it  had  time  to  spread  and  dis- 
integrate the  country  by  everywhere  exciting  tribal  jealousies 
— such  was  David's  first  care  on  his  return  to  Jerusalem,  after 
setting  his  household  in  order  (2  Sam.  xx.  3).  But  the  fatal 
consequences  of  David's  late  conduct  now  appeared.  True 
to  his  promise,  he  proposed  to  entrust  to  Amasa  the  com- 
mand of  the  expedition  against  Sheba  and  what,  to  borrow 
a  modern  term,  we  may  call  the  "  Federal  Republic."  But, 
whether  from  personal  incapacity,  or,  more  probably,  from 
the  general  want  of  confidence  in,  and  dissatisfaction  with, 
the  new  commander,  Amasa  did  not  even  succeed  in  bringing 
together  a  force.  As  time  was  of  the  greatest  importance,^ 
David  felt  himself  obliged  again  to  have  recourse  to  Abishai, 
or  rather,  through  him,  to  Joab.^     There  was  now  no  lack 

^  To  use  the  pictorial  Hebrew  expression  (2  Sam.  xx.  6)  :  "Jest  he  find 
him  fenced  cities,  and  tear  out  our  eye."  This  seems  to  us  a  more  suitable 
rendering  than  that  either  of  our  Authorised  Version  or  of  Ewald. 

2  The  text  mentions  only  dealings  between  David  and  Abishai,  but  the 
subsequent  narrative  shows  that  Joab  was  in  command.  From  the  relations 
between  Joab  and  the  king,  it  seems  likely  that  David  may  have  pre- 
ferred to  communicate  with  Joab  through  his  brother. 


Death  of  SJieba.  35 

of  trusty  warriors,  and  the  expedition  at  once  moved  north- 
wards. 

The  forces,  under  the  leadership  of  Abishai  and  Joab,  had 
reached  the  great  stone  at  Gibeon,  when  Amasa  "came  to 
meet  them "  ^  from  the  opposite  direction,  no  doubt,  on  his 
way  to  Jerusalem.  Joab  was,  as  usual,  "girt  with  his  armour- 
coat  as  a  garment,  and  upon  it  the  girdle  of  the  sword,  bound 
upon  his  loins,  in  its  scabbard;  and  it  [the  scabbard]  came 
out,  and  it  [the  sword]  fell  out."^  Amasa  seems  to  have 
been  so  startled  by  this  unexpected  appearance  of  a  host  with 
another  leader  as  to  have  lost  all  presence  of  mind.  He  saw 
not  the  sword  which  Joab  picked  up  from  the  ground,  and  now 
held  low  down  in  his  left  hand,  but  allowed  his  treacherous 
relative  to  take  him  by  the  beard,  as  if  to  kiss  him,  so  that 
the  sword  ran  into  the  lower  part  of  his  body.  Probably  Joab, 
while  determined  to  rid  himself  of  his  rival,  had  adopted  this 
plan,  in  the  hope  of  leaving  it  open  to  doubt  whether  Amasa's 
death  had  been  the  result  of  accident  or  of  criminal  intention. 
Then,  as  if  there  were  not  time  for  delay,  Joab  and  Abishai 
left  the  body  weltering  where  it  had  fallen,  and  hastened  on 
their  errand. 

It  was  a  dreadful  sight ;  and  not  all  the  urgency  of  the 
soldier  whom  Joab  had  posted  by  the  dead  or  dying  man 
could  prevent  the  people  from  lingering,  horror-stricken,  around 
him.  At  last  the  body  had  to  be  removed.  It  had  been  left 
on  the  ground,  probably  alike  as  a  mark  of  contempt  and  a 
warning  to  others  not  to  provoke  the  jealousy  of  Joab.  And 
now  David's  army  was  in  full  chase  after  Sheba  and  his 
adherents.  They  followed  him  through  the  whole  land  up 
to  the  far  north  among  the  fortresses^  by  the  Lake  Merom, 

'  So  2  Sam.  XX.  8,  and  not,  as  in  the  Authorised  Version,  "went 
before  them." 

2  This  is  the  correct  rendering  of  the  rest  of  ver.  8. 

^  These  fortresses  are  grouped  together  in  i  Kings  xv.  20  ;  2  Kings 
XV.  29 ;  2  Chron.  xvi.  4.  It  has  been  ingeniously  suggested  that  the  ex- 
pression :  "all  the  Berites"  (2  Sam.  xx.  14),  which  gives  no  meaning, 
should  be  regarded  as  a  masculine  form  of  the  word,  and  rendered  :  "all 
the  fortresses." 


$6  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

where  he  was  at  last  tracked  to  Abel,  or  rather,  Abel-Beth- 
maachah.  To  this  fortress  Joab  now  laid  siege.  Its  destruction, 
however,  was  averted  by  the  wisdom  of  one  of  its  women. 
Demanding  speech  of  Joab  from  the  city-wall,  she  reminded 
the  general  that  the  people  of  Abel  had  been  famed,  not  for 
being  rash  in  action,  but  rather  wise  and  deliberate  in  counsel. 
Had  Joab  ever  asked  whether  the  town  of  Abel,  which  he  was 
about  to  destroy,  shared  the  views  of  Sheba,  or  took  part  in  the 
rebellion?  She,  and,  by  implication,  her  fellow-citizens,  were 
quite  the  contrary  of  turbulent  conspirators.  How,  then,  could 
Joab  act  so  unpatriotically,  so  un-Jewishly,  as  to  wish  to 
destroy  a  city  and  a  mother  in  Israel,  and  to  swallow  up 
the  inheritance  of  Jehovah  ?  And  when  Joab  explained  that 
it  was  not  the  destruction  of  a  peaceable  city,  but  the  suppres- 
sion of  a  rebellion  which  he  sought,  she  proposed,  as  a  speedy 
end  to  all  trouble,  that  Sheba  should  be  killed,  and,  in  evidence 
of  it,  his  head  thrown  over  the  wall.  It  was  an  easy  mode  of 
ridding  themselves  both  of  a  troublesome  visitor  and  of  a  terrible 
danger, — and  the  gory  head  cast  at  his  feet  convinced  Joab 
that  the  rebellion  was  at  an  end,  that  he  might  retire  from 
the  city,  dismiss  his  army,  and  return  to  Jerusalem.  So 
ended  the  last  rising  against  David— and,  we  may  add,  the 
political  history  of  his  reign. 


^M'^Jfrgp^B^S^t-S^- 


The  Famine.  yj 


CHAPTER   III. 
5'lJp^^ttbix  tor  the  ^istorj)  tsi  ^abib. 

The  Famine— The  Pestilence— The   Temple  Arrangements— David's  Last 
Hymn  and  Prophetic  Utterance. 

(2  Sam.  XXI.— XXIV.  ;  i  Chron.  xxi.— xxvii.) 

'\  1  7iTH  the  suppression  of  the  federal  revolution  under  Sheba, 
*  ^  the  political  history  of  David,  as  related  in  the  Second 
Book  of  Samuel,  closes.  Accordingly,  the  account  of  this, 
the  second  part  of  his  reign,  concludes,  like  that  of  the  first 
(2  Sam.  viii.  16),  with  an  enumeration  of  his  principal  officers 
(2  Sam.  XX.  23  to  the  end).  What  follows  in  the  Second  Book  of 
Samuel  (xxi. -xxi v.),  must  be  regarded  as  an  Appendix,  giving, 
first,  an  account  of  the  famine  which  desolated  the  land 
(xxi.  1-14),  probably  in  the  earlier  part,  and  of  the  pestilence 
which  laid  it  waste,  probably  towards  the  close  of  David's 
reign  (xxiv.);  secondly,  some  brief  notices  of  the  Philistine 
wars  (xxi.  15-22),  and  a  detailed  register  of  David's  heroes 
(xxiii.  8-39),  neither  of  which  will  require  comment  on  our 
part;  and,  lastly,  David's  final  Psalm  of  thanksgiving  (xxii.), 
and  his  last  prophetic  utterances  (xxiii.  1-7).  All  these  are 
grouped  together  at  the  end  of  the  Second  Book  of  Samuel, 
probably  because  it  was  difficult  to  insert  them  in  any  other 
place  consistently  with  the  plan  of  the  work,  which,  as  we 
have  repeatedly  noted,  was  not  intended  to  be  a  biography 
or  a  history  of  David,  chronologically  arranged.  Perhaps 
we  should  add,  that  the  account  of  the  pestilence  was  placed 
last  in  the  book  (xxiv.),  because  it  forms  an  introduction 
to  the  preparations  made  for  the  building  of  the  Temple  by 
Solomon.  For,  as  we  understand  it,  no  sooner  had  the  place 
been   divinely   pointed   out  where  the  Sanctuary  should   be 


38  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

reared,  than  David  commenced  such  preparations  for  it  as  he 
could  make.  And  here  the  First  Book  of  Chronicles  supple- 
ments most  valuable  notices,  not  recorded  in  any  other  part  of 
Scripture.  From  these  we  learn  what  David  did  and  ordered 
in  his  kingdom  with  a  view  to  the  building  of  the  Temple  and 
the  arrangement  of  its  future  services  (i  Chron.  xxii.-xxix.). 
We  have  thus  four  particulars  under  which  to  group  our 
summary  of  what  we  have  designated  as  the  Appendix  to  the 
History  of  David :  the  fami?te ;  the  pestilejice ;  the  Temple 
arrange?fienfs  ;  and  the  last  Psalm  and  prophecy  of  the  king. 

I.  The  Famine  (2  Sam.  xxi.  1-14). — There  is  not  a  more 
harrowing  narrative  in  Holy  Scripture  than  that  connected 
with  the  famine  which  for  three  years  desolated  Palestine. 
Properly  to  understand  it,  we  require  to  keep  two  facts  in 
view.  First,  the  Gibeonites,  who,  at  the  time  of  Joshua,  had 
secured  themselves  from  destruction  by  fraud  and  falsehood 
(Josh.  ix.  3,  etc.),  were  really  heathens — Hivites,  or,  as  they 
are  called  in  the  sacred  text,  Amorites,  which  was  a  general 
designation  for  all  the  Canaanites  (Gen.  x.  16;  xv.  16;  Josh, 
ix.  i;  xi.  3;  xii.  8,  etc.).  We  know,  only  too  well,  the  cha- 
racter of  the  Canaanite  inhabitants  of  the  land ;  and  although, 
after  their  incorporation  with  Israel,  the  Gibeonites  must  have 
been  largely  influenced  for  good,  their  habits  of  thinking 
and  feeling  would  change  comparatively  little,^ — the  more  so 
because,  as  there  would  be  few,  if  any,  intermarriages  between 
them  and  native  Israelites,  they  would  be  left,  at  least  socially, 
isolated.  This  will  account  for  their  ferocious  persistence  in 
demanding  the  uttermost  punishment  prescribed  by  the  law. 
The  provisions  of  this  law  must  be  our  second  point  of  con- 
sideration. Here  we  have  again  to  bear  in  mind  the  circum- 
stances of  the  times,  the  existing  moral,  social,  and  national 
conditions,  and  the  spiritual  stage  which  Israel  had  then 
reached.      The  fundamental  principle,  laid  down  in  Numb. 

'^  In  a  previous  volume  of  this  History  we  have  shown  how  much  even 
a  woman  like  Jael  was  influenced  by  tribal  traditions — so  to  speak,  the 
inherited  taint  of  blood. 


The   Vengeance  of  the  Gibeonites.  ^  39 

XXXV.,  was  that  of  the  hohness  of  the  land  in  which  Jehovah 
dwelt  among  His  people.      This  holiness  must  be  guarded 
(ver.  34).     But  one  of  the  worst  defilements  of  a  land  was 
that  by  innocent  blood  shed  in  it.     According  to  the  majestic 
view  of  the  Old  Testament,  blood  shed  by  a  murderer's  hand 
could  not  be  covered  up — it  was,  so  to  speak,  a  living  thing 
which  cried  for  vengeance,  until  the  blood  of  him  that  had 
shed  it  silenced  its  voice  (ver.  ^iZ)")  or,  in  other  words,  till 
the   moral   equipoise   had   been   restored.     While,    therefore, 
the    same    section    of   the    law   provided    safety   in   case    of 
unintentional  homicide  (vers.   10-29),  and  regulated  the  old 
practice   of  ''avenging   blood,"   it   also    protected    the    land 
against    crime,    which    it   would    not    allow    to    be   compen- 
sated for  by  money  (ver.   31).     Hence  the  Gibeonites  were 
strictly  within   the   letter   of  the   law  in   demanding   retalia- 
tion on  the  house  of  Saul,  in  accordance  with  the  universally 
acknowledged  Old  Testament  principle  of  the  solidarity  of  a 
family ;  and  David  had  no  alternative  but  to  concede  their 
claim.     This  is  one  aspect  of  the  question.      The  other  must 
be  even  more  reverently  approached.     We  can  only  point  out 
how  they  who  lived  in  those  times  (especially  such  as  the 
Gibeonites)  would  feel  that  they  might  cry  to  God  for  vengeance, 
and  expect  it  from   the  Just  and  True   One;    and  how  the 
sternest  lessons  concerning  public  breach  of  faith  and  public 
crimes  would  be  of  the  deepest  national  importance  after  such 
a  reign  as  that  of  Saul. 

The  story  itself  may  be  told  in  few  sentences.  For  some 
reason  unrecorded — perhaps  in  the  excess  of  his  carnal  zeal, 
but  certainly  without  sufficient  grounds — Saul  had  made  havoc 
among  the  Gibeonites,  in  direct  contravention  of  those  solemn 
engagements  into  which  Israel  had  entered,  and  which  up 
to  that  time  had  been  scrupulously  observed.  When,  after- 
wards, a  famine  desolated  the  land  for  three  years,  and  David 
sought  the  face  of  Jehovah,  he  was  informed  that  it  was  due 
to  the  blood-guilt^  which  still  rested  on  the  house  of  Saul. 

^  It  is  thus  we  understand  the  expression  (2  Sam.  xxi.  i) :  "It  is  for 
Saul,  and  for  his  bloody  house." 


40  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

Upon  this  the  king  summoned  the  Gibeonites,  and  asked  them 
what  atonement  they  desired  for  the  wrong  done  them,  so  that 
the  curse  which  they  had  invoked  might  no  longer  rest  on  the 
inheritance  of  Jehovah.  Their  answer  was  characteristic.  "  It 
is  not  a  matter  to  us  of  silver  or  of  gold,  in  regard  to  Saul  and 
his  house,  nor  is  it  ours  to  put  to  death  any  one  in  Israel." 
"And  he  said  :  What  say  ye  then?  and  I  will  do  it  for  you."^ 
Then  came  the  demand,  made  with  all  the  ferocity  and  irony 
of  which  they  were  capable,  that  the  blood-vengeance  which 
they,  as  Gibeonites,  did  not  venture  to  take,  should  be  executed 
for  them,  and  that  seven  of  Saul's  descendants  should  be 
handed  over  to  them  that  they  might  be  nailed  to  the  cross 
— of  course  after  they  were  dead,  for  so  the  law  directed  - — 
as  they  termed  it :  "  To  Jehovah  in  Gibeah  of  Saul,  the 
chosen  of  Jehovah." 

Terrible  as  their  demand  was,  it  could  not  be  refused,  and 
the  two  sons  of  Rizpah,  a  foreign  concubine  of  Saul,  and 
five  sons  of  Merab,^  Saul's  eldest  daughter,  were  selected  as  the 
victims.  Then  this  most  harrowing  spectacle  was  presented. 
From  the  commencement  of  the  barley  harvest  in  April  till  the 
early  rains  of  autumn  evidenced  the  removal  of  the  curse  from 
the  land,  hung  those  lifeless,  putrescent  bodies,  which  a  fierce 
Syrian  sun  shrivelled  and  dried;  and  beneath  them,  cease- 
less, restless,  was  the  weird  form  of  Saul's  concubine.  When  she 
lay  down  at  night  it  was  on  the  coarse  hair-cloth  of  mourners, 

^  We  have  translated  literally  2  Sam.  xxi.  4. 

"  The  punishment  of  crucifixion,  or  impaling,  is  mentioned  in  Numb. 
XXV.  4.  But  that  criminals  were  not  crucified  or  impaled  alive^  but  only  after 
Ihey  were  slain,  appears  from  ver.  5.  Similarly,  in  hanging,  death  always 
preceded  the  hanging  (Deut  xxi.  22,  where  our  Authorised  Version  is  not  suf- 
ficiently distinct).  The  same  remark  applies  to  the  punishment  oi  btirning, 
•which  was  only  executed  on  the  dead  body  of  the  criminal  (Lev.  xx.  14),  as 
appears  from  Josh.  vii.  i5comp.  with  ver.  1 1,  In  these  respects  the  Rabbi- 
nical Law  was  much  more  cruel,  ordering  literal  strangulation,  and  burning 
by  pouring  down  molten"  lead  (comp.  specially  Mishnak  Sank.  vii.  1-3). 

3  In  2  Sam.  xxi.  8,  by  a  clerical  error,  we  have  Michal  instead  of  Merab. 
But  it  was  the  latter,  not  the  former,  who  was  married  to  Adriel  the 
Meliolathite  (comp.  i  Sam.  xviii.  19). 


The  PestileJice.  4 1 

which  she  spread  upon  the  rock ;  but  day  and  night  was  she 
on  her  wild,  terrible  watch  to  chase  from  the  mangled  bodies 
the  birds  of  prey  that,  with  hoarse  croaking,  swooped  around 
them,  and  the  jackals  whose  hungry  howls  woke  the  echoes  of 
the  night.  Often  has  Jiidcua  capta  been  portrayed  as  weeping 
over  her  slain  children.  But  as  we  realise  the  innocent  Jewish 
victims  of  Gentile  persecution  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  then 
remember  the  terrible  cry  under  the  Cross,  this  picture  of 
Rizpah  under  the  seven  crosses,  chasing  from  the  slaughtered 
the  vultures  and  the  jackals,  seems  ever  to  come  back  to  us 
as  its  terrible  emblem  and  type. 

"  And  it  was  told  David  what  Rizpah,  the  daughter  of  Aiah, 
the  concubine  of  Saul,  had  done.  And  David  went  [himself] 
and  took  the  bones  of  Saul,  and  the  bones  of  Jonathan  his 
son,  from  the  men  of  Jabesh-gilead,  who  had  stolen  them  from 
the  street  of  Bethshan,  where  the  Philistines  had  hanged  them, 
when  the  Philistines  had  slain  Saul  in  Gilboa  :  and  he 
brought  up  from  thence  the  bones  of  Saul  and  the  bones  of 
Jonathan  his  son ;  and  they  gathered  the  bones  of  them  that 
were  crucified.  And  the  bones  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  his  son 
buried  they  in  the  country  of  Benjamin  in  Zelah,  in  the 
sepulchre  of  Kish  his  father." 

2.  The  Pestilence. — In  regard  to  this  event,  it  is  of  the  greatest 
importance  to  bear  in  mind  that  it  was  sent  in  consequence  of 
some  sin  of  which  Israel,  as  a  people,  were  guilty.  True,  the 
direct  cause  and  immediate  occasion  of  it  were  the  pride  and 
carnal  confidence  of  David,  perhaps  his  purpose  of  converting 
Israel  into  a  military  monarchy.  But  this  state  of  mind  of 
their  king  was,  as  we  are  expressly  told  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  i),  itself 
a  judgment  upon  Israel  from  the  Lord,  when  Satan  stood  up 
to  accuse  Israel,  and  was  allowed  thus  to  influence  David 
{i  Chron.  xxi.  i).  If,  as  we  suppose,  the  popular  rising  under 
Absalom  and  Sheba  was  that  for  which  Israel  was  thus  punished, 
there  is  something  specially  corresponding  to  the  sin  alike 
in  the  desire  of  David  to  have  the  people  numbered,  and 
in  the  punishment  which  .followed.     Nor  ought  we  to  overlook 


42  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

another  Old  Testament  principle  evidenced  in  this  history: 
that  of  the  solidarity  of  a  people  and  their  rulers. 

It  seems  a  confirmation  of  the  view,  that  the  sin  of  David, 
in  wishing  to  ascertain  the  exact  number  of  those  capable  of 
bearing  arms,  was  due  to  carnal  elation  and  pride,  and  that  the 
measure  was  somehow  connected  with  military  ambition  on  his 
part,  that  both  in  2  Sam.  and  in  i  Chron.  this  story  follows  an 
enumeration  of  the  three  classes  of  David's  heroes,  and  of 
some  of  their  most  notable  feats  of  arms.  ^  The  unwillingness 
of  Joab  and  of  the  other  captains,  to  whom  the  king  entrusted 
the  census,  arose  partly  from  the  knowledge  that  such  an 
attempt  at  converting  all  Israel  into  a  large  camp  would  be 
generally  disliked  and  disapproved — a  feeling  with  which  he 
and  his  fellow-captains  would,  as  Israelitish  patriots,  fully 
sympathise.  But  religious  considerations  also  came  in,  since 
all  would  feel  that  a  measure  prompted  by  pride  and  ambition 
would  certainly  bring  judgment  upon  the  people  (i  Chron. 
xxi.  3).  Remonstrance  having  been  vain,  the  military  census 
was  slowly  and  reluctantly  taken,  the  Levites  being,  however, 
excluded  from  it  (Numb.  i.  47-54),  and  the  royal  order  itself 
recalled  before  the  territory  of  Benjamin  was  reached.-  For 
already  David's  conscience  was  alive  to  the  guilt  which  he  had 
incurred.  It  was  after  a  night  of  confession  and  prayer  on 
the  part  of  David,  that  Gad  was  sent  to  announce  to  him  the 
punishment  of  his  sin.  For,  the  temporal  punishment  appro- 
priately followed — not  preceded — the  confession  of  public  sin. 
Left  to  choose  between  famine,'^  defeat,  and  pestilence,  David 

^  The  same  inference  may  be  drawn  from  I  Chron.  xxvii.  23,  24,  where  the 
enumeration  is  evidently  connected  with  the  miHtaryorganisation  of  the  nation. 

^  Comp.  I  Chron.  xxi.  6 ;  xxvii.  24.  From  this  latter  notice  we  also 
gather  that  the  result  of  the  census  was  not  entered  in  the  Chronicles  of 
King  David.  We  can  therefore  the  less  hesitate  in  supposing  some  want 
of  accuracy  in  the  numbers  given.  Of  the  two  enumerations  we  prefer  that 
in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  9.  However,  1,300,000,  or  even,  according  to  I  Chron. 
xxi.  5,  1,570,000  men  capable  of  bearing  arms,  would  only  imply  a  total 
population  of  about  five  or  six  millions,  which  is  not  excessive. 

^  According  to  I  Chron.  xxi.  12,  the  famine  was  to  be  of  thre  years' 
duration.    The  number  ^^ seven  "  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13  must  be  a  clerical  error. 


The  Pestilence.  43 

wisely  and  well  cast  himself  upon  the  Lord,  finding  com- 
fort only  in  the  thought,  which  has  so  often  brought  relief  to 
those  who  realise  it,  that,  even  when  suffering  for  sin,  it  is 
well  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  Jehovah.  Nor  was  his  unuttered 
hope  disappointed.  The  pestilence,  terrible  as  it  was  in  its 
desolations,  was  shortened  from  three  days  to  less  than  one 
day:  "from  the  morning  to  the  time  of  the  assembly,"  viz., 
for  the  evening  sacrifice.^ 

Meanwhile  "David  and  the  elders,  clothed  in  sackcloth" 
(i  Chron.  xxi.  16),  were  lying  on  their  faces  in  humiliation 
before  the  Lord.  Significantly,  it  was  as  the  Divine  command 
of  mercy  sped  to  arrest  the  arm  of  the  Angel  messenger  of 
the  judgment,  that  he  became  visible  to  David  and  his 
companions  in  prayer.  Already  he  had  neared  Jerusalem,  and 
his  sword  was  stretched  towards  it — ^just  above  Mount  Moriah, 
at  that  time  still  outside  the  city,  where  Aravnah  ^  the  Jebusite 
had  his  threshing-floor.  It  was  a  fitting  spot  for  mercy  upon 
Israel,  this  place  where  of  old  faithful  Abraham  had  been 
ready  to  offer  his  only  son  unto  God;  fitting  also  as  still 
outside  the  city ;  but  chiefly  in  order  that  the  pardoning  and 
sparing  mercy  now  shown  might  indicate  the  site  where,  on 
the  great  altar  of  burnt-offering,  abundant  mercy  in  pardon  and 
acceptance  would  in  the  future  be  dispensed  to  Israel.  At 
sight  of  the  Angel  with  his  sword  pointed  towards  Jerusalem, 
David  lifted  his  voice  in  humblest  confession,  entreating  that, 
as  the  sin  had  been  his,  so  the  punishment  might  descend  on 
him  and  his  household,  rather  than  on  his  people.  This 
prayer  marked  the  beginning  of  mercy.  By  Divine  direction, 
through  Gad,  David  and  they  who  were  with  him,  went  to 
Aravnah  to  purchase  the  place  thus  rendered  for  ever  memor- 
able, in  order  to  consecrate  it  to  the  Lord  by  an  altar,  on 
which  burnt  and  peace-offerings  were  brought.  And  this  was 
to  be  the  site  for  the  future  "house  of  Jehovah  God,"  and 

1  This  is  the  proper  rendering  of  2  Sam.  xxi  v.  15. 

2  This  seems  to  have  been  the  original,  while  that  of  Oman  (l  Chron. 
xxi.  15)  and  others  are  the  Hebraised  forms  of  the  name. 


44  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

for  "the  altar  of  the  burnt-offering  for  Israel"  (i  Chroii. 
xxii.   i). 

And  God  had  both  prepared  and  inclined  the  heart  of  the 
Jebusite  for  the  willing  surrender  of  the  site  for  its  sacred 
purposes.  No  doubt  he  was  a  proselyte,  and  probably 
(analogously  to  Rahab)  had  been  an  ally  in  the  taking  of 
Jerusalem  under  Joab.  It  seems  that  Aravnah  and  his  four 
sons,  while  busy  in  that  threshing-floor,  had  also  seen  the  figure 
of  the  Angel  high  above  them,  and  that  it  had  struck  terror 
into  their  hearts  (i  Chron.  xxi.  20).  When,  therefore,  David 
and  his  followers  came,  they  were  prepared  freely  to  give,  not 
only  the  threshing-floor,  but  also  all  within  it,^  if  only  Jehovah 
were  pleased  to  accept  the  prayer  of  the  king  (2  Sam.  xxi  v.  23). 
Thus  most  significantly,  in  its  typical  aspect,  were  Jew  and 
•Gentile  here  brought  together  to  co-operate  in  the  dedication 
of  the  Temple-site.  It,  no  doubt,  showed  insight  into  Oriental 
character,  though  we  feel  sure  it  was  neither  from  pride  nor 
narrow  national  prejudice,  that  David  refused  to  accept  as  a  gift 
what  had  been  humbly  and,  as  we  believe,  heartily  offered. 
But  there  Vvas  evident  fitness  in  the  acquisition  of  the  place 
by  money  -  on  the  part  of  David,  as  the  representative  of  all 
Israel.  And  as  if  publicly  and  from  heaven  to  ratify  what  had 
been  done,  fire,  unkindled  by  man,  fell  upon  the  altar  and 
consumed  the  sacrifices  (i  Chron.  xxi.  26).  But  from  that 
moment  the  destroying  sword  of  the  Angel  was  sheathed  at 
the  command  of  God. 

3.  David's  Temple  arrangenmits. — Since  the  Lord  had,  in 

^  2  Sam.  xxiv.  23,  reads  in  the  Hebrew:  "The  whole,  O  king,  does 
Aravnah  give  unto  the  king,"  and  not  as  in  the  Authorised  Version. 

-  Of  the  two  statements  of  the  price,  we  unhesitatingly  take  that  in 
I  Chron.  xxi.  25  (the  other  in  2  Sam.  depending  on  a  clerical  error,  very 
common  and  easily  accounted  for  in  numerals).  Bearing  in  mind  that  the 
common  shekel  was  of  half  the  value  of  the  sacred,  and  that  the  proportion 
of  gold  to  silver  was  about  ten  to  one,  the  six  hundred  shekels  of  gold  would 
amount  to  about ;^38o.  In  Siphrc  146  a.,  various  attempts  are  made  to 
conciliate  the  two  diverging  accounts — it  need  scarcely  be  said  ineffectually. 
The  learned  reader  will  find  a  fidl  discussion  of  the  question  in  Ugolini's 
tractate  .^//«r^ -£';f/'^r/MJ  (Ugolini  Thesaurus,  Fol.  Vol.  x.  pp.  504-506). 


David's  Temple  Arrangements.  45, 

His  Providence,  pointed  out  the  place  where  the  Sanctuary- 
was  to  be  reared,  David,  with  characteristic  energy,  began  im- 
mediate preparations  for  a  work,  the  greatness  of  which  the 
king  measured  by  his  estimate  of  Him  for  Whose  service  it  was 
designed  (i  Chron.  xxii.  5).  It  ahnost  seems  as  if  in  these 
arrangements  all  David's  former  vigour  had  come  back^ 
showing  where,  despite  his  weaknesses  and  failings,  the  king's 
heart  really  was.  Besides,  the  youth  of  his  son  and  successor 
Solomon,^  and  the  consideration  that  probably  no  other 
monarch  would  wield  such  influence  in  the  land  as  he 
had  possessed,  determined  David  not  to  neglect  nor  defer 
anything  that  he  might  be  able  to  do.  First,  he  took  a 
census  of  the  "  strangers,"  ^  and  set  them  to  prepare  the 
stone,  iron,  and  timber  work.  His  next  care  was  to  give 
solemn  charge  to  Solomon  concerning  what  was  so  much 
on  his  own  heart  Recapitulating  all  that  had  passed,  when 
he  first  proposed  to  "build  an  house  unto  the  Name  of 
Jehovah,"  he  laid  this  work  upon  his  son  and  God-appointed 
successor,  as  the  main  business  of  his  reign.  Yet  not  as  a 
merely  outward  work  to  be  done,  but  as  the  manifestation  of 
spiritual  religion,  and  as  the  outcome  of  allegiance  to  God 
and  His  law  (i  Chron.  xxii.  6-12).  Only  such  principles  would 
secure  true  prosperity  to  his  reign  (ver.  13).  For  himself,  he 
had    "by  painful  labour "^  gathered  great  treasures,^  which 

1  Solomon  was  probably  at  this  time  about  twenty  years  of  age. 

^  These  were  not  only  foreign  settlers,  but  the  descendants  of  the  original 
inhabitants  of  the  land  whose  lives  had  been  spared.  Such  was  their 
number  that  Solomon  could  employ  no  fewer  than  one  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand  of  them  to  bear  burdens,  and  to  hew  stones  (i  Kings  v.  15  ; 
2  Chron.   ii.    17). 

^  This,  and  not  "in  my  trouble,"  is  the  correct  rendering  of  i  Chron. 
xxii.   14. 

^  Although,  as  we  have  often  explained,  clerical  errors  occur  in 
the  numerals  in  the  historical  books,  it  may  be  well  to  give  the  real 
equivalent  of  the  silver  and  gold,  menti6ned  in  I  Chron.  xxii.  14.  Bear- 
ing in  mind  the  distinction  between  the  sacred  and  the  common  shekel 
(2  Sam.  xiv.  26;  I  Kings  x.  17,  compared  with  2  Chron.  ix.  16),  it  would 
amount  to  under  ;[^4,ooo,ooo.  Immense  as  this  sum  is,  Keil  has  shown 
that  it  is  by  no  means  out  of  proportion  with  the  treasures  taken  as  booty 
in  antiquity  (comp.  Bibl.  Comvicnt.  Vol.  v.  pp.  181-184). 


4-6  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

were  to  be  devoted  to  the  building  of  the  new  Temple ;  and 
he  had  made  all  possible  preparations  for  it.  Finally,  sum- 
moning "  the  princes  of  Israel,  with  the  priests  and  the 
Levites"  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  i,  2),  and  presenting  to  them  his 
son  Solomon  as  successor  in  the  kingdom,  he  entreated  their 
co-operation  with  him  in  what  was  to  be  the  great  work  of 
the  future — making  it  not  a  personal,  but  a  national  under- 
taking, expressive  of  this,  that  they  had  "  set  heart  and  soul 
to  seek  Jehovah"  their  God  (i  Chron.  xxii.  19). 

It  was  in  this  solemn  assembly  of  laity  and  priesthood 
that  Solomon's  succession  was  announced  and  accepted,  and 
that  the  future  organisation  of  the  Temple  Services  was  de- 
termined and  fixed.^  A  census  of  the  Levites  gave  their 
number,  from  thirty  years  and  upwards,  at  38,000  men.  Of 
these  24,000  were  appointed  to  attend  to  the  general  mi- 
nistry of  the  sanctuary  (xxiii.  28-32),  6,000  to  act  as  "officers 
and  judges,"  4,000  for  instrumental  music,  and  4,000  as 
choristers — the  latter  (and  probably  also  the  former  class) 
being  subdivided  into  adepts,  of  which  there  were  288  (xxv. 
7;,  and  learners  (xxv.  8).  As  all  the  Levites,  so  these  288 
adepts  or  trained  choristers  were  arranged  by  lot  into  twenty- 
four  courses,  a  certain  number  of  "  learners  "  being  attached 
to  each  of  them.  Each  course  of  Levites  had  to  under- 
take in  turn  such  services  as  fell  to  them.  Those  who 
had  charge  of  the  gates  were  arranged  into  classes,  there 
being  altogether  twenty-four  posts  in  the  Sanctuary  in  which 
watch  was  to  be  kept  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  1-19).  Similarly,  the 
priests,  the  descendants  of  Aaron,  were  arranged  by  lot  into 
twenty-four  courses  for  their  special  ministry  (i  Chron.  xxiv. 
I -1 9).  Lastly,  the  sacred  text  gives  a  brief  account  of  the 
work  of  those  6000  Levites  whom  David  appointed  as  "scribes 
and  judges"  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  29-32),  and  of  the  final  arrange- 
ment of  the  army,  and  *of  all  the  other  public  offices 
(i  Chron.  xxvii.). 

^  It  is,  of  course,  impossible  here  to  enter  into  any  critical  examination  of 
the  chapters  in  i  Chron.,  summarised  in  our  text. 


David^s  Last  Hymn.  47 

4.  David's  last  hymn  and  prophetic  utterance  (2  Sam.  xxii.- 
xxiii.  2-7). — The  history  of  David  appropriately  closes  with  a 
grand  hymn,  which  may  be  described  as  alike  the  programme 
and  the  summary  of  his  life  and  reign  in  their  spiritual  as- 
pect. Somewhat  altered  in  language,  so  as  to  adapt  it  to 
liturgical  purposes,  it  is  inserted  in  our  present  Psalter  as 
Ps.  xviii.,  to  which  we  accordingly  refer.  This  grand  hymn  of 
thanksgiving  is  followed — to  use  the  language  of  an  eminent 
German  critic^ — by  the  prophetic  testament  of  the  king,  in 
which  he  indicates  the  spiritual  import  and  bearing  of  his 
kingdom.  If  Ps.  xviii.  was  a  grand  Hallelujah,  with  which 
David  quitted  the  scene  of  life,  these  his  "last  words"  are  the 
Divine  attestation  of  all  that  he  had  sung  and  prophesied  in 
the  Psalms  concerning  the  spiritual  import  of  the  kingdom 
which  he  was  to  found,  in  accordance  with  the  Divine  message 
that  Nathan  had  been  commissioned  to  bring  to  him.  Hence 
these  "  last  words  "  must  be  regarded  as  an  inspired  prophetic 
utterance  by  David,  before  his  death,  about  the  King  and  the 
Kingdom  of  God  in  their  full  and  real  meaning.  The  following 
is  the  literal  rendering  of  this  grand  prophecy  : 

The  Spirit  of  Jehovah  speaks  by  me,^ 
And  His  Word  is  on  my  tongue  !  ^ 

Saith  the  God  of  Israel, 

Speaks  to  me  the  Rock  of  Israel : 

A  Ruler  over  man,'*  righteous, 

A  Ruler  in  the  fear  of  God — 

And  as  the  light  of  morning,^  when  riseth  the  sun® — 

^  Keil.     We  quote,  of  course,  only  the  substance  of  his  remarks. 

2  According  to  some  "in  me  "  or  "  into  me,"  as  Hos.  i.  2.  In  that  case, 
the  first  clause  would  indicate  inspiration,  and  the  second  its  human 
utterance. 

^  The  Rabbis  and  others  regard  this  as  referring  to  all  David's  Psalms 
and  prophecies. 

*  Not  merely  over  Israel,  but  over  mankind,  indicating  the  future  Kingdom 
of  God,  and  the  full  application  of  the  prophecy  in  its  Messianic  sense, 

5  Here  the  effects  of  that  great  salvation  are  described.  The  Rabbis, 
however,  connect  it  with  the  previous  verse,  and  regard  it  as  a  farther 
description  of  this  ruler, 

^  The  light  of  the  morning  of  salvation — in  opposition  to  the  previous 
darkness  of  the  night,  the  sun  being  the  Sun  of  Righteousness. 


4  8  Close  of  David's  Reign. 

Morning  without  clouds — 

From  the  shining  forth  out  of  (after)  rain  (sprouts)  the  green  out  of  the 

earth  !  ^ 
For  is  not  thus  my  house  with  God?^ 
Since  an  everlasting  covenant  He  hath  made  with  me, 
Provided  (prepared)  in  all  things,  and  preserved  (kept,  watched  over) — 
Then,  all  my  salvation  and  all  good  pleasure, 
Shall  He  not  cause  it  to  spring  forth? 

And  (the  sons  of)  Belial,    as  thorns  cast  away  are  they  alP — 
For  they  are  not  taken  up  in  the  hand^ 
And  the  man  who  toucheth  them, 

Provides  himself  {lit.,  fills)  with  iron  and  shaft  of  spear,^ 
And    '\n   fire^    are   they   utterly    burned   in   their   dwelling^   (where 
they  are). 

^  After  a  night  of  rain  the  sun  shines  forth  and  the  earth  sprouts.  Comp. 
Ps.  Ixxii.   6  ;  Is.  xlv.   8. 

-  Pointing  to  the  promise  in  2  Sam.  vii. — as  it  were  :  Does  not  my  house 
stand  in  this  relationship  towards  God,  that  alike  the  Just  Ruler  and  the 
blessings  connected  with  His  reign  shall  spring  from  it  ? 

2  Here  is  an  indication  of  the  judgment  to  come  upon  the  enemies  of  the 
Messianic  Kingdom.  Mark  here  the  contrast  between  the  consequences  of 
Belial  and  those  of  the  morning  light  when  green  sprouts  from  the  earth. 
Mark  also  how,  while  the  sprouting  of  the  grass  is  a  gradual  and  continuous 
process,  the  burning  of  the  castaway  thorns  is  the  final  but  immediate 
judgment.     Comp.  Matt.  xiii.  30. 

4  That  is,  they  are  not  gathered  together  with  the  naked  hand  in  order 
to  burn  them,  but  people  provide  themselves  with  iron  instruments  held 
by  wooden  handles. 

5  The  fire  a  symbol  of  the  Divine  wrath. 

^  Other  renderings  have  been  proposed,  but  the  one  in  the  text  conveys 
the  idea  that  the  thorns  are  burned  where  they  lie. 


The  Book  of  Kings.  49 


CHAPTER   IV. 

Adonijah's  Attempt  to  Seize  the  Throne— Anointing  of  Solomon— Great 
Assembly  of  the  Chiefs  of  the  People— Dying  Charge  of  David— 
Adonijah's  Second  Attempt  and  Punishment — Execution  of  Joab  and 
of  Shimei. 

(i  Kings  i.,  ii.  ;  i  Chron.  xxiii.  i,  xxviii.,  xxix.) 

THE  history  of  David,  as  told  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles, 
closes  with  an  account  of  what,  in  its  bearing  on  the 
theocracy,  was  of  greatest  importance — the  public  charge  to 
Solomon  in  regard  to  the  building  of  the  Temple  and  the 
preparations  for  the  work.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Book  of 
Kings  ^    takes   up   the  thread  of  prophetic  history  where  the 

^  It  should  always  be  kept  in  view  that  (as  stated  in  Vol.  iv.  p.  163)  the 
histor)"-  of  Israel  is  presented  in  the  Book  of  Kings  from  the  prophetic  point 
of  view.  In  other  words,  it  is  a  history  written  from  the  standpoint  of 
2  Sam.  vii.  12-16.  In  the  language  oiVsmtx  [Real- Worterb.  vol.  i.  p.  412, 
note),  "  The  history  of  the  Old  Testament  was  not  regarded  as  an  aggregate 
of  facts,  to  be  ascertained  by  diligent  research  and  treated  with  literary 
ability,  but  as  the  manifestation  of  Jehovah  in  the  events  which  occurred, 
for  the  understanding  of  which  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God  was  an 
essential  condition."  The  Old  Testament  contains  not  merely  secular 
history.  Accordingly,  its  writers  are  designated  in  the  Canon  as  "pro- 
phets." The  "Book  of  Kings  "  was  originally  one  work.  Its  division  into 
two  books  was  made  by  the  lxx  translators.  Thence  it  passed  into  the 
Vulgate,  and  was  introduced  into  our  printed  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible 
by  Dan.  Bomberg,  at  the  beginning  of  the  1 6th  century.  In  the  LXX  and 
Viilgate  the  books  of  Samuel  and  of  Kings  form  one  work,  divided  into 
four  books.  The  Talmud  {Baba  B.  1$  a)  ascribes  the  authorship  of  the 
Book  of  Kings  to  Jeremiah,  but  the  evidence  seems  insufficient.  The  author 
of  the  "Book  of  Kings"  mentions  three  sources  from  which,  at  least 
partially,  his  information  was  derived  :  the  Acts  of  Solomon  {once,  I  Kings 
xi.  41),  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  {sixteen  times),  and 
the  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  {seventeen  times) — making 
in  all  thirty-four  references.  At  the  time  of  the  composition  of  the  Book  of 
Chronicles  the  two  last- mentioned  works  seem  to  have  been  either  combined, 
or  re-cast  into  one  :  the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  (2  Chron. 

E 


50  Accession  of  Solon lOii. 

previous  writers  had  dropped  it.  The  birth  of  Solomon  had 
been  the  beginning  of  the  fulfilment  of  that  glorious  promise 
(2  Sam.  vii.  12-16),  which  gave  its  spiritual  meaning  and 
import  to  the  institution  of  royalty  in  Israel.  And  the  promises 
and  the  warnings  embodied  in  that  prediction  form,  so  to 
speak,  the  background  of  the  whole  later  history  of  the  people 
of  God. 

Naturally,  the  first  event  recorded  in  this  history  is  the 
formal  installation  of  Solomon  as  the  God-appointed  successor 
of  David  (2  Sam.  vii.  12  ;  xii.  25  ;  i  Kings  viii.  20;  i  Chron. 
xxviii.  5-7).  It  was  somewhat  hastened  by  an  incident  which, 
like  so  many  others  that  caused  trouble  in  Israel,  must  ulti- 
mately be  traced  to  the  weakness  of  David  himself.  It  has 
already  been  noticed,  in  the  history  of  Amnon  and  in  that 
of  Absalom,  to  what  length  David  carried  his  indulgence 
towards  his  children,  and  what  terrible  consequences  resulted 
from  it.  Both  Amnon  and  Absalom  had  died  violent  deaths. 
A  third  son   of  David,  Chileab,  whose   mother  was  Abigail, 


xvi.  1 1  ;  xxiv.  27,  and  other  passages).  Another  important  inference  is  to 
be  derived  from  a  comparison  of  the  Books  of  Kings  with  those  of  Chronicles. 
Not  unfrequently  the  two, relate  the  same  event  in  almost  the  same  Mords. 
But  while  in  the  history  of  Solomon,  as  told  in  the  Book  of  Kings,  the  refer- 
ence is  to  the  Acts  of  Solomon,  in  Chronicles  (2  Chron.  ix.  29)  it  is  to  the 
"  Book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  the  Prophecy  of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  and  the 
Visions  of  Iddo  the  Seer,"  showing  that  the  work  called  the  Acts  of  Solomon 
was  based  on  these  three  prophetic  compositions.  Again,  in  the  history  oi 
Rehoboam,  we  have  in  2  Chron.  xii.  15,  a  reference  to  the  "Bookof  Shemaiah 
the  Prophet,"  and  to  that  of  "  Iddo  the  Seer,  concerning  genealogies ;"  in  the 
history  of  Abij ah  to  the  "  Midrash  of  the  prophet  Iddo  "  (2  Chron.  xiii.  22) ; 
in  that  of  Uzziah  to  "the  writing  of  Isaiah  the  prophet  "  (2  Chron.  xxvi. 
22) ;  and  in  that  of  Manasseh  to  "the  Book  of  Chosai "  (2  Chron.  xxxiii. 
19).  "Without  entering  into  further  details,  we  only  remark  that  passages 
from  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  (xxxvi.-xxxix.),  and  of  Jeremiah  {Hi- )  are 
inserted  in  2  Kings,  where,  however,  they  are  ascribed  not  to  these 
prophetic  books,  but  to  the  "  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  "  (2  Kings  xx.  20). 
These  facts  seem  to  show  that  the  works  from  which  the  author  of  the 
Book  of  Kings  quoted,  were  themselves  based  on  earlier  prophetic  writings. 
It  is  only  necessary  to  add  in  this  note  that  the  period  embraced  in  the 
Books  of  Kings  extends  over  455  years. 


Adonijah  Schemes  for  the  TJirone,  5  r 

seems  also  to  have  died.  At  least,  so  we  infer  from  the 
silence  of  Scripture  concerning  him.  These  were  the  three 
eldest  sons  of  David.  The  next  in  point  of  age  was  Adonijah 
the  son  of  Haggith  (2  Sam.  iii.  2-4).  Like  his  elder  brother, 
Amnon,  he  had  been  born  in  Hebron  '}  like  Absalom,  he 
Avas  distinguished  by  personal  attractions.  But  he  also,  as 
Amnon  and  Absalom,  had  all  Lis  life  been  fatally  indulged 
by  David.  In  the  expressive  language  of  Holy  Scripture  :  "  his 
father  had  not  made  him  sorry  all  his  days,  saying.  Why  hast 
thou  done  so?"  (i  Kings  i.  6.)  The  consequence  may  be 
easily  guessed.  By  right  of  primogeniture  the  succession  to 
the  throne  seemed  his.  Why,  then,  should  he  not  attempt 
to  seize  upon  a  prize  so  coveted?  His  father  had,  indeed, 
sworn  to  Bathsheba  that  Solomon  should  be  his  successor 
(i  Kings  i.  13,  30),  and  that  on  the  ground  of  express  Divine 
appointment;  and  the  prophet  Nathan  (ver.  11),  as  well  as  the 
leading  men  in  Church  and  State,  not  only  knew  (as  did  most 
people  in  the  land),  but  heartily  concurred  in  it.  But  what 
mattered  this  to  one  who  had  never  learned  to  subject  his 
personal  desires  to  a  higher  will?  This  supposed  Divine 
appointment  of  his  younger  brother  might,  after  all,  have  been 
only  a  matter  of  inference  to  David,  and  Nathan  and  Bath- 
sheba have  turned  it  to  account,  the  one  because  of  the 
influence  which  he  possessed  over  Solomon,  the  other  from 
maternal  fondness  and  ambition.  At  any  rate,  the  prospect 
of  gaining  a  crown  was  worth  making  an  effort;  and  the 
more  quickly  and  boldly,  the  more  likely  of  success. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  circumstances  seemed  specially 
to  favour  Adonijah's  scheme.  David  was  indeed  only  seventy 
years  old;  but  premature  decay,  the  consequence  of  a  life 
of  exposure  and  fatigue,  had  confined  him  not  only  to  his 
room  (ver.  15),  but  to  his  bed  (ver.  47).  Such  was  his  weak- 
ness, that  the  body  had  lost  its  natural  heat,  which  could  not 
be  restored  even  by  artificial  means ;  so  that  the  physicians, 

^  Accordingly,  Adonijah  must  have  been  between  thirty-three  and  forty 
years  of  age  at  the  time  of  his  attempt  to  seize  the  throne. 


52  Accession  of  Solomon. 

according  to  the  medical  views  of  those  times,  had  advised 
bodily  contact  with  a  young,  healthy  subject. ^  For  this  purpose 
Abishag,2  a  fair  maiden  from  Shunem,  had  been  brought  into 
the  king's  harem.  In  David's  utter  physical  prostration, 
Adonijah  might  reckon  on  being  able  to  carry  on  his  scheme 
without  interference  from  the  king.  Indeed,  unless  David 
had  been  specially  informed,  tidings  of  the  attempt  -would 
not  even  have  reached  his  sick-chamber  till  it  was  too  late. 
The  rebellion  of  Absalom  had  failed  because  David  was  in 
full  vigour  at  the  time,  and  so  ably  supported  by  Abiathar 
the  priest  and  Joab  the  captain  of  the  host.  But  Adonijah 
had  attached  these  two  to  his  interests.  It  is  not  difficult 
to  understand  the  motives  of  Joab  in  trying  to  secure  the 
succession  for  one  who  would  owe  to  him  his  elevation,  not 
to  speak  of  the  fact  that  the  rival  candidate  for  the  throne 
was  Solomon,  the  "  man  of  peace,"  the  pupil  of  Nathan,  and 
the  representative  of  the  "  religious  party  "  in  the  land.  But  it 
is  not  so  easy  to  account  for  the  conduct  of  Abiathar,  unless  it 
was  prompted  by  jealousy  of  Zadok,  who  officiated  at  Gibeon 
(i  Chron.  xvi.  39).  As  the  latter  was  considered  the  prin- 
cipal Sanctuary  (i  Kings  iii.  4),  the  high-priest  who  officiated 
there  might  have  been  regarded  as  entitled  to  the  Pontificate, 
when  tlie  temporary  dual  service  of  Gibeon  and  Jerusalem 
should  give  place  to  the  permanent  arrangements  of  the 
Temple.  If  such  was  his  motive,  Abiathar  may  have  also 
wished  to  lay  the  new  king  under  personal  obligations. 

From  such  a  movement — which  took  advantage  first  of  the 

^  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  2)  expressly  states  this  to  have  been  the  advice 
given  by  his  physicians.  The  practice  was  in  accordance  with  the  medical 
views  entertained  not  only  in  ancient,  but  even  in  comparatively  modern 
times.  Dr.  Trusen  devotes  to  the  medical  consideration  of  this  subject  a 
special  paragi'aph  {^21,  pp.  257-260)  in  his  curious  work,  SittcUy  Gcbr.  u. 
Krankh.  d.  alt  en  Hebr. 

^  The  story  of  Abishag  is  only  introduced  in  order  to  explain  the  occasion 
of  Adonijah's  later  execution.  Of  course  it  must  be  viewed  in  the  light 
of  the  toleration  of  polygamy — nor  could  the  object  which  the  ph}'sicians 
had  in  view  have  been  otherwise  secured. 


AdoiiijaJ^s  Feast.  53, 

indulgence,  and  then  of  the  illness  of  David ;  which  compassed 

aims  that  every  one  would  know  to   be  equally  contrary   to 

the  Divine  appointment  and  the  express  declarations  of  the 

aged  king ;  and  in  which  the  chief  agents  were  an  ambitious 

priest  and  an  unscrupulous  military  chieftain — those  who  were 

faithful  to  their  God  or  to   their  monarch  would,  of  course, 

keep  aloof      Adonijah  knew  this,  and   accordingly  excluded 

such   from  the  invitation  to  the  feast,    at  which  it  had  been 

arranged  his  accession  to   the  throne  should  be  proclaimed. 

In  other  respects  his  measures  closely  resembled  those  taken 

by  Absalom.     For  some  time  previous  to  his  attempt  he  had 

sought  to  accustom  the  people  to  regard  him  as  their  future 

king  by  assuming  royal  state  (i  Kings  i.   5).^     At  length  all 

seemed   ready.       It   is   characteristic   that,   in  order   to  give 

the   undertaking   the   appearance   of    religious   sanction,    the 

conspirators  prepared  a  great  sacrificial  feast.     We  know  the 

scene,  and  we  can  picture  to  ourselves  that  gathering  in  the 

shady  retreat  of  the  king's   gardens,   under   an   over-arching 

rock,  close  by  the  only  perennial  spring  in  Jerusalem — that 

of  the  Valley  of  Kidron — which  now  bears  the  name  of  the 

"  fountain  of  the  Virgin,"2  at  that  time  the  En-Rogel  {'"^^^x\ng 

of  the  Spy,"  or  else  "  of  the  Fuller  ").     But  a  higher  power  than 

man's  overruled  events.     To  outward  appearance  the   danger 

was  indeed  most  urgent,  the  more  so  that  it  was  not  known 

in   the   palace.       But   already   help    was   at   hand.      Nathan 

hastened   to    Bathsheba,    and  urged  on  her  the  necessity   of 

immediate  and  decisive  action.     If  Adonijah  were  proclaimed 

king,    Solomon,    Bathsheba,    and   all    their   adherents   would 

immediately  be  put  out  of  the  way.     In  such  circumstances 

court-ceremonial  must  be  set  aside ;  and  Bathsheba  made  her 

way  into  the  king's  sick-chamber.     She  spoke  respectfully  but 

earnestly ;  she  told  him  fully  what  at  that  very  moment  was 

taking  place  in  the  king's  gardens ;  she  reminded  him  of  his 

solemn  oath  about  the  succession,  which  had  hitherto  determined 

^  Comp.  Josephus,  Ant.  vii.  14.  4. 

^  Comp.  Bonar,  Lami  of  Promise,  pp.  492-496. 


54  Accessio7i  of  Solomon. 

her  own  conduct  and  that  of  Solomon's  adherents ;  and,  finally, 
she  appealed  to  him  as  alone  competent  at  this  crisis  to 
determine  who  was  to  be  king.  The  interview  had  not 
terminated  when,  according  to  previous  arrangement,  Nathan 
was  announced.  He  had  come  on  the  same  errand  as  Bath- 
sheba :  to  inform  the  king  of  what  Adonijah  and  his  adherents 
were  doing,  and  that  Solomon  and  the  king's  most  trusted 
servants  had  been  excluded  from  a  feast,  the  object  of  which 
was  not  concealed.  Had  all  this  been  done  by  direction  of 
the  king  ?  If  so,  why  had  not  he,  so  old  and  faithful  a  coun- 
sellor, been  informed  that  Adonijah  was  to  be  proclaimed 
successor  to  the  throne? 

AVith  whatever  weakness  David  may  have  been  chargeable,  he 
always  rose  to  the  requirements  of  the  situation  in  hours  of 
decisive  importance,  when  either  the  known  will  of  God  or 
else  the  interests  of  his  kingdom  were  in  question.  In  this 
instance  his  measures  were  immediate  and  decisive.  Recalling 
Bathsheba,  who  had  withdrawn  during  the  king's  interview 
with  Nathan,  he  dismissed  her  with  words  of  reassurance. 
Then  he  sent  for  Zadok,  Nathan,  and  Benaiah,  and  gave  them 
his  royal  command  for  the  immediate  anointing  of  Solonion 
as  king  over  Judah  and  Israel.  The  scene  is  vividly  por- 
trayed in  Scripture.  The  king's  body-guard — the  CheretJii 
and  Pelethi — under  the  command  of  Benaiah,  was  drawn  up 
in  front  of  the  royal  palace.  Soon  a  vast  concourse  of  people 
gathered.  And  now  the  king's  state-mule,  richly  caparisoned, 
was  brought  out.  It  was  an  unwonted  sight,  which  betokened 
some  great  state  event.  Presently,  the  great  news  became 
known,  and  rapidly  spread  through  the  streets  and  up  the 
bazaars :  Solomon  was  about  to  be  anointed  king !  The 
people  crowded  together,  in  hundreds  and  thousands,  from 
all  parts  of  the  city.  And  now  Solomon  appeared,  attended 
by  Zadok  the  high  priest,  Nathan  the  prophet,  and  Benaiah 
the  chief  of  the  royal  guard.  The  procession  formed,  and 
moved  forward.  To  avoid  collision  with  the  party  of 
Adonijah,  it  took  an  opposite  or  western  direction  to  the  valley 


Solomon  anointed  King.  55 

of  Gihon.^  Here,  by  authority  and  express  command  of  David, 
Solomon  was  anointed  king  with  the  sacred  oil  by  the  joint 
ministry  of  the  high  priest  and  the  prophet.  The  ceremony 
ended,  the  blast  of  the  trumpets  proclaimed  the  accession 
of  the  new  monarch,  and  the  people  burst  into  a  ringing  shout : 
"  God  save  King  Solomon  !"  The  enthusiastic  demonstrations 
of  joy  were  truly  Eastern.  There  were  music  of  pipes  and 
acclamations  of  the  people,  till  the  ground  beneath  seemed  to 
rend  with  the  noise.  As  the  procession  returned,  the  city  rang 
with  the  jubilee,  till  it  reached  the  royal  palace,  where  King 
Solomon  seated  himself  in  solemn  state  on  his  father's  throne, 
and  received  the  homage  of  the  court,  while  David  gave 
public  thanks  that  he  had  lived  to  see  that  day. 

Meanwhile,  out  in  the  king's  gardens,  the  strange  shouts 
from  the  city  had  reached  Adonijah  and  his  guests.  Joab  had 
grown  uneasy  as  he  heard  the  well-known  sound  of  the 
trumpet.  The  tidings  travelled  quickly,  and  already  one  was 
in  waiting  to  explain  its  meaning.  But  it  was  not  as  Adonijah 
had  hoped  against  hope.  The  son  of  Abiathar  had  come  to 
inform  the  conspirators  of  what  had  just  taken  place  in  Gihon 
and  in  the  royal  palace.  And  now  sudden  terror  seized  those 
who  had  but  lately  been  so  confident  in  their  feasting.  Every 
one  of  the  conspirators  fled,  foremost  among  them  Adonijah ; 
nor  did  he  deem  himself  safe  till  he  had  reached  the  sacred 
precincts,  and  laid  hold  on  the  horns  of  the  altar.  This 
asylum  he  refused  to  quit,  until  Solomon  had  assured  him  by 
oath  that  his  life  would  be  spared — though  on  condition  that 
his  future  conduct  should  give  the  king  no  cause  for  complaint. 

The  events  just  recorded,  which  are  only  briefly  indicated  in 
I  Chron.  xxiii.  i,  were  followed  by  a  great  assembly  of  the 
chief  dignitaries  in  Church  and  State  (i  Chron.  xxviii.,  xxix.), 
when  the  accession  of  Solomon  to  the  throne  was  formally 
confirmed,  and  he  was  anointed  a  second  time  ( i  Chron.  xxix. 
22).     We  remember,  that  similarly  both  Saul  and  David  were 

1  Such  seems  to  me  the  right  location  of  Gihon,  and  not  that  suggested 
in  the  Speaker's  Commentary,  vol.  ii.  p.  485. 


5  5  Aecessioji  of  Solomon. 

anointed  a  second  time,  on  publicly  receiving  the  homage  of 
their  subjects  (i  Sam.  xi.  15  ;  2  Sam.  ii.  4 ;  v.  3).     It  was  in  this 
great  assembly  that  the  aged  king,  speaking,  as  it  were,  from 
his  death-bed,  laid  before  his  people  the  deepest  wishes  of  his 
heart,  and  told  his  inmost  thoughts  concerning  the  character, 
the  stability,  and  the  object  of  royalty  in  Israel.     Beginning 
with  an  evident  reference  to  the  great  promise  given  to  him 
and  his  house,  David  first  solemnly  owned,  that  the  appoint- 
ment to  the  royal  office — more  particularly  his  own  election 
and  that  of  Solomon  as  his  successor — was  of  God  as  Israel's 
supreme  King,  and  that  the  stability  and  welfare  of  the  king- 
dom depended  upon  faithful  allegiance  to  Jehovah,  to  which 
he  accordingly  admonished  Solomon  and  the  people  (i  Chron. 
xxviii.   2-10).      Then,  following  further  the  line  indicated  in 
the  covenant-promise,  David  pointed  out  that  the  grand  object 
of  his  son's  reign  must  be  to  build  an  house  unto  the  Lord. 
This  would  be  the  initial  typical  fulfilment  of  that  to  which 
the  prophetic  promise  pointed.     So  deeply  had  the  king  this 
work  at  heart,  that  he  had  already  prepared  all  the  plans  for 
the  Temple ;  and  that  he  dedicated  to  this  work  the  vast  trea- 
sures which  during  his  long  reign  he  had  accumulated,  always 
with  this  great  purpose  in  view  (i  Chron.  xxviii.   ii-xxix.  5). 
But  this  was  not  a  work  which  Solomon  either  could  or  should 
undertake  by  himself     He  must  be  supported  in  it  by  a  willing 
people.     And  when  the  representatives  of  Israel  in  that  great 
assembly  readily  and   liberally  promised  of  their    substance, 
David  seemed  to  feel  that  the  work  of  his  life  was  indeed  done, 
and  that  God  would  now  let  "His  servant  depart  in  peace." 
The  solemn  and  joyous  eulogy,  and  the  earnest  prayer  for  his 
people,  and  for  his  son  and  successor  on  the  throne,  with  which 
David  dismissed  this  assembly,  form  a  most  appropriate  close 
to  his  public  career. 

Gladly  would  we  here  end  our  record  of  David's  life.  But 
Scripture,  in  its  truthful  narration,  calls  us  to  witness  yet  another 
scene.  We  stand  by  the  death-bed  of  David,  and  hear  his  last 
injunctions  to  his  son  and  successor.     At  this  time  Solomon 


David's  Last  Address.  57 

could  not  have  been  more  than  twenty  years  of  age.  Probably 
he  was  even  younger.  However  wise  and  well-disposed,  the 
temptations  and  difficulties  of  his  position  could  not  but 
awaken  fears  in  the  heart  of  his  father,  and  that  in  proportion 
as  he  kept  in  view  the  terms  of  the  Divine  prediction  con- 
cerning his  house,  with  its  warnings  as  well  as  its  promises.  In 
regard  to  matters  Divine  and  spiritual,  only  one  plain  advice  need 
he  give  to  Solomon.  Spiritual  decidedness,  faithfulness,  and 
obedience  to  God :  such  simply  were  the  means  by  which 
the  promises  given  to  David  and  his  house  would  be  inherited. 
But  all  the  greater  were  the  political  dangers  which  beset  the 
path  of  the  youthful  king :  an  unscrupulous  military  party, 
headed  by  Joab ;  a  dissatisfied  priestly  faction,  ready  to  plot 
and  join  any  rebellious  movement;  and  ill-suppressed  tribal 
jealousies,  of  whose  existence  Shimei  had,  at  a  critical  period, 
given  such  painful  evidence.  The  leaders  of  two  of  these 
parties  had  long  forfeited  their  lives ;  indeed,  only  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  time  could  have  excused  either  the  impunity 
with  which  Joab's  treachery  and  his  murder  of  Abner  and 
Amasa  had  been  passed  over,  or  the  indulgence  extended  to 
such  conduct  as  that  of  Shimei.  On  the  other  hand,  gratitude 
to  such  tried  adherents  in  adversity  as  the  family  of  Barzillai  had 
proved,  was  alike  dictated  by  duty  and  by  policy.  It  was  not, 
as  some  would  have  us  believe,  that  on  his  death-bed  David 
gave  utterance  to  those  feelings  of  revenge  which  he  was 
unable  to  gratify  in  his  lifetime,  but  that,  in  his  most  intimate 
converse  with  his  son  and  successor,  he  looked  at  the  dangers 
to  a  young  and  inexperienced  monarch  from  such  powerful 
and  unscrupulous  partisans.  In  these  circumstances  it  was  only 
natural  that,  before  dying,  he  should  have  given  to  his  son 
and  successor  such  advice  for  his  future  guidance  as  his  long 
experience  would  suggest ;  and  similarly  that,  in  so  doing,  he 
should  have  reviewed  the  chief  dangers  and  difficulties  which 
had  beset  his  own  path,  and  have  referred  to  the  great  public 
crimes  which,  during  his  reign,  had  necessarily  been  left  un- 
punished.    The  fact  that,  even  before  his  death,  an  attempt  had 


58  Accession  of  Solomon. 

been  made  to  elevate  Adonijah  to  the  throne,  contrar}-' alike  to  the 
known  will  of  God  and  the  appointment  of  David,  and  that  the 
chief  actors  in  this  had  been  Joab  and  Abiathar,  must  have 
recalled  the  past  to  his  mind,  and  shown  him  that  the  fire  had 
been  smouldering  these  many  years,  and  might  at  any  time  burst 
into  flame.  But,  however  natural,  and  even  lawful,  such  feelings 
on  the  part  of  David,  it  is  impossible  to  read  his  parting 
directions  and  suggestions  to  Solomon  without  disappointment 
and  pain.  Truly,  even  the  most  advanced  of  the  "  children 
were  in  bondage  under  the  elements  of  the  world  "  (Gal.  iv.  3). 
How  far  did  the  type  fall  short  of  the  reality,  and  how  dim 
and  ill-defined,  were  the  foreshadowings  of  Him,  "  Who  when 
He  was  reviled,  reviled  not  again;  when  He  suffered.  He 
threatened  not ;  but  committed  Himself  to  Him  that  judgeth 
righteously ! " 

And  yet  events  soon  proved  that  David's  apprehensions  had 
been  only  too  well  grounded.  The  aged  king  died,  and  was 
buried  in  his  own  "  City  of  David,"  amidst  the  laments  of  a 
grateful  nation,  which  ever  afterwards  cherished  his  memory 
(Acts  ii.  29).  It  seems  that  Adonijah,  although  obliged  to 
submit  to  Solomon's  rule,  had  not  given  up  all  hope  of 
his  own  ultimate  accession.  The  scheme  which  he  con- 
ceived for  this  purpose  lacked,  indeed,  the  courage  of  open 
rebellion,  but  was  characterised  by  the  cunning  and  trickery 
of  a  genuine  Oriental  intrigue.  To  marry  any  of  the  late 
king's  wives  or  concubines  was  considered  in  the  East  as 
publicly  claiming  his  rights  (2  Sam.  xii.  8;  xvi.  21,  22).  If 
such  were  done  by  a  rival,  it  would  be  regarded  as  implying 
an  insult  to  which  not  even  the  weakest  monarch  could  submit 
without  hopelessly  degrading  his  authority  in  public  opinion 
(2  Sam.  iii.  7).  If  Adonijah's  primary  object  was  to  lower 
Solomon  in  public  estimate,  and  that  in  a  manner  which  he 
could  neither  resist  nor  resent,  no  better  scheme  could  have 
been  devised  than  that  of  his  application  for  the  hand  of 
Abishag.  By  combined  flattery  and  parade  of  his  supposed 
wrongs  and  injuries,  he  gained  the  queen-mother  as  unconscious 


AdonijaJis  neiu  Intrigue.  59 

accomplice  and  even  instrument  of  his  intrigue.     Any  scruples 
might  be  set  aside  by  the  plea,  that  there  could  be  no  wrong  in 
his  request,  since,  in  the  strict  sense,  Abishag  had  neither  been 
the  wife  nor  the  concubine  of  David.     To  punish  with  death  so 
cunning  and  mean  an  intrigue  can  scarcely  be  called  excessive 
severity  on  the  part  of  Solomon.      It  was  rather  a  measure 
necessary,  if  tranquillity  was  to  be  preserved  in  the  land,  all 
the  more  that,  by  his  own  admission,  Adonijah  still  entertained 
the  opinion  that  rightfully  the  kingdom  was  his,  and  that  "  all 
Israel  set  their  faces  on  him  that  he  should  reign"  (i  Kings  ii.  15). 
Whether  or  not  Abiathar  and  Joab  were  involved  in  this 
intrigue,  is  matter  of  uncertainty.     At  any  rate  an  attempt  so 
daring,    and   coming  so  soon  after  that   in   which  these  two 
had    taken   a   leading  part,  called  for  measures  which  might 
prevent  rebellion  in  the  future,  and  serve  as  warning  to  the 
turbulent  in  Israel.       That    Joab  felt   conscious  his    conduct 
deserved  the  severest  punishment,  appears  from  the  circum- 
stance  that    he   anticipated    his    sentence.      On   hearing   of 
Adonijah's    execution,    he    sought   refuge  within   the   sacred 
precincts  of  the  Tabernacle.     It  would  have  been  not  only  a 
dangerous  precedent,  but  contrary  to  the  express  direction  of 
the  law  (Ex.  xxi.   12;    Deut.  xix.   11-13),  to  have  allowed  a 
criminal  by  such  means  to  escape  justice.     However,  it  was 
not  for  his  part  in  Adonijah's  recent  schemes  that  Joab  now 
suffered  the    extreme    penalty  of  the  law,  but  for  his  former 
and   still   unpunished   crimes,  which    his    recent   treasonable 
conduct  seemed  to  bring  afresh  to  view,  just  as  some  accidental 
ailment  does  a  long  latent  fatal  disease.     As  for  Abiathar,  in 
consideration  of  his  office  and  former  services  to  David,  he  was 
only  removed  from  the  Pontificate,  and  banished  to  his  ancestral 
property  at  Anathoth,  the  city  of  the  priests.     But  Holy  Scrip- 
ture calls  us  to  mark,  how  by  the  deposition  of  Abiathar  the 
Divine  prediction  against  the  house  of  Eli  (i  Sam.  ii.  31-36) 
was  fulfilled,  though  in  this  instance  also  through  a  concurrence 
of  intelligible  causes. 

There   was   now  only   one   other   left,    who    in   heart   and 


6o  Reign  of  Solomon. 

mind,  as  well  as  in  popular  opinion,  belonged  to  the  party 
opposed  to  the  reigning  house.  That  old  offender,  Shimei, 
was  still  at  large,  and  enjoying  ill-deserved  safety.  Had  he 
during  those  years  learned  to  respect  the  dynasty  which  he 
had  once  so  wantonly  insulted,  or  did  he  still  consider  it 
too  weak  to  resent  insubordination  on  his  part  ?  The  question 
was  soon  to  be  decided ;  for  Solomon  now  ordered  Shimei  to 
remain  permanently  within  the  bounds  of  Jerusalem,  at  the 
same  time  warning  him  that  any  infringement  of  this  command, 
from  whatever  cause,  would  be  punished  by  death.  Shimei, 
who  had  probably  expected  a  far  more  severe  sentence,  received 
with  gratitude  this  comparatively  slight  restriction  upon  his 
liberty.  He  must  have  known  that  most  Eastern  monarchs 
would  have  acted  towards  him  in  a  very  different  spirit.  Besides, 
the  restriction  was  not^  more  irksome  than  that  which  limited 
the  safety  of  an  ordinary  manslayer  by  the  condition  of  his 
remaining  within  the  bounds  of  the  city  of  refuge.  Nor  was  the 
command  in  itself  unreasonable,  considering  the  necessity  of 
watching  Shimei's  movements,  and  the  importance  of  convincing 
the  people  that  a  strong  hand  now  held  the  reins  of  govern- 
ment. But  whatever  outward  acquiescence  Shimei  had  shown, 
he  had  no  idea  of  yielding  such  absolute  obedience  as  in  his 
circumstances  seemed  called  for.  On  the  first  apparently 
trivial  occasion,^  Shimei  left  Jerusalem  for  the  capital  of 
Philistia  without  having  sought  the  king's  permission,  and,  upon 
his  return,  suffered  the  penalty  which,  as  he  well  knew,  had 
been  threatened.  By  such  measures  of  vigour  and  firmness 
"the  kingdom  was  established  in  the  hand  of  Solomon." 

^  It  can  scarcely  be  pretended  that  Shimei's  personal  presence  at  Gatli 
was  absolutely  necessary  for  the  recovery  of  his  fugitive  slaves.  But  even 
had  it  been  so,  if  Shimei  had  been  allowed  to  transgress  the  king's  injunc- 
tion, his  obedience  in  this  or  any  other  matter  could  never  afterwards  have 
been  enforced. 


Solomon's  Officers.  6i 


CHAPTER    V. 

Solomon  marries  the  Daughter  of  Pharaoh— His  Sacrifice  at  Gibeon—His 
Dream  and  Prayer— Solomon's  Wisdom— Solomon's  Officers  and  Court 
—Prosperity  of  the  Country— Understanding  and  Knowledge  of  the 
King. 

(I  Kings  hi.,  iv.,  2  Chron.  i.) 

Tt  is  remarkable,  how  often  seemingly  unimportant  details  in 
-^  the  sacred  narrative  gain  a  fresh  meaning  and  new  interest 
if  viewed  in  their  higher  bearing  and  spiritual  import.  Nor 
is  such  application  of  them  arbitrary.  On  the  contrary,  we 
conclude  that  Scripture  was  intended  to  be  so  read.  This  is 
evident  from  the  circumstance  thai  it  is,  avowedly,  not  a  secular 
but  a  prophetic  history,^  and  that,  being  such,  it  is  not  arranged 
according  to  the  chronological  succession  of  events,  but  grouped 
so  as  to  bring  into  prominence  that  which  concerns  the  kingdom 
of  God.  This  plan  of  Scripture  history  is  not  only  worthy  of 
its  object,  but  gives  it  its  permanent  interest  and  application. 

What  has  just  been  stated  is  aptly  illustrated  by  the  opening 
account  of  King  Solomon's  reign.  Of  course,  no  chronological 
arrangement  could  have  been  here  intended,  since  the  list  of 
Solomon's  officers,  given  in  i  Kings  iv.,  contains  the  names  of 
at  least  two  of  the  king's  sons-in-law  (vers.  1 1,  15),  whose  appoint- 
ment must,  therefore,  date  from  a  period  considerably  later 
than  the  commencement  of  his  reign.  What,  then,  we  may 
ask,  is  the  object  of  not  only  recording  in  a  "prophetic 
history "  such  apparently  unimportant  details,  but  grouping 
them  together  irrespective  of  their  dates?  Without  under- 
valuing them,  considered  as  purely  historical  notices,  we  may 
venture  to  suggest  a  higher  object  in  their  record  and  arrange- 

^  As  noticed  in  the  previous  part,  and  even  indicated  by  the  position 
in  the  Hebrew  Canon  of  the  historical  books  among  "the  Prophets." 


62  Reign  of  Solomon. 

ment.  This  detailed  account  of  all  the  court  and  government 
appointments  serves  as  evidence,  how  thoroughly  and  even 
elaborately  the  kingdom  of  Solomon  was  organised — and  by 
obvious  inference,  how  fully  God  had  made  good  in  this  respect 
His  gracious  promises  to  King  David.  But  may  we  not  go 
even  beyond  this,  and  see  in  the  literal  fulfilment  of  these  out- 
ward promises  a  pledge  and  assurance  that  the  spiritual  realities 
connected  with  them,  and  of  which  they  were  the  symbol  and 
type,  would  likewise  become  true  in  the  Kingdom  of  Him  Who 
was  "  David's  better  Son  ?  "  Thus  viewed,  the  Divine  promise 
made  to  David  (2  Sam.  vii.)  was  once  more  like  a  light  casting 
the  lengthening  shadows  of  present  events  towards  the  far-off 
future. 

The  first  event  of  national  interest  that  occurred  was  the 
marriage  of  Solomon  with  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh.  It  was  of 
almost  equal  poHtical  importance  to  Egypt  and  to  Palestine. 
An  alliance  with  the  great  neighbouring  kingdom  of  Egypt  might 
have  seemed  an  eventuality  almost  unthought  of  among  the 
possibihties  of  the  new  and  somewhat  doubtful  monarchy  in 
Israel.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  may  have  been  also  of 
importance  to  the  then  reigning  Egyptian  dynasty  (the  21st 
Tanite),  which,  as  we  know,  was  rapidly  declining  in  authority.^ 
To  Israel  and  to  the  countries  around,  such  a  union  would  now 
afford  evidence  of  the  position  and  influence  which  the  Jewish 
monarchy  had  attained  in  the  opinion  of  foreign  politicians. 
All  the  more  are  we  involuntarily  carried  back  in  spirit  to  the 
period  when  Israel  was  oppressed  and  in  servitude  to  Egypt. 
As  we  contrast  the  relations  in  the  past  and  in  the  time  of 
Solomon,  we  realise  how  marvellously  God  had  fulfilled  His 
promises  of  deliverance  to  His  people.  And  here  we  again 
turn  to  the  great  promise  in  2  Sam.  vii.,  as  alike  instructive  to 
Israel  as  regarded  their  present,  and  as  full  of  blessed  hope  for 
their  future.  The  time  of  the  Judges  had  been  one  of  struggle 
and  disorganisation ;  that  of  David  one  of  war  and  conflicts. 
But  with  Solomon  the  period  of  peace  had  begun,  emblematic 
^  Comp.  Stuart  Poole,  in  Smith's  Bible  Diet,  y  vol.  i.  p.  511. 


IsraeVs  Relations  to  Egypt.  6l 

of  the  higher  peace  of  the  "Prince  of  Peace."  Thus  viewed, 
the  account  of  the  prosperity  of  the  land  and  people,  as  further 
evidenced  by  the  wealth  displayed  in  the  ordinary  appointments 
of  the  Court;  by  the  arrangement  of  the  country  into  provinces 
under  officers  for  fiscal  administration  and  civil  government; 
and,  above  all,  by  the  wisdom  of  Solomon,  —  who,  while 
encouraging  by  example  literature  and  study  of  every  kind, 
chiefly  aimed  after  that  higher  knowledge  and  understanding 
which  is  God-given,  and  leads  to  the  fear  and  service  of  the 
Lord, — acquires  a  new  and  a  spiritual  meaning. 

But  to  return  to  the  sacred  narrative.  This  marriage  of 
Solomon  with  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh — to  which,  from  its 
frequent  mention,  so  much  political  importance  seems  to  have 
been  attached — took  place  in  the  first  years  of  his  reign, 
although  some  time  after  the  building  of  the  Temple  and  of 
his  own  palace  had  commenced. ^  Such  a  union  was  not 
forbidden  by  the  law,-  nor  was  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh 
apparently  implicated  in  the  charge  brought  against  Solomon's 
other  foreign  waives  of  having  led  him  into  idolatry  (i  Kings 
xi.  1-7).  In  fact,  according  to  Jewish  tradition,  the  daughter 
of  Pharaoh  actually  became  a  Jewish  proselyte.  Still,  Solomon 
seems  to  have  felt  the  incongruity  of  bringing  her  into  the 
palace  of  David,  within  the  bounds  of  which  "  the  Ark  of  the 
Lord  "  appears  to  have  been  located  (2  Chron.  viii.  11),  and  she 
occupied  a  temporary  abode  "  in  the  City  of  David,"  till  the 
new  palace  of  Solomon  was  ready  for  her  reception. 

But  the  great  prosperity  which,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  the 
country  enjoyed  during  the  reign  of  Solomon,  was  due  to 
higher  than  merely  outward  causes.  It  was  the  blessing  of  the 
Lord  which  in  this  instance  also  made  rich — that  blessing  which 

^  From  I  Kings  xi.  42,  comp.  with  xiv.  21,  we  might  infer  that  Solomon 
had  married  the  Ammonitess  Naamah  before  the  death  of  his  father.  But 
as  this  seems  incompatible  with  2  Chron.  xiii.  7,  and  for  other  reasons 
which  will  readily  occur  to  the  reader,  the  numeral  indicating  the  age  of 
Rehoboam  (i  Kings  xiv.  21)  seems  to  be  a  copyist's  mistake  for  21. 

"  The  law  only  forbade  alliance  with  the  Canaanites  (Ex.  xxxiv.  16 ; 
Deut.  vii.  3). 


64  Reign  of  Solomon. 

it  was  Solomon's  chief  concern  to  obtain.  From  the  necessity 
of  the  case,  Israel,  and  even  Solomon,  still  worshipped  on  the 
ancient  *'  high  places  "  ^  Of  these  the  principal  was  naturally 
Gibeon — the  twin  height.  For,  right  over  against  the  city  itself, 
on  one  of  the  two  eminences  ("  mamelons  ")  which  gave  it  its 
name,  the  ancient  Tabernacle  which  Moses  had  reared  had 
been  placed.  Here  Solomon,  at  the  commencement  of  his 
reign,  celebrated  a  great  festival,  probably  to  inaugurate  and 
consecrate  his  accession  by  a  public  acknowledgment  of  Jehovah 
as  the  God  of  Israel.  All  the  people  took  part  in  what  was  a 
service  of  hitherto  unparalleled  magnificence.  ^  But  something 
far  better  than  the  smoke  of  a  thousand  burnt-sacrifices  ofi"ered 
in  Israel's  ancient  Sanctuary,  attested  that  the  God,  Who  had 
brought  Israel  out  of  Egypt  and  led  them  through  the  Wilder- 
ness, still  watched  over  His  people.  The  services  of  those 
festive  days  were  over,  and  king  and  people  were  about  tO' 
return  to  their  homes.  As  Solomon  had  surveyed  the  vast 
multitude  which,  from  all  parts  of  the  country,  had  gathered 
to  Gibeon,  the  difficulty  must  have  painfully  forced  itself  on  him 
of  wisely  ruling  an  empire  so  vast  as  that  belonging  to  him, 
stretching  from  Tiphsach  (the  Greek  Thapsacus),  '^  the  fords," 
on  the  western  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  in  the  north-east,  to  Gaza 
on  the  border  of  Egypt,  in  the  south-west  (i  Kings  iv.  24). 
The  conquests  so  lately  made  had  not  yet  been  consolidated ; 
the  means  at  the  king's  disposal  were  still  comparatively  scanty ; 
tribal  jealousies  were  scarcely  appeased  ;  and  Solomon  himself 
was  young  and  wholly  inexperienced.  Any  false  step  might 
prove  fatal ;  even  want  of  some  brilliant  success  might  dis- 
integrate what  was  but  imperfectly  welded  together.  On  the 
other  hand,  had  Israel's  history  not  been  a  series  of  constant 
miracles,  through  the  gracious  Personal  interposition  of  the 
Lord?  What,  then,  might  Solomon  not  expect  from  His  help? 
Busy  with  such  thoughts,  the  king  had  laid  him  down  to  rest 

^  Comp.  the  views  expressed  in  the  Mishnah  on  the  lawfulness  of  such 
worship  in  vol.  iii.   of  this  "Bible  History,"  p.   78. 

^  Similarly  Xerxes  offered  a  thousand  oxen  at  Troy  (Herod,  vii.  43). 


Solomon's  Dream.  65 

on  the  last  night  of  his  stay  in  Gibeon.  Ordinarily  dreams  are 
without  deeper  significance.  So  Solomon  himself  afterwards 
taught  (Eccles.  v.  7) ;  and  so  the  spiritually  enlightened  among 
other  nations,  and  the  prophets  in  Israel  equally  declared  (Job 
XX.  8 ;  Is.  xxix.  7).  And  yet,  while  most  fully  admitting  this 
(as  in  Ecclus.  xxxiv.  1-6),  it  must  have  been  also  felt,  as  indeed 
Holy  Scripture  teaches  by  many  instances,  that  dreams  might 
be  employed  by  the  Most  High  in  the  time  of  our  visitation 
(Ecclus.  xxxiv.  6).  So  was  it  with  Solomon  on  that  night.  It 
has  been  well  remarked,  that  Adonijah  would  not  have  thus 
dreamed  after  his  feast  at  En-Rogel  (i  Kings  i.  9,  25),  even 
had  his  attempt  been  crowned  with  the  success  for  which  he 
had  hoped.  The  question  which  on  that  night  the  Lord 
put  before  Solomon,  "Ask  what  I  shall  give  thee?"  was  not 
only  an  answer  to  the  unspoken  entreaty  for  help  expressed  in 
the  sacrifices  that  had  been  offered,  but  was  also  intended  to 
search  the  deepest  feelings  of  his  heart.  Like  that  of  our  Lord 
addressed  to  St.  Peter,  "Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  lovest  thou  Me?" 
it  sounded  the  inmost  depths  of  the  soul.  Such  questions  come, 
more  or  less  distinctly,  to  us  all,  and  that  in  every  crisis  of  our 
lives.  They  may  become  fresh  spiritual  starting-points  to  us, 
seasons  of  greater  nearness  to  God,  and  of  spiritual  advance- 
ment ;  or  they  may  prove  times  of  "  temptation,"  if  we  allow 
ourselves  to  be  "drawn  away"  and  "enticed"  of  our  own 
"lust." 

The  prayer  of  Solomon  on  this  occasion  once  more  combined 
the  three  elements  of  thanksgiving,  confession,  and  petition. 
In  his  thanksgiving,  acknowledgment  of  God  mingled  with 
humiliation;  in  his  confession,  a  sense  of  inability  with  the 
expression  of  felt  want ;  while  his  petition,  evidently  based  on 
the  Divine  promise  (Gen.  xiii.  16;  xxxii.  12),  was  characterised 
by  singleness  of  spiritual  desire.  For,  in  order  to  know  what  he 
sought,  when  so  earnestly  craving  for  "  understanding,"  we  have 
only  to  turn  to  his  own  "  Book  of  Proverbs."  And,  as  in  the 
case  of  all  whose  spiritual  aim  is  single,  God  not  only  granted 
his  request,  but  also  added  to  what  He  gave  "  all  things  "  other- 


66  Reign  of  Solomon. 

wise  needful,  thus  proving  that  the  "  promise  of  the  Hfe  that 
now  is "  is  ever  connected  with  that  of  the  hfe  "  which  is  to 
come  "  (i  Tim.  iv.  8),  just  as  in  our  present  condition  the  soul  is 
with  the  body.  Perhaps  we  may  put  it  otherwise  in  this  manner  : 
As  so  often,  God  extended  the  higher  wisdom  granted  Solomon 
even  to  the  lower  concerns  of  this  life,  while  He  added  to  it  the 
promise  of  longevity  and  prosperity — but  only  on  condition 
of  continued  observance  of  God's  statutes  and  commandments 
(i  Kings  iii.  14).  ^  Such  gracious  condescension  on  the  part 
of  the  Lord  called  for  the  expression  of  fresh  public  thanks- 
giving, which  Solomon  rendered  on  his  return  to  Jerusalem 
(i   Kings  iii.   15). 

Evidence  of  the  reality  of  God's  promise  soon  appeared,  and 
that  in  a  manner  peculiarly  calculated  to  impress  the  Eastern 
mind.  According  to  the  simple  manners  of  the  times,  a  cause 
too  difficult  for  ordinary  judges  was  carried  direct  to  the 
king,  who,  as  God's  representative,  was  regarded  as  able  to 
give  help  to  his  people  in  all  lime  of  need.  In  such  paternal 
dispensation  of  justice,  there  was  no  appeal  to  witnesses  nor  to 
statute-books,  which  indeed  would  have  been  equally  accessible 
to  inferior  judges ;  but  the  king  was  expected  to  strike  out  some 
new  light,  in  which  the  real  bearings  of  a  case  would  so  appear 
as  to  appeal  to  all  men's  convictions,  and  to  com.mand  their 
approval  of  his  sentence.  There  was  here  no  need  for  anything 
recondite— x2X\v^x  the  opposite.  To  point  out  to  practical 
common  sense  what  was  there,  though  unperceived  till  suddenly 
brought  to  prominence,  would  more  than  anything  else  appeal 
to  the  people,  as  a  thing  within  the  range  of  all,  and  yet  showing 
the  wise  guidance  of  the  king.  Thus  sympathy  and  universal 
trust,  as  well  as  admiration,  would  be  called  forth,  especially 
among  Orientals,  whose  wisdom  is  that  of  common  life,  and 
whose  philosophy  that  of  proverbs. 

The  story  of  the  contention  of  the  two  women  for  the  one 
living  child,  when  from  the  absence  of  witnesses  it  seemed 

1  Accordingly,  Solomon  forfeited  this  promise  on  account  of  his  later 
idolatiy.     He  died  at  the  age  of  about  fifty-nine  or  sixty. 


TJie  Coitntry  under  Solo7non.  6y 

impossible  to  determine  whose  it  really  was,  is  sufficiently 
known.  The  ready  wisdom  with  which  Solomon  devised  means 
for  ascertaining  the  truth  would  commend  itself  to  the  popular 
mind.  It  was  just  what  they  would  appreciate  in  their  king.  Such 
a  monarch  would  indeed  be  a  terror  to  evil-doers,  and  a  protection 
and  praise  to  them  that  did  well.  It  is  probably  in  order  to 
explain  the  rapid  spread  of  Solomon's  fame  that  this  instance 
of  his  wisdom  is  related  in  Holy  Scripture  (i  Kings  iii.  28). 

The  prosperity  of  such  a  reign  was  commensurate  with  the  fact 
that  it  was  based  upon  the  Divine  promises,  and  typical  of  far 
greater  blessings  to  come.  The  notices  in  i  Kings  iv.  and  v. 
are  strung  together  to  indicate  that  prosperity  by  presenting 
to  our  view  the  condition  of  the  Israelitish  monarchy  in  the 
high-day  of  its  glory.  Wise  and  respected  councillors  sur- 
rounded the  king.i  The  administration  of  the  country  was 
orderly,  and  the  taxation  not  arbitrary  but  regulated.  The  land 
was  divided,  not  according  to  the  geographical  boundaries  of 
the  "  tribes,"  but  according  to  population  and  resources,  into 
twelve  provinces,  over  each  of  which  a  governor  was  appointed. 
Among  their  number  we  find  two  sons-in-law  of  the  king 
(iv.  II,  15),  and  other  names  well-known  in  the  land  (such  as 
those  of  Baana,  ver.  12,  probably  the  brother  of  "the  re- 
corder," ver.  3,  and  Baanah,  the  son  of  Hushai,  probably 
David's  councillor,  ver.  16).  Had  this  policy  of  re-arranging 
the  country  into  provinces  been  sufficiently  consolidated, 
many  of  the  tribal  jealousies  would  have  ceased.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  financial  administration,  entrusted  to  these  governors, 
was  of  the  simplest  kind.  Apparently,  no  direct  taxes  were 
levied,  but  all  that  was  requisite  for  the  royal  court  and  govern- 
ment had  to  be  provided,  each  province  supplying  in  turn  what 

^  The  word  Cohen  in  I  Kings  iv.  2  ("Azariah,  the  son  of  Zadok  the 
priest"  )  should  «^^  be  rendered  "priest,"  but  refers  to  a  civil  office — that  of 
the  king's  representative  to  the  people  and  his  most  intimate  adviser.  The 
same  term  is  used  ofZabudin  ver.  5,  where  the  Authorised  Version  translates 
**  principal  officer,"  and  also  of  David's  sons,  2  Sam.  viii.  18.  A  grand- 
son of  Zadok  could  not  have  been  old  enough  to  be  high-priest  (comp. 
I  Chron.  vi.   10.) 


6S  Reign  of  Solomon. 

was  required  for  one  month.  Such  a  system  could  not  in  deed- 
press  heavily,  so  long  as  the  country  continued  prosperous  ;  but 
with  a  luxurious  court,  in  hard  times,  or  under  harsh*  governors,, 
it  might  easily  become  an  instrument  of  oppression  and  a  source 
of  discontent.  From  i  Kings  xii.  4  we  gather  that  such  was 
ultimately  the  case.  It  need  scarcely  be  added,  that  in  each 
province  the  supreme  civil  government  was  in  the  hands 
of  these  royal  officials;  and  such  was  the  general  quiet  pre- 
vailing, that  even  in  the  extensive  district  east  of  the  Jordan, 
which  bordered  on  so  many  turbulent  tributary  nations,  "  one 
sole  officer"  (i  Kings  iv.  19)  was  sufficient  to  preserve  the 
peace  of  the  country. 

Quite  in  accordance  with  these  notices  are  the  references- 
both  to  the  prosperity  of  Israel,  and  to  the  extent  of  Solomon's 
dominions  (i  Kings  iv.  20,  21).  They  almost  read  like  an 
initial  fulfilment  of  that  promise  to  Abraham :    "  Multiplying 

1  will  multiply  thy  seed  as  the  stars  of  the  heaven,  and  as  the 
sand  which  is  upon  the  sea  shore ;  and  thy  seed  shall  possess 
the  gate  of  his  enemies  "  (Gen.  xxii.  1 7).  And  if,  compared 
with  the  simplicity  of  Saul's  and  even  of  David's  court,  that  of 
Solomon  seems  luxurious  in  its  appointments,^  we  must 
remember  that  it  was  intended  to  show  the  altered  state  of  the 
Israelitish  monarchy,  and  that  even  so  the  daily  consumption 
was  far  smaller  than  at  the  court  of  the  Persian  monarchs  in 
the  high-day  of  their  power  and  glory." 

^  The  provision  made  was  not  only  for  the  court  and  its  dependants,  but 
also  for  the  royal  stables  (i  Kings  iv.  26-28).  In  verse  26  the  number  of 
his  horses  is  by  a  clerical  error   given  as  40,000  instead  of  4000  (comp. 

2  Chron.  ix.  25).  If,  according  to  I  Kings  x.  26,  2  Chron.  i.  14,  Solomon 
had  1,400  chariots,  each  with  two  horses,  and  with,  in  most  of  them,  a  third 
horse  as  reserve,  we  have  the  number  4000. 

-  It  is  difficult  to  give  the  exact  equivalent  of  the  "  thirty  measures  of 
fne  flour  and  threescore  of  meal "  (in  all,  ninety  measures),  I  Kings  iv.  22. 
According  to  the  calculation  of  the  Rabbis  {^BibL  Diet.  vol.  iii.  p.  1742) 
they  would  yield  ninety-nine  sacks  of  flour.  Thenius  {Studicn  u.  Krit.  for 
1846,  p.  73,  etc.)  calculates  that  they  would  yield  two  pounds  of  bread  for 
14,000  persons.  But  this  computation  is  exaggerated.  On  competent 
authority  I  am  informed  that  one  bushel  of  flour  makes  up  fourteen  (four 


Solomon's  Wisdom.  6g 

But  the  fame  which  accrued  to  the  kingdom  of  Solomon  from 
its  prosperity  and  wealth  would  have  been  little  worthy  of  the 
Jewish  monarchy,  had  it  been  uncombined  with  that  which  alone 
truly  exalteth  a  nation  or  an  individual.  The  views  of  Solomon 
himself  on  this  subject  are  pithily  summed  up  in  one  of  his  own 
"Proverbs"  (iii.  13,  14):  "Happy  is  the  man  that  findeth 
wisdom,  and  the  man  that  causeth  understanding  to  go  forth ; 
for  merchandise  (trading)  with  it,  is  better  than  merchandise 
with  silver,  and  the  gain  from  it  than  the  most  fine  gold."^ 
All  this  the  "  wise  king  "  exemplified  in  his  own  person.  God 
gave  him  "wisdom"  not  only  far  wider  in  its  range,  but  far 
other  in  its  character  (Prov.  i.  7  ;  ix.  10)  than  that  of  the  East, 
or  of  far-famed  Egypt,  or  even  of  those  deemed  wisest  in  Israel,- 
"and  understanding  exceeding  much,  and  largeness  of  heart, 
■even  as  the  sand  that  is  on  the  sea-shore"^  (i  Kings  iv.  29). 
Not  satisfied  with  the  idle  life  of  an  Eastern  monarch,  he  set 


pound)  loaves  of  bread  ;  consequently,  one  sack  (  =  four  bushels)  fifty-six 
loaves,  or  224  pounds  of  bread.  This  for  ninety-nine  sacks  would  give 
.22,176  pounds  of  bread,  which  at  two  pounds  per  person  would  supply 
11,088 — or,  with  waste,  about  11,000  persons.  Of  this  total  amount  of 
bread,  the  thirty-three  sacks  of  "fine  flour  " — probably  for  court  use — would 
yield  1,848  loaves,  or  7,392  pounds  of  bread.  The  number  of  persons  fed 
daily  at  the  court  of  the  kings  of  Persia  is  said  to  have  been  15,000  (see 
Speaker's  Cotnm.^  p.  502).  Thenius  further  calculates  that,  taken  on  an 
average,  the  thirty  oxen  and  one  hundred  sheep  would  yield  one  and  a  half 
pounds  of  meat  for  each  of  the  14,000  persons.  At  the  court  of  Cyrus,  the 
daily  provision  seems  to  have  been,  400  sheep,  300  lambs,  100  oxen,  30 
liorses,  30  deei-,  400  fatted  geese,  100  young  geese,  300  pigeons,  600  small 
fowls,  3,750  gallons  of  wine,  75  gallons  of  new  milk,  and  75  of  sour  milk 
(comp.  Bahr  in  Lange's  Bibel  IV.,  vol.  vii.  p.  29).  But  here  also  the 
computation  of  Thenius  seems  too  large,  bearing  in  mind  that  cattle  and 
sheep  in  the  East  are  much  smaller  than  in  the  West. 

^  We  translate  literally. 

"  Comp.  I  Chron.  ii.  6,  Ethan,  I  Chron.  vi.  44;  xv.  17,  19;  Ps.  Ixxxix. 
(inscr.)  Heman,  I  Chron.  vi.  33;  xxv.  5;  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  (inscr.)  Chalcol 
and  Darda,  sons  of  Mahol,  perhaps — ^'sacras  choreas  diicejtdi periii." 

3  A  hyperbole  not  uncommon  in  antiquity.  I  feel  tempted  here  to  quote 
the  similar  expression  of  Horace  (Odes,  i.  28) : 

"Te  maris  et  terrae  numeroque  carentis  arena; 
Alensorem  cohibent,  Archyta." 


yo  Reign  of  Solomon. 

the  example  of,  and  gave  encouragement  to  study  and 
literature — the  range  of  his  inquiries  extending  not  only  to 
philosophy  and  poetry,^  but  also  to  natural  science  in  all  its 
branches.-  It  must  have  been  a  mighty  intellectual  impulse 
which  proceeded  from  such  a  king ;  it  must  have  been  a  reign 
unparalleled  in  that  age,  as  well  as  among  that  people,  which 
Solomon  inaugurated. 


CHAPTER    VI. 

The  Building  of  Solomon's  Temple— Preparations  for  it— Plan  and  Struc- 
ture of  the  Temple— Internal  Fittings — History  of  the  Temple— Jewish 
Traditions. 

(i  Kings  v.,  vi.,  vii.  13-51,  viii.  6-9;  2  Chron.  ii.   hi.,  iv.,  v.  7-10). 

WHILE  Solomon  thus  wisely  and  in  the  fear  of  God  ordered 
his  government,  and  the  country  enjoyed  a  measure  of 
prosperity,  wealth,  and  power  never  before  or  afterwards 
attained,  the  grand  work  of  his  reign  yet  remained  to  be  done. 
This  was  the  building  of  an  "  house  unto  the  Name  of  Jehovah 
God."  We  have  already  seen  how  earnestly  David  had  this  at 
heart ;  how  fully  it  corresponded  with  the  Divine  promise ; 
and  how  fitly  its  execution  was  assigned  to  Solomon  as  the 
great  task  of  his  reign,  viewing  it  as  typical  of  that  of  "  David's 
greater  Son."  As  might  be  expected,  all  outward  circumstances 
contributed  to  further  the  work.  Israel,  as  a  nation,  was  not 
intended  to  attain  pre-eminence  either  in  art  or  science.      If 

^  Of  these  "  Proverbs"  only  915  verses  have  been  preserved  in  the  Dook 
of  that  name;  of  "the  Songs,"  besides  the  Song  of  Songs,  only  Ps.  Ixxii. 
and  cxxvii. 

-  The  word  rendered  "hyssop"  in  the  Authorised  Version  is  either  the 
mint,  the  marjoram,  the  Orthoiriaim  saxatilc,  or,  according  to  Tristram 
{Nat.  Hist,  oj  the  Bible,'"  p.  457),  the  caper  {Capparis  spinosa). 


Preparations  for  the  Building.  y  I 

we  may  venture  to  pronounce  on  such  a  matter,  this  was  the 
part  assigned ,  in  the  Providence  of  God,  to  the  Gentile  world. 
To  Israel  was  specially  entrusted  the  guardianship  of  that 
spiritual  truth,  which  in  the  course  of  ages  would  develop  in 
all  its  proportions,  till  finally  it  became  the  common  property 
of  the  whole  world.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  the  task  assigned 
to  that  world,  to  develop  knowledge  and  thought  so  as  to 
prepare  a  fitting  reception  for  the  truth,  that  thus  it  might  be 
presented  in  all  its  aspects,  and  carried  from  land  to  land  in  a 
form  adapted  to  every  nation,  meeting  every  want  and  aspira- 
tion. This  was  symbolically  indicated  even  in  the  building  of 
Solomon's  Temple.  For,  if  that  Temple  had  been  exclusively 
the  workmanship  of  Jewish  hands,  both  the  materials  for  it 
and  their  artistic  preparation  would  have  been  sadly  defective, 
as  compared  with  what  it  actually  became.  But  it  was  not  so  ; 
and,  while  in  the  co-operation  of  Gentiles  with  Israel  in  the 
rearing  of  the  Temple  we  see  a  symbol  of  their  higher  union 
in  the  glorious  architecture  of  that  "  spiritual  house  built  up  " 
of  •'  lively  stones,"  we  also  recognise  the  gracious  Providence 
of  God,  which  rendered  it  possible  to  employ  in  that  work  the 
best  materials  and  the  best  artificers  of  the  ancient  world. 

For  it  was  in  the  good  Providence  of  God  that  the  throne  of 
Tyre  was  at  the  time  occupied  by  Hiram,i  who  had  not  only 
been  a  friend  and  ally  of  David,  but  to  whom  the  latter  had 
communicated  his  plans  of  the  projected  Temple-buildings. 
Indeed,  Hiram  had  already  furnished  David  with  a  certain 
proportion  of  the  necessary  materials  for  the  work  (i  Chron. 
xxii.  4).  The  extraordinary  mechanical  skill  of  the  Phoenicians 
— especially  of  the  Sidonians — was  universally  famed  in  the 
ancient  world. ^  Similarly,  the  best  materials  were  at  their 
command.  On  the  slopes  of  Lebanon,  which  belonged  to  their 
territory,  grew  those  world-famed  cedars  with  which  the  palaces 

1  Also  written  Flirom  (i  Kings  v.  lo,  18 — in  the  Hebrew,  iv.  24,  32), 
and  in  2  Chron,  ii.  Huraju. 

*  Comp.  the  quotations  in  the  Speaker's  Comment.  (ll,  p.  507a,)  and 
Movers,  Phoniz.  ii,  i.  pp.  86,  etc. 


72  Reign  of  Solomon. 

of  Assyria  were  adorned,  and,  close  by,  at  Gebal  (the  ancient 
Byblos,  the  modern  Jebeil)  were  the  most  skilled  workmen ' 
(Ezek.  xxvii.  9).  On  the  same  slopes  grew  also  the  cypress/^ 
so  suitable  for  flooring,  its  wood  being  almost  indestructible, 
and  impervious  to  rot  and  worms;  while  the  Phoenician 
merchantmen  brought  to  Tyre  that  ''  almug,"  "  algum,"  or  red 
sandal-wood  which  was  so  valued  in  antiquity  (comp.  i  Kings 
X.  11).^  The  same  skill  as  in  the  preparation  of  woodwork 
distinguished  the  Phoenician  carvers,  stone-cutters,  dyers, 
modellers,  and  other  craftsmen.  To  have  at  his  disposal  the 
best  artificers  of  Phoenicia,  and  these  under  a  trained  and  cele- 
brated "master"  (2  Chron.  ii.  13,  14),  must  have  been  of 
immense  advantage  to  Solomon.  At  the  same  time  the 
extensive  preparations  which  David  had  made  rendered  the 
work  comparatively  so  easy,  that  the  Temple-buildings,  with 
their  elaborate  internal  fittings,  were  completed  in  the  short 
space  of  seven  years  (i  Kings  vi.  37,  38),  while  the  later  rearing 
of  the  king's  palace  occupied  not  less  than  thirteen  years 
(i  Kings  vii.  i).  But,  although  Solomon  thus  availed  himself 
of  Phoenician  skill  in  the  execution  of  the  work,  the  plan 
and  design  were  strictly  Jewish,  having,  in  fact,  been  drawn 
long  before,  in  the  time  of  King  David. 

^  Our  Authorised  Version  translates  wrongly,  "stone-squarers"  (i  Kings 
V.  18),  where  the  original  has  "  Gebalites,"  i.e.,  inhabitants  of  Gebal. 

2  There  has  been  much  controversy  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word 
berosh,  rendered  in  the  Authorised  Version  (i  Kings  v.  8,  and  many  other 
passages)  by  "fir."  Differing  from  Canon  Rawlinson,  it  seems  to  me, 
for  many  reasons,  most  improbable  that  it  was  "the  juniper,"  and  on  the 
grounds  explained  in  Gesenius'  Thesaurus  I.  246  b,  247  a,  I  regard  it, 
with  almost  all  authorities,  as  the  cypress.  The  Targumim  and  the  Talmud 
have  the  words  berotha  and  beratha,  with  apparently  the  same  signification. 
Comp.  Levy,  Chald.  Worterb.  ii.  d.  Targ.  p.  1 18  b.  Canon  Tristram, 
who  is  always  trustworthy  {Nat.  Hist,  of  the  Bible),  speaks  of  it  with  caution. 

^  Most  commentators  are  agreed  that  it  was  the  "red  sandal"  wood. 
It  is  curious  to  notice  that  this  was  apparently  an  article  of  ordinary 
commerce.  The  "  Ophir "  (or  Red  Sea)  fleet  of  King  Solomon,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  only  said  to  have  brought  "gold"  (i  Kings  ix.  28  ;  2  Chron. 
viii.  17,  18).  Remembering  that  this  wood  had  to  come  from  Tyj-e,  there 
is  not  the  slightest  inaccuracy  in  2  Chron.  ii.  8,  as  Zdckler  and  even  Keil 
seem  to  imagine. 


TJie  Btdlding  of  the  Temple.  73 

The  building  of  the  Temple  commenced  in  the  second  month 
("  6/Z',"  "  splendour  " — the  month  of  opening  beauty  of  nature) 
of  the  fourth  year  of  Solomon's  reign,  being  the  480th  from  the 
Exodus^  (i  Kings  vi.  i).  But  there  was  this  peculiarity  about 
the  work,  that  no  sound  of  axe,  hammer,  or  chisel  was  heard 
on  Mount  Moriah  while  the  Holy  House  was  rising,  day  by  day, 
in  beauty  and  glory.  As  Jewish  tradition  has  it :  "  The  iron  is 
created  to  shorten  the  days  of  man,  and  the  altar  to  lengthen 
them  ;  therefore  it  is  not  right  that  that  which  shortens  should  be 
lifted  upon  that  which  lengthens  "  (Midd.  iii.  4).  The  massive 
timber  used  was  not  merely  prepared  but  dressed  before  it  was 
brought  to  the  sea,  to  be  conveyed  in  floats  to  Joppa, 
whence  the  distance  to  Jerusalem  was  only  about  forty  miles 
(i  Kings  V.  9).  Similarly,  those  great,  splendid  {not  "costly," 
as  in  the  Authorised  Version)  hewed  stones  (i  Kings  v.  17), 
bevelled  at  the  edges,  of  which  to  this  day  some  are  seen  in 
what  remains  of  the  ancient  Temple-wall — the  largest  of  them 
being  more  than  thirty  feet  long  by  seven  and  a  half  high,  and 
weighing  above  one  hundred  tons — were  all  chiselled  and  care- 
fully marked  before  being  sent  to  Jerusalem  (i  Kings  vi.  7). 
An  undertaking  of  such  magnitude  would  require,  especially 
in  the  absence  of  modern  mechanical  appliances,  a  very  large 
number  of  workmen.  They  amounted  in  all  to  160,000  Pale- 
stinians, who  were  divided  into  two  classes.  The  first  comprised 
native  Israelites,  of  whom  30,000  were  raised  by  a  "levy," 
which,  taking  the  census  of  David  as  our  basis,  would  be  at 
the  rate  of  considerably  less  than  one  in  forty-four  of  the  able- 
bodied  male  population.  These  30,000  men  worked  by  relays, 
10,000  being  employed  during  one  month,  after  which  they 
returned  for  two  months  to  their  homes.  The  second  class  of 
workmen,  which  consisted  of  strangers  resident  in  Palestine 
(i  Kings  V.  15  ;  2  Chron.  ii.  17,  18),  amounted  to   150,000,  of 

^  Doubt  has  been  thrown  on  the  accuracy  of  this  date,  which  indeed 
is  altered  by  the  LXX  ;  but  this,  as  it  seems  to  us,  on  wholly  insufficient 
grounds.  Compare  the  Chronological  Table  at  the  beginning  of  Vol.  iii. 
of  this  "Bible  History,"  and  the  detailed  remarks  of  Bahr  in  La.ngo's  Bidet- 
Werk,  vol.  vii.  pp.  ^ob^  41a. 


74  Reign  of  Solomon. 

whom  70,000  were  burden-bearers,  and  80,000  "hewers  m  the 
mountains,"  or  rather,  as  the  expression  always  means,  ''  stone- 
cutters," The  two  classes  are  carefully  distinguished — the 
Israelites  being  free  labourers,  who  worked  under  the  direction  of 
Hiram's  skilled  men  ;  while  the  others,  who  were  the  representa- 
tives of  the  ancient  heathen  inhabitants  of  Palestine,  were  really 
held  to  "bond-service"  (i  Kings  ix.  20,  21 ;  2  Chron.  ii.  17,  18  ; 
viii.  7-9).  The  total  number  of  men  employed  (160,000), 
though  large,  cannot  be  considered  excessive,  when  compared, 
for  example,  with  the  360,000  persons  engaged  for  twenty 
years  on  the  building  of  one  pyramid  (Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  xxxvi. 
12.  apiid  Bahr  u.  s.)  Over  these  men  3,300  officers  were 
appointed  (i  Kings  v.  16),  with  550  "chiefs  "  (i  Kings  ix.  23),  of 
whom  250  were  apparently  native  Israelites  (2  Chron.  viii.  10.)^ 
The  number  of  skilled  artificers  furnished  by  Hiram  is  not 
mentioned,  though  probably  the  proportion  was  comparatively 
small.  A  very  vivid  impression  is  left  on  our  minds  of  the 
transaction  between  the  two  kings.  When  Hiram  sent  a  friendly 
embassy  to  congratulate  Solomon  on  his  accession,  the  latter 
replied  by  another,  which  was  charged  formally  to  ask  help  in 
the  building  about  to  be  undertaken.  The  request  was  enter- 
tained by  Hiram  in  the  most  cordial  manner.  At  the  same 
time,  bearing  in  mind  Eastern  phraseology,  and  that  a 
Phoenician  ally  of  David  would  readily  recognise  the  God  of 
Israel  as  a  "  national  Deity,"  there  is  no  reason  for  inferring, 
from  the  terms  of  his  reply,  that  Hiram  was  personally  a 
worshipper  of  Jehovah  (i  Kings  v.  7;  2  Chron.  ii.  12).  The 
agreement  seems  to  have  been,  that  Solomon  would  undertake 
to  provide  for  the  support  of  Hiram's  men,  wheat,  barley,  and 
oil,  to  the  amount  specified  in  2  Chron.  ii.  10;  while,  so  long  as 
building  materials  were  required,  Hiram  charged  for  them 
at  an  annual  rate  of  20,000  measures  of  wheat,  and   twenty 

^  There  is  no  real  discrepancy  between  the  number  of  the  "officers,"  as 
given  respectively  in  Chronicles  and  in  Kings.  The  sum  total  (3850)  is 
in  both  cases  the  same — the  arrangement  in  Chronicles  b  ing  apparently 
according  to  nationality,  and  in  the  Book  of  Kings  according  to  office 
(I  Kings,  3300  +  550;  2  Chron.,  3600  +  250) 


Solomon's  Agreement  with  Hiram.  75 

measures  (about  ten  hogsheads)  of  "  beaten  oil," — that  is,  the 
best  in  the  market,  which  derived  its  name  from  its  manufacture, 
the  oil  being  extracted  by  beating  the  olives  before  they  were 
quite  ripe  (1  Kings  v.  11).  In  regard  to  these  terms,  it  should 
be  remembered  that  Phoenicia  was  chiefly  dependent  on  Pales- 
tine for  its  supply  of  grain  and  oil  (Ezek,  xxvii.  17  ;  Acts  xii. 
20).  Lastly,  the  name  of  the  "  master-workman,"  whom  Hiram 
sent,  has  also  been  preserved  to  us  as  Huram,  or  rather  Churam,^ 
a  man  of  Jewish  descent  by  the  mother's  side  (2  Chron.  ii. 
13,  14;  comp.  I  Kings  vii.  14;  2  Chron.  iv.  i6).2  Even  the 
completeness  and  entirely  satisfactory  character  of  these 
arrangements  proved,  that  in  this  respect  also  "  Jehovah  gave 
Solomon  wisdom,  as  He  had  promised  him"  (i  Kings  v.  12). 

Without  entering  into  details,^  the  general  appearance  and 
proportions  of  the  Temple  which  Solomon  built  can  be  described 
without  much  difficulty.  The  Temple  itself  faced  east — that  is 
to  say,  the  worshippers  entered  by  the  east,  and,  turning  to  the 
Most  Holy  Place,  would  look  west ;  while,  if  the  veil  had  been 
drawn  aside,  the  Ark  in  the  innermost  Sanctuary  would  have 
been  seen  to  face  eastwards.  Entering  then  by  the  east,  the 
worshipper  would  find  himself  in  front  of  "a  porch,"  which 
extended  along  the  whole  width  of  the  Temple, — that  is,  twenty 
cubits,  or  about  thirty  feet — and  went  back  a  depth  of  ten  cubits, 
or  fifteen  feet.  The  Sanctuary  itself  was  sixty  cubits  (ninety 
feet)  long,  twenty  cubits  (thirty  feet)  wide,  and  thirty  cubits 
(forty-five  feet)  high.  The  height  of  the  porch  is  not  mentioned 
in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and  the  numeral  given  for  it  in  2  Chron. 
iii.  4,  is  evidently  a  copyist's  error.^  Probably  it  rose  to  a  height 

^  The  name  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  king  himself. 

"  Our  Authorised  Version  of  2  Chron.  ii.  13  is  entirely  misleading. 
The  sacred  text  mentions  "Huram"  as  "Abi,"  "my  father," — not  the 
father  of  King  Hiram,  but  a  title  of  distinction  given  to  this  able  man 
(comp.  the  use  of  the  word  '^  Ab"  in  regard  to  Joseph,  Gen.  xlv.  8), 
and  equivalent  to  "master." 

^  The  literature  of  this  subject  is  very  large,  and  details  are  often  most 
difficult. 

*  A  height  of  120  cubits  would  be  out  of  all  proportion,  and,  indeed, 
considering  the  width  and  length,  almost  impossible. 


']6  ReigJi  of  Soloviofi. 

of  about  thirty  cubits. ^  Of  the  total  length  of  the  Sanctuary, 
forty  cubits  were  apportioned  to  the  Holy  Place,  (which  was 
thus  sixty  feet  long,  thirty  wide,  and  forty-five  high),  and 
twenty  cubits  (thirty  feet)  to  the  Most  Holy  Place,  which 
(i  Kings  vi.  20)  is  described  as  measuring  twenty  cubits- 
(thirty  feet)  in  length,  width,  and  height.  The  ten  cubits 
(fifteen  feet)  left  above  the  Most  Holy  Place  were  apparently 
occupied  by  an  empty  room.  Perhaps,  as  in  the  Temple  of 
Herod,  this  space  was  used  for  letting  down  the  workmen 
through  an  aperture,  when  repairs  were  required  in  the  inner- 
most Sanctuary.  In  that  case  the  access  to  it  would  have  been 
from  the  roof.     The  latter  was,  no  doubt,  flat.^ 

The  measurements  just  given  apply,  of  course,  only  to  the 
ititerior  of  these  buildings.  As  regards  their  exterior  we  have 
to  add  not  only  the  thickness  of  the  walls  on  either  side,  and  the 
height  of  the  roof,  but  also  a  row  of  side-buildings,  which  have, 
not   inaptly,  been  designated  as   a   "lean-to."       These  side- 

^  Of  the  textual  alterations  proposed,  the  first  (HNTS,  100,  into  m73tS 
"cubits  ")  seems  the  easiest,  although  it  involves  the  elimination  of  the 
1  with  which  the  next  word  in  the  Hebrew  begins.  On  the  other  hand, 
*'  thirty  cubits  "  seems  a  more  suitable  height,  especiallyas  the  absence  of  its 
measurement  in  I  Kings  seems  to  convey  that  the  "porch"  had  the  same 
height  as  the  main  building.  But  this  implies  two  alterations  in  the  text, 
it  being  difficult  to  understand  how,  if  the  nuvieral  30  was  originally  written 
by  a  letter  {^,  of  which,  it  is  supposed,  the  blotting  out  of  the  upper  half 
made  it  appear  like  3  =  20),  the  copyist  finding  DITON  written  in  full  could 
have  mistaken  it  for  T\isD,  100,  which  also  ought  to  have  been  written  with 
a  letter  (  p  ).  It  is,  however,  possible  that  instead  of  the  full  word,  n*l7DN, 
the  MS.  may  have  borne  "'TDK,  and  the  copyist  have  been  thus  misled. 

'^  Thus  the  Most  Holy  Place  would  have  had  exactly  double  the  pro- 
portions of  that  in  the  Tabernacle,  while  the  height  of  the  Holy  Place  was 
ten  cubits  (fifteen  feet)  higher. 

^  It  is  with  great  reluctance  and  becoming  modesty — though  without 
misgiving— that  I  differ  from  so  justly  famous  an  authority  as  Mr.  Ferguson 
(Smith's  Bibl.  Diet.  vol.  III.,  Art.  "Temple").  Mr.  Ferguson,  and  after 
him  most  English  writers,  have  maintained  that  the  roof,  both  of  the  Taber- 
nacle and  of  the  Temple,  was  sloping,  and  not  flat.  This  view  is,  to  say 
the  least,  wholly  unsupported  by  the  text  of  Holy  Scripture.  Canon  Raw- 
linson,  indeed,  speaks  of  Mr.  Ferguson's  view  as  '' demonstrated,'' ^hu\.y 
surely,  without  weighing  the  meaning  of  the  word  which  he  has  italicised. 


The  Temple  Chamber.  'jj 

buildings  consisted  of  three  tiers  of  chambers,  which  surrounded 
the  Temple,  south,  west,  and  north — the  east  front  being  covered 
by  the  "porch."  On  the  side  where  these  chambers  abutted 
on  the  Temple  they  seem  to  have  had  no  separate  wall.  The 
beams,  which  formed  at  the  same  time  the  ceiling  of  the  first 
and  the  floor  of  the  second  tier  of  chambers,  and  similarly  those 
which  formed  the  ceiling  of  the  second  and  the  floor  of  the 
third  tier,  as  also  those  on  which  the  roof  over  the  third  tier 
rested,  were  not  inserted  within  the  Temple  wall,  but  were  laid 
on  graduated  buttresses  which  formed  part  of  the  main  wall  of 
the  Temple.  These  buttresses  receded  successively  one  cubit 
in  each  of  the  two  higher  tiers  of  chambers,  and  for  the  roofing 
of  the  third,  thus  forming,  as  it  were,  narrowing  steps,  or  receding 
rests  on  which  the  beams  of  the  chambers  were  laid.  The 
effect  was  that,  while  the  walls  of  the  Temple  decreased  one 
cubit  in  thickness  with  each  tier,  the  chambers  increased  one  cubit 
in  width,  as  they  ascended.  Thus,  if  at  the  lowest  tier  the  wall 
including  the  buttress  was,  say,  six  cubits  thick,  at  the  next  tier 
of  chambers  it  was,  owing  to  the  decrease  in  the  buttress,  only 
five  cubits  thick,  and  at  the  third  only  four  cubits,  while  above 
the  roof,  where  the  buttress  ceased,  the  walls  would  be  only  three 
cubits  thick.  For  the  same  reason  each  tier  of  chambers,  built 
on  gradually  narrowing  or  receding  rebatements,  would  be  one 
cubit  wider  than  that  below,  the  chambers  on  the  lowest  tier 
being  five  cubits  wide,  on  the  second  six  cubits,  and  on  the  third 
seven  cubits.  If  we  suppose  these  tiers  with  their  roof  to  have 
been  altogether  sixteen  to  eighteen  cubits  high  (i  Kings  vi.  lo), 
and  allow  a  height  of  two  cubits  for  the  roof  of  the  Temple, 
whose  walls  were  thirty  cubits  high  (the  total  height,  including 
roof,  thirty-two  cubits),  this  would  leave  an  elevation  of  twelve 
to  fourteen  cubits  (eighteen  to  twenty-one  feet)  for  the  wall  of 
the  Temple  above  the  roof  of  "  the  chambers."  Within  this 
space  of  twelve  to  fourteen  cubits  we  suppose  the  "  windows  " 
to  have  been  inserted — south  and  north,  the  back  of  the  Most 
Holy  Place  (west)  having  no  windows,  and  the  front  (east)  being 
covered  by  the  "porch."     The  use  of  the  " chambers "  is  not 


yS  Reign  of  Solomon. 

mentioned  in  the  sacred  text,  but  it  seems  more  probable  that 
they  served  for  the  deposit  of  relics  of  the  ancient  Tabernacle, 
and  for  the  storage  of  sacred  vessels,  than  that  they  were  the 
sleeping  apartments  of  the  ministering  priesthood.  Access  to 
these  "  chambers  "  was  gained  by  a  door  in  the  middle  of  the 
southern  facade,  whence  also  a  winding  stair  led  to  the  upper 
tiers  (i  Kings  vi.  8).  The  windows  of  the  Temple  itself,  which 
we  have  supposed  to  have  been  above  the  roof  of  the 
"  chambers,"  were  with  ''  fixed  lattices  "  ^  (i  Kings  vi.  4),  which 
could  not  be  opened,  as  in  private  dwellings,  and  were  probably 
constructed,  like  the  windows  of  old  castles  and  churches,  broad 
within,  but  mere  slits  externally.  While  these  protracted  works 
were  progressing,  the  Lord  in  His  mercy  gave  special  en- 
couragement alike  to  Solomon  and  to  the  people.  The  word 
of  the  Lord,  which  on  this  occasion  came  to  the  king  (i  Kings 
vi.  11-13)— no  doubt  through  a  prophet — not  only  fully  con- 
firmed the  promise  made  to  David  (2  Sam.  vii.  12,  etc.),  but  also 
connected  the  "  house  "  that  was  being  built  to  the  Lord  with 
the  ancient  promise  (Ex.  xxv.  8  ;  xxix.  45)  that  God  would  dwell 
in  Israel  as  among  His  people.  Thus  it  pointed  king  and  people 
beyond  that  outward  building  which,  rising  in  such  magnificence, 
might  have  excited  only  national  pride^)  its  spiritual  meaning, 
and  to  the  conditions  under  which  alone  it  would  fulfil  its 
great  purpose.  ^ 

Thus  far  we  have  given  a  description  of  the  exterior  of  the 
Temple.^  It  still  remains  to  convey  some  idea  of  its  internal 
arrangements.  If  we  may  judge  by  the  description  of 
Ezekiel's  Temple  (Ezek.  xl.  49),  and  by  what  we  know  of  the 
Temple  of  Herod,  some  steps  would  lead  up  to  the  porch, 

1  Not  as  in  our  Authorised  Version  :  "windows  of  narrow  lights." 
^  A  fuller   description  of  the  Temple,  and  a  detailed  discussion  of  the 
various  points  in  controversy  among  writers  on  the  subject,  would  lead 
beyond  the  limit  which  we  must  here  assign  ourselves. 

^  Some  have  imagined  that  the  Most  Holy  Place  was,  like  the  chancel 
in  most  churches,  lower  than  the  Holy  Place  (ten  feet).  Lundius  has 
drawn  the  porch  to  the  height  of  a  gigantic  steeple.  Many  (mostly  fanciful) 
sketch-plans  of  the  Temple  have  been  drawn  ;  but  it  would  be  out  of  place 
here  to  enter  into  further  details. 


The  Temple  Pillars.  79 

which,  as  we  imagine,  presented  the  appearance  of  an  open 
colonnade  of  cedar,  set  in  a  pavement  of  hewn  stones,  and 
supporting  a  cedar-roof  covered  with  marble.  The  most 
prominent  objects  here  were  the  two  great  pillars,  Jachin  and 
Boaz,  which  Hiram  cast  by  order  of  Solomon  (i  Kings  vii. 
15-22).  These  pillars  stood,  as  we  are  expressly  told,  within 
"the  porch"  (i  Kings  vii.  21),  and  must  have  served  alike 
architectural,  artistic,  and  symbolical  purposes.  Added  after 
the  completion  of  the  "  House,"  perhaps  for  the  better  support 
of  the  roof  of  the  "  porch,"  their  singular  beauty  must  have 
attracted  the  eye,  while  their  symbolical  meaning  appeared  in 
their  names.  Jachin  ("  He  supports  "  ),  Boaz  ("  in  Him  is 
strength"),  pointed  beyond  the  outward  support  and  strength 
which  these  pillars  gave,  to  Him  on  Whom  not  only,  the  Sanc- 
tuary but  every  one  who  would  truly  enter  it  must  rest  for 
support  and  strength.  Some  difficulty  has  been  experienced 
in  computing  the  height  of  these  pillars,  including  their 
"  chapiters,"  or  "  capitals  "  (i  Kings  vii.  15-22).  It  seems  most 
likely  that  they  consisted  of  single  shafts,  each  eighteen  cubits 
high  and  twelve  in  circumference,^  surmounted  by  a  twofold 
"chapiter"  —  the  lower  of  five  cubits,  with  fretted  network 
depending,  and  ornamented  with  two  rows  of  one  hundred 
pomegranates;  the  higher  chapiter  four  cubits  high  (i  Kings 
vii.  19),  and  in  the  form  of  an  opening  lily.  The  symbolical 
significance  of  the  pomegranate  and  of  the  lily— the  one  the 
flower,  the  other  the  fruit  of  the  Land  of  Promise,  and  both 
emblematic  of  the  pure  beauty  and  rich  sweetness  of  holiness 
— need  scarcely  be  pointed  out.  If  we  compute  the  height 
of  these  pillars  with  their  chapiters  at  twenty-seven  cubits,^ 
we  have  three  cubits  left  for  the  entablature  and  the  roofing 
of  the  porch  (18  +  5+4  +  3  =  30). 

"  The  porch,"  which  (in  its  tablature)  was  overlaid  with  gold 
(2  Chron.  iii.  4),  opened  into  the  Holy  Place  by  folding  doors, 

^  Canon  Rawlinson  has  shown  that  the  columns  of  the  Egyptian  temples 
were  thicker  than  those  of  Solomon's. 

2  Other  calculations  have  also  been  proposed,  as  by  Bahr.and  Merz. 


8o  Reign  of  Solomon. 

each  of  two  leaves,  folding  back  upon  each  other.  These 
doors,  which  were  the  width  of  a  fourth  of  the  wall  (i  Kings  vi. 
2,"^^  or  five  cubits,  were  made  of  cypress-wood,  and  hung  by 
golden  hinges  on  door-posts  of  olive-wood.  They  were  deco- 
rated with  carved  figures  of  cherubim  between  palm-trees,^  and 
above  them  opening  flower-buds  and  garlands,  the  whole  being 
covered  with  thin  plates  of  gold,  which  showed  the  design 
beneath.  Within  the  Sanctuary  all  the  sacred  furniture  was  of 
gold,  while  that  outside  of  it  was  of  brass.  In  truth,  the 
Sanctuary  was  a  golden  house.  The  floor,  which  was  of 
cypress-wood,  was  overlaid  with  gold;  the  walls,  which  were 
panelled  with  cedar,  on  which  the  same  designs  were  carved  as 
on  the  doors,  were  covered  with  gold,  and  so  was  the  ceiling. 
It  need  scarcely  be  said,  how  it  must  have  glittered  and  shone 
in  the  light  of  the  sacred  candlesticks,  especially  as  the  walls 
were  encrusted  with  gems  (2  Chron.  iii.  6).  There  were  ten 
candlesticks  in  the  Holy  Place,  each  seven-branched,  and  of 
pure  gold.  They  were  ranged  right  and  left  before  the  Most 
Holy  Place"  (i  Kings  vii.  49).  The  entrance  to  the  Most 
Holy  Place  was  covered  by  a  veil  "  of  blue  and  purple,  and 
crimson,  and  byssus,"  with  "  v/rought  cherubs  thereon " 
(2  Chron.  iii.  14).  Between  the  candlesticks  stood  the  "  altar 
of  incense,"  made  of  cedar-wood  and  overlaid  with  gold 
(i  Kings  vi.  20,  22;  vii.  48);  while  ten  golden  tables  of  she w- 
bread  (2  Chron.  iv.  8)  were  ranged  right  and  left.  The 
implements  necessary  for  the  use  of  this  sacred  furniture  were 
also  of  pure  gold  (i  Kings  vii.  49,  50). 

Two  folding-doors,  similar  in  all  respects  to  those  already 
described,  except  that  they  were  of  oleaster  wood,  and  not  a 
fourth,  but  a  fifth  of  the  wall  (  =  4  cubits),  opened  from  the 

■^  Probably  they  were  in  panels,  each  having  two  cherubs  and  a 
palm  tree. 

2  Keil  supposes  that  only  two  of  these  candlesticks  stood  before  the 
Most  Holy  Place,  while  the  other  eight  were  ranged,  four  and  four,  along 
the  side  walls,  five  tables  of  shewbrcad  being  placed  in  the  interstices  behind 
them,  along  each  of  the  side  walls.  In  that  case,  however,  it  would  not 
have  been  easy  to  go  round  the  tables. 


The  Porck  and  the  Sanctuary.  8 1 

Holy  Place  into  the  Most  Holy.  These  doors  we  suppose 
to  have  always  stood  open,  the  entrance  being  concealed  by 
the  great  veil,  which  the  High-priest  lifted,  when  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement  he  went  into  the  innermost  Sanctuary. ^  Con- 
siderable difficulty  attaches  to  a  notice  in  i  Kings  vi.  21,  which 
has  been  variously  translated  and  understood.  Two  inter- 
pretations here  specially  deserve  attention.  The  first  regards 
the  "  chains  of  gold  before  the  Oracle,"  as  chain-work  that 
fastened  together  the  cedar-planks  forming  the  partition  be- 
tween the  Holy  and  the  Most  Holy  Place — somewhat  like  the 
bars  that  held  together  the  boards  in  the  Tabernacle.  The 
other,  which  to  us  seems  the  more  likely,^  represents  the 
partition  boards  between  the  Holy  and  the  Most  Holy  Place,  as 
not  reaching  quite  to  the  ceiling,  and  this  "chain-work"  as 
running  along  the  top  of  the  boarding.  For  some  opening  of 
this  kind  seems  almost  necessary  for  ventilation,  for  letting  out 
the  smoke  of  the  incense  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  and  to 
admit  at  least  a  gleam  of  light,  without  which  the  ministrations 
of  the  High-priest  on  that  day,  limited  though  they  were,  would 
have  been  almost  impossible.  The  only  object  within  the  Most 
Holy  Place  was  the  Ark  overshadowed  by  the  Cherubim.  It 
was  the  same  which  had  stood  in  the  Tabernacle.  But 
Solomon  placed  on  either  side  of  it  (south  and  north)  a  gigantic 
figure  of  a  Cherub,  carved  out  of  oleaster  wood,  and  overlaid 
with  gold.  Each  was  ten  cubits  high  ;  and  the  two,  with  their 
outspread  wings,  which  touched  over  the  Mercy  -  Seat,  ten 
cubits  wide.  Thus,  the  two  cherubim  with  their  outspread 
wings  reached  (south  and  north)  from  one  wall  of  the  Sanctuary 
to  the  other  (i  Kings  vi.  23-28).  But,  whereas  the  Mosaic 
Cherubim  looked  inwards  and  downwards  towards  the  Mercy- 

1  This  we  conclude  from  the  circumstance,  that  otherwise  there  would 
have  been  no  use  of  a  veil,  and  that  we  do  not  read  of  the  High-priest 
opening  the  doors  on  the  Day  of  Atonement. 

2  Most  writers  suppose  that  these  chains  were  drawn  inside  to  further 
bar  access  to  the  Most  Holy  Place.  But  no  mention  is  made  of  their 
existence  or  removal  on  the  Day  of  Atonement.  The  view  we  have  expressed 
is  that  of  the  Rabbis. 

G 


82  Reign  of  Solomon. 

Seat,  those  made  by  Solomon  looked  outwards  towards  the 
Holy  Place,  with  probably  a  slight  inclination  downwards 
(2  Chron.  iii.  13).  Another  notice  has  raised  differences  of 
opinion.  From  i  Kings  viii.  8,  we  learn  that  the  "  staves  "  by 
which  the  Ark  was  carried  were  "  drawn  forward "  ("  length- 
ened," not  "  drawn  out,"  as  in  the  Authorised  Version),  so  that 
their  heads  were  visible  from  the  Holy  Place.  As  these  "  staves  " 
were  never  to  be  drawn  out  (Ex.  xxv.  15),  and  as  all  view  of 
the  interior  of  the  Most  Holy  Place  was  precluded,  this  could 
only  have  been  effected  (as  the  Rabbis  suggest)  by  drawing  the 
staves  forward,  so  that  their  heads  would  slightly  bulge  out  on 
the  veil.  Of  course  this  would  imply  that  the  staves  faced  east 
and  west — not,  as  is  generally  supposed,  south  and  north.  Nor 
is  there  any  valid  objection  to  this  supposition. 

Descending  from  "the  Porch,"  we  stand  in  the  '* inner" 
(i  Kings  vi.  36)  or  "Court  of  the  Priests"  (2  Chron.  iv.  9). 
This  was  paved  with  great  stones,  as  was  also  the  outer  or 
"Great  Court"  (2  Chron.  iv.  9)  of  the  people.  Within  the 
"  inner  "  or  Priests'  Court,  facing  the  entrance  to  the  Sanctuary, 
was  "the  altar  of  burnt-offering"  (i  Kings  viii.  64),  made  of 
brass,  and  probably  filled  within  with  earth  and  unhewn- stones. 
It  was  ten  cubits  high,  and  twenty  cubits  in  length  and  breadth 
at  the  base — probably  narrowing  as  it  ascended,  like  receding 
buttresses^  (2  Chron.  iv.  i).  Between  the  altar  and  the  porch 
stood  the  colossal  "  sea  of  brass,"  five  cubits  high,  and  thirty 
cubits  in  circumference  (i  Kings  vii.  23-26;  2  Chron.  iv.  2-5). 
Its  upper  rim  was  bent  outwards,  "  like  the  work  of  the  brim  of 
a  cup,  in  the  shape  of  a  lily-flower."  Under  the  brim  it  was 
ornamented  by  two  rows  of  opening  flower-buds,  ten  to  a  cubit. 
This  immense  basin  rested  on  a  pedestal  of  twelve  oxen,  three 
looking  to  each  point  of  the  compass.     Its  object  was  to  hold 

1  This  was  certainly  the  structure  of  the  altar  in  the  Temple  of  Herod 
(comp.  Midd.  iii.  i).  In  general,  I  must  here  refer  the  reader  to  the 
description  of  that  Temple  in  The  Temple,  its  Ministry  and  Services  at 
the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  my  translation  of  the  Mishnic  Tractate 
Middoth,  in  the  Appendix  to  Sketches  of  Jewish  Social  Life  in  the  Days 
of  Christ,     Our  present  limits  prevent  more  than  the  briefest  outline. 


The  Sanctuary  and  the  Courts.  83 

the  water  in  which  the  priests  and  Levites  performed  their 
ablutions.  For  the  washing  of  the  inwards  and  of  the  pieces 
of  the  sacrifices,  ten  smaller  **  lavers  "  of  brass  were  provided, 
which  stood  on  the  right  and  left  ''  side  of  the  House  "  (i  Kings 
vii.  38 ;  2  Chron.  iv.  6).  They  were  placed  on  square  *'  bases," 
or,  rather,  waggons  of  brass,  four  cubits  long  and  broad,  and 
three  cubits  high,  which  rested  on  "  four  feet "  (not  "  corners," 
as  in  the  Authorised  Version,  i  Kings  vii.  30)  upon  wheels,  so 
as  to  bring  them  readily  to  the  altar.  Bearing  in  mind  the  height 
of  the  altar,  this  accounts  for  their  being  four  cubits  high  ( +  4 
cubits  for  the  laver  itself).  The  sides  of  these  waggons  were 
richly  ornamented  with  figures  of  lions,  oxen,  and  cherubs, 
and  beneath  them  were  *'  garlands,  pensile  work."i  Although 
it  is  not  easy  to  make  out  all  the  other  details,  it  seems  that 
the  tops  of  these  "bases"  or  waggons  had  covers,  which 
bulged  inwards  to  receive  the  lavers,  the  latter  being  further 
steadied  by  supports  ("  undersetters "  in  the  Authorised 
Version,  or  rather  "shoulder-pieces").  The  covers  of  the 
waggons  were  also  richly  ornamented.  Lastly,  in  the  Priests' 
Court,  and  probably  within  full  view  of  the  principal  gate,  stood 
the  brazen  scaffold  or  stand  (2  Chron.  vi.  13)  from  which  King 
Solomon  offered  his  dedicatory  prayer,  and  which  seems  to 
have  always  been  the  place  occupied  in  the  Temple  by  the  kings 
(2  Kings  xi.  14 ;  xxiii.  3).  To  this  a  special  "  ascent "  led  from 
the  palace  (i  Kings  x.  5),  which  was,  perhaps  afterwards,  roofed 
over  for  protection  from  the  weather.  2  The  Priests'  Court  was 
enclosed  by  a  wall  consisting  of  three  tiers  of  hewn  stones  and 
a  row  of  cedar  beams  (i  Kings  vi.  36). 

From  the  court  of  the  priests  steps  led  down  to  the  "  outer 
court"  of  the  people  (comp.  Jer.  xxxvi.  10),  which^  was  sur- 
rounded by  a  solid  wall,  from  which  four  massive  gates,  covered 

^  See  Speaker's  Comment,  ii.,  p.  521 — not;  as  in  our  Authorised  Version, 
"certain  additions  made  of  thin  work"  (i  Kings  vii.  29). 

2  This  was  "the  covert  for  the  Sabbath "  (2  Kings  xvi.  18).  The  Rabbis 
hold  it  to  have  been  the  exclusive  privilege  of  the  kings  to  sit  down  within 
the  Priests'  Court.  ^  This  appears  from  i  Chron.  xxvi.  13-16. 


84  Reign  of  Solomon. 

with  brass,  opened  upon  the  Temple-mount  (2  Chron.  iv.  9). 
In  this  court  were  large  colonnades  and  chambers,  and  rooms 
for  the  use  of  the  priests  and  Levites,  for  the  storage  of  what 
was  required  in  the  services,  and  for  other  purposes.  The 
principal  gate  was,  no  doubt,  the  eastern  (Ezek.  xi.  i),  corre- 
sponding to  the  "  Beautiful  Gate  "  of  New  Testament  times. 
To  judge  by  the  analogy  of  the  other  measurements,  as 
compared  with  those  of  the  Tabernacle,  the  Court  of  the  Priests 
would  be  100  cubits  broad,  and  200  cubits  long,  and  the  Outer 
Court  double  these  proportions  (comp.  also  Ezek.  xl.  27).^ 

Such,  in  its  structure  and  fittings,  was  the  Temple  which 
Solomon  built  to  the  Name  of  Jehovah  God.  Its  further 
history  to  its  destruction,  416  years  after  its  building,  is  traced 
in  the  following  passages  of  Holy  Scripture :  i  Kings  xiv.  26; 
XV.  18,  etc. ;  2  Chron.  xx.  5  ;  2  Kings  xii.  5,  etc. ;  xiv.  14;  xv. 
35 ;  2  Chron.  xxvii.  3 ;  2  Kings  xvi.  8 ;  xviii.  15,  etc. ;  xxi.  4,  5, 
7;  xxiii.  4,  7,  II ;   xxiv.  13;  xxv.  9,  13-17)-^ 

1  It  is  with  exceeding  reluctance  that  I  forbear  entering  on  the 
symbolical  import  of  the  Temple,  of  its  materials,  structure,  and  arrange- 
ments. But  such  discussions  would  evidently  be  outside  the  plan  and 
limits  of  this  Bible  History. 

2  Comparing  the  Temple  of  Solomon  with  that  of  Herod,  the  latter  was, 
of  course,  much  superior,  not  only  as  regards  size,  but  architectural  beauty. 
To  understand  the  difference,  plans  of  the  two  should  be  placed  side  by  side. 

We  add  a  few  remarks  which  may  interest  the  reader.  From  being  so 
largely  constructed  of  cedar-wood,  the  Temple  is  also  figuratively  called 
"Lebanon"  (Zech.  xi.  i).  Among  the  Jewish  legends  connected  with 
the  Temple,  one  of  the  strangest  is  that  about  a  certain  worm  Shamir, 
which,  according  to  Aboth  v.  6,  was  among  the  )en  things  created  on  the 
eve  of  the  world's  first  Sabbath,  just  before  sunset  (see  also  Si/re  on  Dent. 
p.  147,  a).  In  Giit.  86,  a  and  b,  we  are  informed  by  what  artifices  Solomon 
obtained  possession  of  this  worm  from  Ashmedai,  the  prince  of  the  demons. 
This  worm  possessed  the  power,  by  his  touch,  to  cut  the  thickest  stones, 
and  was  therefore  used  by  Solomon  for  this  purpose  (comp.  also  generally 
Gitt.  68  a,  and  Sotah  48  b).  According  to  Joma  53^,  54/',  the  Ark  was 
placed  upon  what  is  called  the  "foundation  stone  of  the  world."  So 
early  as  in  the  Targiim  Pseiido-Jonathaji  ox\.  Exod.  xxviii.  30,  we  read  that 
the  ineffable  Name  of  God  was  engraved  upon  this  stone,  and  that  God 
at  the  first  sealed  up  with  it  the  mouth  of  the  great  deep.  This  may 
serve  as  a  specimen  of  these  legends.  Perhaps  we  should  add  that, 
according  to  later  Rabbis,  the  roof  of  the  Temple  was  not  quite  flat,  but 
slightly  sloping,  yet  probably  not  higher  in  any  part  than  the  parapet  around 


Dedication  of  the  Teinfle,  85 


CHAPTER    VII. 

Dedication  oftfie  Temple— Wtien  it  tool(  place— Connection  witli  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles— Tlie  Consecration  Services— The  King's  part  in  them 
— Symbolical  meaning  of  the  great  Institutions  in  Israel— The  Prayer 
of  Consecration— Analogy  to  the  Lord's  Prayer— The  Consecration 
Thanl(sgiving  and  Offerings. 

(i  Kings  viii.  ;    2  Chron.  v.— vii.  ii.) 

A  T  length  the  great  and  beautiful  house,  which  Solomon  had 
•^^  raised  to  the  Name  of  Jehovah,  and  to  which  so  many 
ardent  thoughts  and  hopes  attached,  was  finished.  Its  solemn 
dedication  took  place  in  the  year  following  its  completion,  and, 
very  significantly,  immediately  before,  and  in  connection  with, 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  Two  questions,  of  some  difficulty 
and  importance,  here  arise.  The  first  concerns  the  circum- 
stance that  the  sacred  text  (i  Kings  vii.  1-12)  records  the 
building  of  Solomon's  palace  immediately  after  that  of  the 
Temple,  and,  indeed,  almost  intermingles  the  two  accounts. 
This  may  partly  have  been  due  to  a  very  natural  desire  on  the 
part  of  the  writer  not  to  break  the  continuity  of  the  account 
of  Solomon's  great  buildings,  the  more  so  as  they  were  all 
completed  by  the  aid  of  Tyrian  workmen,  and  under  the 
supervision  of  Hiram.  But  another  and  more  important  con- 
sideration may  also  have  influenced  the  arrangement  of  the 
narrative.  For,  as  has  been  suggested,  these  two  great  under- 
takings of  Solomon  bore  a  close  relation  to  each  other.  It 
was  not  an  ordinary  Sanctuary,  nor  was  it  an  ordinary  royal 
residence  which  Solomon  reared.  The  building  of  the  Temple 
marked  that  the  preparatory  period  of  Israel's  unsettledness 
had  passed,  when  God  had  walked  with  them  "in  tent  and 
tabernacle" — or,    in  other  words,  that    the  Theocracy  had 


86  Reign  of  Solomon. 

attained  not  only  fixedness,  but  its  highest  point,  when  God 
would  set  "  His  Name  for  ever "  in  its  chosen  centre.  But 
this  new  stage  of  the  Theocracy  was  connected  with  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  firm  and  settled  kingdom  in  Israel,  when  He 
would  "  establish  the  throne  of  that  kingdom  for  ever "  (com- 
pare 2  Sam.  vii.  5-16).  Thus  the  dwelling  of  God  in  His 
Temple  and  that  of  Solomon  in  his  house  were  events  between 
which  there  was  deep  internal  connection,  even  as  between  the 
final  establishment  of  the  Theocracy  and  that  of  David's  royal 
line  in  Israel.  Moreover,  the  king  was  not  to  be  a  monarch 
in  the  usual  Oriental,  or  even  in  the  ancient  Western  sense. 
He  was  to  be  regarded,  not  as  the  Vicegerent  or  Representative 
of  God,  but  as  His  Servajit,  to  do  His  behest  and  to  guard 
His  covenant.  And  this  might  well  be  marked,  even  by  the 
conjunction  of  these  two  buildings  in  the  Scripture  narrative. 

These  considerations  will  also  help  us  to  understand  why 
the  Feast  of  the  Dedication  of  the  Temple  was  connected  with 
that  of  Tabernacles  (of  course,  in  the  year  following).  It  was 
not  only  that,  after  *'  the  eighth  month,"  when  the  Temple  was 
completed,  it  would  have  been  almost  impossible,  considering 
the  season  of  the  year,  to  have  gathered  the  people  from  all 
parts  of  the  country,  or  to  have  celebrated  for  eight  days  a  great 
popular  festival ;  nor  yet  that  of  all  feasts,  that  of  Tabernacles, 
when  agricultural  labour  was  at  an  end,  probably  witnessed  the 
largest  concourse  in  Jerusalem.^  But  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles 
had  a  threefold  meaning.  It  pointed  back  to  the  time  when, 
*'  strangers  and  pilgrims  "  on  their  way  to  the  Land  of  Promise, 
Israel,  under  its  Divine  leadership,  had  dwelt  in  tents.  The 
full  import  of  this  memorial  would  be  best  realised  at  the 
dedication  of  the  Temple,  when,  instead  of  tent  and  tabernacle, 
the  glorious  house  of  God  was  standing  in  all  its  beauty,  while 
the  stately  palace  of  Israel's  king  was  rising.  Again,  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  was  essentially  one  of  thanksgiving,  when  at  the 

^  The  Temple  was  completed  in  the  eighth  month ;  its  dedication  took 
place  in  the  seventh  of  the  next  year.  Ewald  suggests  that  it  was  dedicated 
before  it  was  quite  finished.     But  this  idea  can  scarcely  be  maintained. 


Dedication  of  the  Temple  and  Feast  of  Tabernacles.    Sy 

completion,  not  only  of  the  harvest,  but  of  the  ingathering  of  the 
fruits,  a  grateful  people  presented  its  homage  to  the  God  to 
^Vhom  they  owed  all,  and  to  Whom  all  really  belonged.  But 
what  could  raise  this  hymn  of  praise  to  its  loudest  strains,  if 
not  that  they  uplifted  it  within  those  sacred  walls,  symbolical  of 
God's  gracious  Presence  as- King  in  His  palace  in  the  midst  of 
His  people,  whose  kingdom  He  had  established  ?  Lastly,  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles — the  only  still  unfulfilled  Old  Testament 
type — pointed  forward  to  the  time  of  which  the  present  state  of 
Israel  was  an  initial  realisation,  when  the  Name  of  the  Lord 
should  be  known  far  and  wide  to  earth's  utmost  bounds,  and 
all  nations  seek  after  Him  and  offer  worship  in  His  Temple. 
Thus,  however  viewed,  there  was  the  deepest  significance  in 
the  conjunction  of  the  dedication  of  the  Temple  with  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

But,  as  previously  stated,  there  is  yet  another  question  of 
somewhat  greater  difficulty  which  claims  our  attention.  To 
judge  by  the  arrangement  of  the  narrative,  the  dedication  of 
the  Temple  (i  Kings  viii.)  might  seem  to  have  taken  place 
a/fer  the  completion  of  Solomon's  palace,  the  building  of 
which,  as  we  know,  occupied  further  thirteen  years  (i  Kings 
vii.  i).  Moreover,  from  the  circumstance  that  the  second 
vision  of  God  was  vouchsafed  "when  Solomon  had  finished 
the  building  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  the  king's  house, 
and  all  Solomon's  desire  which  he  was  pleased  to  do"  (i  Kings 
IX.  i),  it  has  been  argued,  that  the  dedication  of  the  Temple 
must  have  taken  place  immediately  before  this  vision,  es- 
pecially as  what  was  said  to  him  seems  to  contain  pointed 
reference  to  the  consecration  prayer  of  Solomon  (i  Kings  ix.  3, 
7,  8).  But,  even  if  that  vision  took  place  at  the  time  just 
indicated,^  the  supposed  inference  from  it  cannot  be  maintained. 

^  At  the  same  time,  I  confess  that  I  am  by  no  means  convinced  that 
such  was  the  case.  The  language  of  i  Kings  ix.  i  should  not  be  too 
closely  pressed,  and  may  be  intended  as  a  sort  of  general  transition 
from  the  subject  previously  treated  to  that  in  hand.  The  brief  notices  in 
2  Chron.  vii.  seem  rather  to  favour  this  idea. 


88  Reign  of  Solomon, 

For,  although  part  of  the  sacred  vessels  may  have  been  made 
during  the  time  that  Hiram  was  engaged  upon  Solomon's 
palace,  it  is  not  credible  that  the  Temple  should,  after  its 
completion,  have  stood  deserted  and  unused  for  thirteen  years. 
Nor  are  the  arguments  in  favour  of  this  most  improbable 
assumption  valid.  The  appeal  to  i  Kings  ix.  i  would  oblige 
us  to  date  the  dedication  of  the  Temple  even  later  than  the 
completion  of  Solomon's  palace,  viz.,  after  he  had  finished  all 
his  other  building  operations.  As  for  the  words  which  the 
Lord  spake  to  Solomon  in  vision  (2  Kings  ix.  3-9),  although 
bearing  reference  to  the  Temple  and  the  king's  dedication 
prayer,  they  are  evidently  intended  rather  as  a  general  warning, 
than  as  an  answer  to  his  petition,  and  are  such  as  would  befit 
the  period  of  temptation,  before  Solomon,  carried  away  by  the 
splendour  of  his  success,  yielded  himself  to  the  luxury,  weak- 
ness, and  sin  of  his  older  age.  From  all  these  considerations 
we  conclude  that  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication,  which  lasted 
seven  days,  took  place  in  the  seventh  month,  that  of  Ethanim, 
or  of  "flowing  brooks  "^  (the  later  Tishri),  of  the  year  after  the 
completion  of  the  Temple  (eleven  months  after  it),  and  imme- 
diately before  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  which,  with  the 
concluding  solemnity,  lasted  eight  days. 

The  account  of  the  dedication  of  the  Temple  may  be  con- 
veniently ranged  under  these  three  particulars  :  the  Consecration- 
Services^  the  Consecration-Prayer^  and  the  Co?isecration- Thanks- 
giving and  Festive  Offerings.  But  before  describing  them,  it  is 
necessary  to  call  attention  to  the  remarkable  circumstance  that 
the  chief,  if  not  almost  the  sole  prominent  agent  in  these 
services,  was  the  king^  the  high-priest  not  being  even  men- 
tioned. Not  that  Solomon  in  any  way  interfered  with,  or 
arrogated  to  himself  the  functions  of  the  priesthood,  but  that, 
in  the  part  which  he  took,  he  fully  acted  up  to  the  spirit  of  the 
monarchical  institution  as  founded  in  Israel.  Solomon  was 
not  "  king "  according  to  the  Saxon  idea  of  cyni7ig — cunning, 

^  This  rendering  of  the  term  "  Ethanim,"  seems  preferable  to  that  of 
"gifts,"  viz.,  fruits  (Thenius),  or  of  "stand  still,"  viz.,    equinox  (Bottche). 


The  Dedication  and  its  Services.  89 

mighty,  illustrious,  the  embodiment  of  strength.  According 
to  the  terms  of  the  Covenant,  all  Israel  were  God's  servants 
(Lev.  XXV.  42,  55;  comp.  Isa.  xli.  8,  9;  xliv.  i,  2,  21;  xlv.  4; 
xlix.  3,  6 ;  Jer.  xxx.  10,  and  others).  As  such  they  were  to  be 
*'  a  kingdom  of  priests  "  (Exod.  xix.  6) — "  the  priest,"  in  the 
stricter  sense  of  the  term,  being  only  the  representative  of 
the  people,  with  certain  distinctive  functions  ad  hoc.  But 
what  the  nation  was,  as  a  whole,  that  Israel's  theocratic 
king  y^duS  pre-eminently :  the  servant  of  the  Lord  (i  Kings 
viii.  25,  28,  29,  52,  59).  It  was  in  this  capacity  that  Solomon 
acted  at  the  dedication  of  the  Temple,  as  his  own  words 
frequently  indicate  (see  the  passages  just  quoted).  In  this 
manner  the  innermost  and  deepest  idea  of  the  character  of 
Israel  and  of  Israel's  king  as  "the  servant"  of  the  Lord, 
became,  so  to  speak,  more  and  more  individualized  during  the 
progress  of  the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  till  it  stood  out  in 
all  its  fulness  in  the  Messiah — the  climax  of  Israel  and  of 
Israelitish  institutions — Who  is  the  Servant  of  Jehovah.  Thus 
we  perceive  that  the  common  underlying  idea  of  the  three 
great  institutions  in  Israel,  which  connected  them  all,  was 
that  of  the  Servant  of  Jehovah.  The  prophet  who  uttered 
the  voice  of  heaven  upon  earth  was  the  servant  of  Jehovah 
(comp.,  for  example,  Numb.  xii.  7,  8;  Josh.  i.  2;  Isa.  xx.  3, 
€tc.).i  So  was  the  priest,  who  spake  the  voice  of  earth  to 
heaven  \  and  the  king,  who  made  heaven's  voice  to  be  heard 
on  earth.  That  which  gave  its  real  meaning  equally  to  this 
threefold  function — downwards,  upwards,  outwards — was  the 
grand  fact  that  in  each  of  them  it  was  the  Servant  of  Jehovah 
who  was  acting,  or,  in  other  words,  that  God  was  all  in  all. 
With  these  general  principles  in  view  we  shall  be  better  able 
to  understand  what  follows. 

I.    The  Consecration-Services   (i    Kings   viii.   1-2 1). — These 
commenced  with  the  transference  of  the  Ark  and  of  the  other 

J  It  is  impossible  here  to  do  more  than  indicate  this  train  of  thought. 
The  reader  will  be  able  to  make  out  a  perfect  catena  of  confirmatory 
passages,  extending  over  almost  all  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture,  or 
from  age  to  age. 


90  Reign  of  Solomon. 

holy  vessels  from  Mount  Zion,  and  of  the  ancient  Mosaic 
Tabernacle  from  Gibeon.  The  latter  and  the  various  other 
relics  of  those  earlier  services  were,  as  we  have  suggested, 
placed  in  the  chambers  built  around  the  new  Sanctuary.  In 
accordance  with  the  Divine  direction,  the  whole  of  this  part  of 
the  service  was  performed  by  the  Priests  and  Levites,  attended 
by  the  king,  "  the  elders  of  Israel,  the  heads  of  the  tribes,  and 
the  princes  (of  the  houses)  of  the  fathers  of  Israel,"  who,  as 
representatives  of  the  people,  had  been  specially  summoned 
for  the  purpose.  As  this  solemn  procession  entered  the  sacred 
courts,  amidst  a  vast  concourse  of  people,  numberless  offerings 
were  brought.  Then  the  Ark  was  carried  to  its  place  in  the 
innermost  Sanctuary.^  As  the  priests  reverently  retired  from 
it,  and  were  about  to  minister  in  the  Holy  Place  ^ — perhaps  to 
burn  incense  on  the  Golden  Altar — "  the  cloud,"  as  the  visible 
symbol  of  God's  Presence,  came  down,  as  formerly  at  the  con- 
secration of  the  Tabernacle  (Ex.  xl.  34,  35),  and  so  filled  the 
whole  of  the  Temple  itself,  that  the  priests,  unable  to  bear 
"  the  glory,"  had  to  retire  from  their  ministry.  But  even  here 
also  we  mark  the  characteristic  difference  between  the  Old  and 
the  New  Dispensations,  to  which  St.  Paul  calls  attention  in 
another  connection  (2  Cor.  iii.  13-18).  For  whereas,  under 
the  preparatory  dispensation  God  dwelt  in  a  "  cloud  "  and  in 
"  thick  darkness,"  we  all  now  behold  "  the  glory  of  God "  in 
the  Face  of  His  Anointed.^ 

^  The  expression,  l  Kings  viii.  9,  seems  to  be  incompatible  with  the 
notice  in  Hebrews  ix.  4.  But  not  only  according  to  the  Talmud  {Jonta 
52.  b),  but  according  to  uniform  Jewish  tradition  (see  apiid  Delitzsch 
Covivi.  z.  Br.  mi  die  Hebj'.  p.  361),  what  is  mentioned  in  Ileb.  ix.  4  had 
been  really  placed  in  the  Ark,  although  the  emphatic  notice  in  i  Kings 
viii.  9  indicates  that  it  was  no  longer  there  in  the  time  of  Solomon. 
It  may  have  been  removed  previous  to,  or  after  the  capture  of  the  Ark 
by  the  Philistines. 

-  The  Book  of  Chronicles  (2  Chron.  v.  12-14)  characteristically  notes 
that  the  Priests  and  Levites  were  raising  holy  chant  and  music. 

3  Bahr  here  quotes  this  ancient  comment  :  Ncbiiki  Dens  se  et  reprc- 
sejtiabai  et  velabai,  and  Buxtorf  (//w/.  Arcce  Foed.  ed.  Bas.  1659,  p.  115) 
adduces  a  very  apt  passage  from  Abarbanel. 


TJie  ^^ Cloudy  Presence''  in  the  Temple.  91 

This  was  the  real  consecration  of  the  Temple.  And  now 
the  king,  turning  towards  the  Most  Holy  Place,  filled  with  the 
Sacred  Presence,  spake  these  words  of  dedication,  brief  as 
became  the  solemnity :  "  Jehovah  hath  said  :  to  dwell  in  dark- 
ness— Building,  I  have  built  an  house  of  habitation  to  Thee, 
and  a  settling-place  for  Thy  dwelling  ever  !"  In  this  reference 
to  what  Jehorah  had  said,  it  would  not  be  any  single  utterance 
which  presented  itself  to  Solomon's  mind.  Rather  would  he 
think  of  them  in  their  connection  and  totality — as  it  were,  a 
golden  chain  of  precious  promises  welded  one  to  the  other,  of 
which  the  last  link  seemed  riveted  to  the  solemnity  then 
enacting.  Such  sayings  as  Ex.  xix.  9  ;  xx.  21;  Lev.  xvi.  2  ;  Deut. 
iv.  1 1 ;  V.  2  2  would  crowd  upon  his  memory,  and  seem  fully 
realised  as  he  beheld  the  Cloudy  Presence  in  the  Holy  House. 
Thus  it  is  often  not  one  particular  promise  or  prophecy  which  is 
referred  to  when  we  read  in  Holy  Scripture  these  words  :  "  That 
it  might  be  fulfilled,"  but  rather  a  whole  series  which  culminate 
in  some  one  great  fact  (as,  for  example,  in  Matt.  ii.  15,  23). 
Nor  should  we  forget  that,  when  the  king  spoke  of  the  Temple 
as  God's  dwelling  for  ever,  the  symbolical  character  alike  of  the 
manifestation  of  His  Presence  and  of  its  place  could  not  have 
been  absent  from  his  mind.  But  the  symbolical  necessarily 
implies  the  temporary,  being  of  the  nature  of  an  accommoda- 
tion to  circumstances,  persons,  and  times.  What  was  for  ever 
was  not  the  form,  but  the  substance — not  the  manner  nor  the 
place,  but  the  fact  of  God's  Presence  in  the  midst  of  His 
people.  And  what  is  real  and  eternal  is  the  Kingdom  of  God 
in  its  widest  sense,  and  God's  Presence  in  grace  among  His 
worshipping  people,  as  fully  realised  in  Jesus  Christ. 

When  the  king  had  spoken  these  words,  he  turned  from  the 
Sanctuary  to  the  people  who  reverently  stood  to  hear  his  bene- 
dictory "address."  ^  Briefly  recounting  the  gracious  promises 
and  experiences  of  the  past,  he  pointed  to  the  present  as  their 

^  It  is  thus,  and  not  as  implying  any  actual  benediction,  either  uttered 
or  silent,  that  I  understand  the  words  1  Kings  viii.  14. 


g2  Reign  of  Soloinoii. 

fulfilment,  specially  applying  to  it,  in  the  manner  already 
described,  what  God  had  said  to  David  (2  Sam.  vii.  7,  8).^ 

2.  The  Prayer  of  Consecration. — This  brief  address  concluded, 
the  king  ascended  the  brazen  pulpit-like  platform  "before  the 
altar  "  (of  burnt  offering),  and  with  his  face,  probably  sideways, 
towards  the  people,  knelt  down  with  hands  outspread  in 
prayer  (comp.  2  Chron.  vi.  12,  13). 

It  seems  like  presumption  and  impertinence  to  refer  in 
laudatory  terms  to  what  for  comprehensiveness,  sublimeness, 
humility,  faith,  and  earnestness  has  no  parallel  in  the  Old 
Testament,  and  can  only  be  compared  with  the  prayer  which 
our  Lord  taught  His  disciples.  ^  Like  the  latter,  it  consists  of 
^n  introduction  (i  Kings  viii.  23-30),  of  seven  petitions  (the 
covenant-number,  vers.  31-53),  and  of  a  eulogetic  close 
(2  Chron.  vi.  40-42).  The  Introduction  sounds  like  an  Old 
Testament  version  of  the  words  "  Our  Father  "  (vers.  23-26), 
^'  which  art  in  heaven  "  (vers.  27-30).  It  would  be  out  of  place 
here  to  enter  into  any  detailed  analysis.  Suffice  it  to  indicate  the 
leading  Scriptural  references  in  it — as  it  were,  the  spiritual 
stepping-stones  of  the  prayer — and  one  or  another  of  its  out- 
standing points.  Marking  how  a  review  of  the  gracious  dealings 
in  the  past  should  lead  to  confideiice  in  present  petitions  (comp. 
Matt.  xxi.    22;   Mark  xi.    24;  James  i.   6),  reference  should 

^  Compare  the  fuller  account  in  2  Chron.  vi.  5,  6. 

2  It  is  one  of  its  many  extraordinary  instances  of  "begging  the  ques- 
tion," that  modern  criticism  boldly  declares  this  whole  prayer  spurious, 
or  rather  relegates  its  composition  to  a  much  later  date,  even  so  far  as  the 
Babylonish  exile  !  The  only  objective  ground  by  which  this  dictiini  is  sup- 
ported, is  the  circumstance  that  the  prayer  is  full  of  references  to  the  Book 
of  Deuteronomy — which  modern  criticism  has  ruled  to  be  non- Mosaic, 
and  of  much  later  date — ergo,  this  prayer  must  share  its  fate  !  This  kind  of 
reasoning  is,  in  fact,  to  derive  from  one  unproved  hypothesis  another  even 
more  unlikely  !  For  we  have  here,  first,  the  accordant  accounts  (with  but 
slight  variations)  in  I  Kings  and  2  Chron.  ;  while,  secondly  (as  Bleek  has 
remarked),  the  wording  of  the  prayer  implies  a  time  and  conditions  when 
the  Temple,  Jerusalem,  and  the  Davidic  throne  were  still  extant.  To 
this  we  may  add,  that  the  whole  tone  and  conception  is  not  at  all  in 
accordance  with,  or  what  we  would  have  expected  at,  the  time  of  the  exile. 


J  he  Prayei'  of  Consecration.  93 

be  made  in  connection  with  verses  23-26  to  the  following 
passages  :  Ex.  xv.  11 ;  Deut.  iv.  39 ;  vii.  9  ;  Josh.  ii.  11 ;  2  Sam. 
vii.  12-22;  xxii.  32;  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  8.  In  regard  to  the  second 
part  of  the  Introduction  (vers.  27-30),  we  specially  note  the 
emphatic  assertion,  that  He,  Whose  Presence  they  saw  in  the 
cloud,  was  really  in  ^^  heaven, ^^  and  yet  ^^our  Father,"  who  art 
upon  earth.  These  two  ideas  seem  carried  out  in  it :  (i)  Not 
as  heathenism  does,  do  we  locate  God  here ;  nor  yet  will  we, 
as  carnal  Israel  did  (Jer.  vii.  4;  Mic.  iii.  11),  imagine  that  ex 
opere  operato  (by  any  mere  deed  of  ours)  God  will  necessarily 
attend  even  to  His  own  appointed  services  in  His  house.  Our 
faith  rises  higher — from  the  Seen  to  the  Unseen — from  the  God 
of  Israel  to  our  Father ;  it  reaHses  the  spiritual  relationship  of 
children,  which  alone  contains  the  pledge  of  His  blessing ;  and 
through  which,  though  He  be  in  heaven,  yet  faith  knows  and 
addresses  Him  as  an  ever-present  help.  Thus  Solomon's 
prayer  avoided  ahke  the  two  extremes  of  unspiritual  realism 
and  of  unreal  spiritualism. 

'Y\iQ  first  petitio7i  (vers.  31,  32)  in  the  stricter  sense  opens 
the  prayer,  which  in  ver.  28  had  been  outlined,  according  to 
its  prevailing  characteristics,  as  "petition,"  "prayer  for  mercy" 
(forgiveness  and  grace),  and  "thanksgiving"  (praise).^  It  is 
essentially  an  Old  Testament  "  Hallowed  be  Thy  Name,"  in  its 
application  to  the  sanctity  of  an  oath  as  its  highest  expression^ 
inasmuch  as  thereby  the  reality  of  God's  hoHness  is  challenged. 
The  analogy  between  the  secofid petition  (vers.  33,  34)  and  that 
in  the  Lord's  Prayer  is  not  so  evident  at  first  sight.  But  it  is 
none  the  less  real,  since  its  ideal  fulfilment  would  mark  the 
coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  which  neither  sin  from  within 
nor  enemy  from  without  could  endanger.  The  references  in 
this  petition  seem  to  be  to  Lev.  xxvi.  3,  7,  14,  17 ;  Deut.  xxviii. 
1-7,  15-25 ;  and  again  to  Lev.  xxvi.  33,  and  40-42,  and  Deut. 
iv.  26-28  ;  xxviii.  64-68,  andiv.  29-31  j  xxx.  1-5.  The  organic 

^  In  the  Authorised  Version,  inaccurately,  "prayer,"  "supplication," 
"cry;"  in  the  Hebrew,  Tephillah  (from  the  Hiihpael  oi  Palal),  Techinitah 
(from  the  Hithp.  of  Chanan),  and  Rinnah  (from  Ranan). 


94  Reign  of  Solomon. 

connection,  so  to  speak,  between  heaven  and  earth,  which  lies 
at  the  basis  of  the  third  petition  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  is  also 
expressed  in  that  of  Solomon  (vers.  35,  36).  Only  in  the  one 
case  we  have  the  New  Testament  realisation  of  that  grand  idea, 
or  rather  ideal,  while  in  the  other  we  have  its  Old  Testament 
aspect.  The  references  here  are  to  Lev.  xxvi.  19;  Deut.  xi.  17  ; 
xxviii.  23,  24.  At  the  same  time  the  rendering  of  our  Autho- 
rised Version  (i  Kings  viii.  35) :  *' When  Thou  afflictest  them," 
should  be  altered  to,  "  Because  Thou  humblest  them,"  which 
indicates  the  moral  effect  of  God's  discipline,  and  the  last  link 
in  the  chain  of  true  repentance. 

The  correspondence  between  the  fourth  petition  in  the 
Solomonic  (vers.  37-40)  and  in  our  Lord's  Prayer  will  be  evident 
—  always  keeping  in  view  the  difference  between  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament  standpoint.  But  perhaps  verses 
38-40  may  mark  the  transition  from,  and  connection  between 
the  first  and  second  parts  of  the  prayer.  The  fifth  petition 
(vers.  41-43),  which  concerns  the  acceptance  of  the  prayers  of 
strangers  (not  proselytes),  is  based  on  the  idea  of  the  great 
mutual  forgiveness  by  those  who  are  forgiven  of  God,  fully 
realised  in  the  abolition  of  the  great  enmity  and  separation,  which 
was  to  give  place  to  a  common  brotherhood  of  love  and  service 
— "  that  all  the  people  of  the  earth  may  know  Thy  Name,  to 
fear  Thee,  as  Thy  people  Israel."  Here  also  we  note  the  dif- 
ference between  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament  form  of  the 
petition — a  remark  which  must  equally  be  kept  in  view  in 
regard  to  the  other  two  petitions.  These,  indeed,  seem  to  bear 
only  a  very  distant  analogy  to  the  concluding  portion  of  the 
Lord's  Prayer.  Yet  that  there  was  real  "temptation"  to  Israel, 
and  real  "deliverance  from  evil"  sought  in  these  petitions, 
appears  from  the  language  of  confession  put  into  the  mouth  of 
the  captives  (ver.  47),  which,  as  we  know,  was  literally  adopted 
by  those  in  Babylon  ^  (Dan.  ix.  5;  Ps.  cvi.  6).     Here  sin  is 

^  It  would  seem  almost  too  great  a  demand  upon  our  credence,  even  by 
**  advanced  criticism,"  that,  because  these  expressions  were  taken  up  by 
the  exiles  in  Babylon,  they  originated  at  that  time. 


Consecration  Thanksgiving  and  Offerings.        95 

presented  in  its  threefold  aspect  2iS  failure,  so  far  as  regards  the 
goal,  or  stumbling  and  falling  (in  the  Authorised  Version  *'  we 
have  sinned  " )  \  then  as  perversion  (literally,  making  crooked) ; 
and,  lastly,  as  tiwiidtuous  rebellion  (in  the  Authorised  Version 
"committed  wickedness").  Lastly,  the  three  concluding 
verses  (vers.  51-53)  maybe  regarded  either  as  the  argument 
for  the  last  petitions,  or  else  as  an  Old  Testament  version  of 
**  Thine  is  the  kingdom,  and  the  power,  and  the  glory."  But 
the  whole  prayer  is  the  opening  of  the  door  into  heaven — a  door 
moving,  if  the  expression  be  lawful,  on  the  two  hinges  of  sin 
and  oi  grace,  of  need  Siud  of  provision. 

3.  27ie  Consecration-Thanksgiving  and  Offerings. — ^To  the 
prayer  of  Solomon,  the  descent  of  fire  upon  the  great  altar — 
probably  from  out  the  Cloudy  Presence  ^ — which  is  recorded  in 
2  Chron.  vii.  i,  seems  a  most  appropriate  answer  2  (comp. 
Lev.  ix.  24).  Little  requires  to  be  added  to  the  simple  account 
of  what  followed.  Rising  from  his  knees,  the  king  turned 
once  more  to  the  people,  and  expressed  the  feelings  of  all 
in  terms  of  mingled  praise  and  prayer,  basing  them  on  such 
Scriptural  passages  as  Deut.  xii.  9,  loj  Josh.  xxi.  44,  etc.; 
xxiii.  14,  and,  in  the  second  part  of  his  address,  on  Lev.  xxvi. 
3-13  ;  Deut.  xxviii.  1-14.  But  it  deserves  special  notice,  that 
throughout  (as  Thenius  has  well  remarked)  the  tone  is  of  the 
loftiest  spirituality.  For,  if  the  king  asks  for  continued  help  and 
blessing  from  the  Lord,  it  is  for  the  express  purpose  "  that  He 
may  incline  our  hearts  to  Him  "  (comp.  Ps.  cxix.  36 ;  cxli.  4), 
*'to  keep  His  commandments  "  (i  Kings  viii.  58) ;  and,  if  he  looks 
for  answers  to  prayer  (ver.  59),  it  is  "that  all  the  people  of  the 
earth  may  know  that  Jehovah  is  God,  and  that  there  is  none 
else  "  (ver.  60). 

1  2  Chron.  vii.  i  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  there  was  a  second 
manifestation  of  "the  glory  of  Jehovah." 

"  It  is  certainly  a  fact,  that  this  circumstance  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
narrative  in  the  Book  of  Kings.  But  from  this  it  is  a  very  long  and  ven- 
turesome step  to  the  conclusion,  that  this  is  an  addition  or  interpolation  on 
the  part  of  the  writer  or  editor  of  the  Books  of  Chronicles,  the  more  so  as 
"Kings"  and  "Chronicles"  alternately  record  or  omit  other  important 
events. 


96  Reign  of  Solomon. 

Lastly,  we  have  an  account  of  the  vast  number  i  of  festive 
offerings  which  Solomon  and  all  Israel  ^  brought,  and  of  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  3  with  which  the  solemn  dedication- services 
concluded. 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

7hB  Surroundings  of  the  Temple— Description  of  Jerusalem  at  ttie  time 
of  Solomon— The  Palace  of  Solomon— Solomon's  fortified  Cities-^ 
External  relations  of  the  Kingdom— Internal  State— Trade— Wealth 
—Luxury— The  visit  of  the  Queen  of  Sheba. 

(i  Kings  ix.,  x.;  2  Chron.  vii.  ii-ix.  28.) 

T  T  7e  have  now  reached  the  period  of  Solomon's  greatest 
^  ^  worldly  splendour,  which,  as  alas  !  so  often,  marks  also 
that  of  spiritual  decay.  The  building  of  the  Temple  was  not 
the  first,  nor  yet  the  last,  of  his  architectural  undertakings. 
Mount  Moriah  was  too  small  to  hold  on  its  summit  the  Temple 
itself,  even  without  its  courts  and  other  buildings.  Accordingly, 

1  Canon  Rawlinson  {Speaker's  Commentary,  ii.  p.  533)  has  shown,  by 
numerous  quotations,  that  these  sacrifices  were  not  out  of  proportion  to 
others  recorded  in  antiquity.  As  to  the  time  necessarily  occupied  in  these 
sacrifices,  we  have  the  historical  notice  of  Josephus  {/eivish  War,  vi.  9,  3), 
that  on  one  occasion  not  fewer  than  256,000  Passover-lambs  were  offered, 
the  time  occupied  being  just  three  hours  of  an  afternoon.  It  is  also  to  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  killing  and  preparing  of  the  sacrifices  was  not 
necessarily  the  duty  of  priests  or  even  Levites,  the  strictly  priestly  function 
being  only  that  of  sprinkling  the  blood.  Lastly,  we  are  distinctly  informed 
(i  Kings  viii.  64)  that  supplementary  altars — besides  the  great  altar  of 
burnt  offering — were  used  on  this  occasion. 

2  We  are  expressly  told  in  ver.  62,  that  these  offerings  were  brought 
not  only  by  the  king  but  by  all  Israel. 

^  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  lasted  seven  days  and  closed  on  the  after- 
noon of  the  eighth  with  the  clausiira  or  solemn  dismissal  (comp.  Lev. 
xxiii.  33-39)- 


Jo'iisalem  in  the  Days  of  Solomon.  97 

as  we  learn  from  Josephus  {Ant.  xv.  11,  3),  extensive  substruc- 
tures had  to  be  reared.  Thus,  the  level  of  the  Temple-mount 
was  enlarged  both  east  and  west,  in  order  to  obtain  a  sufficient 
area  for  the  extensive  buildings  upon  it.  These  rose  terrace 
upon  terrace — each  court  higher  than  the  other,  and  the  Sanc- 
tuary itself  higher  than  its  courts.  We  are  probably  correct  in 
the  supposition  that  the  modern  Mosque  of  Omar  occupies  the 
very  site  of  the  ancient  Temple  of  Solomon,  and  that  over 
the  celebrated  rock  in  it — according  to  Jewish  tradition,  the 
very  spot  where  Abraham  offered  up  Isaac — the  great  altar  of 
burnt-offering  had  risen.  Before  the  building  of  the  Sanctuary 
itself  could  have  been  commenced,  the  massive  substructures 
of  the  Temple  must  have  been  at  least  partially  completed, 
although  these  and  the  outbuildings  were  probably  continued 
during  many  years,  perhaps  many  reigns,  after  the  completion 
of  the  Temple. 

The  same  remarks  apply  to  another  structure  connected 
with  the  Temple,  called  "Parbar"  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  18).  As 
already  explained,  the  outer  court  of  the  Temple  had  four 
massive  gates  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  13-16),  of  which  the  western- 
most opened  upon  "  Parbar  "  or  "  Parvarim  "  (perhaps  "  co- 
lonnade ").  This  seems  to  have  been  an  annex  to  the  western 
side  of  the  Temple,  fitted  up  as  chambers,  stables  for  sacri- 
ficial animals,  etc.  (2  Kings  xxiii.  ii,  where  our  Authorised 
Version  wrongly  renders  "  Parvarim  "  by  "  suburbs  ").  From 
Parbar  steps  led  down  to  the  Tyropoeon,  or  deep  valley  which 
intersected  the  city  east  and  west.    • 

Although  anything  like  an  attempt  at  detailed  description 
would  here  be  out  of  place,  it  seems  desirable,  in  order  to  realise 
the  whole  circumstances,  to  give  at  least  a  brief  sketch  of 
Jerusalem,  as  Solomon  found,  and  as  he  left  it.  Speaking 
generally,  Jerusalem  was  built  on  the  two  opposite  hills  (east 
and  west),  between  which  the  Tyropoeon  runs  south-east  and 
then  south.  The  eastern  hill  is  about  100  feet  lower  than 
the  western.  Its  northern  summit  is  Mount  Moriah,  which 
slopes  down  into  Ophel  (about  50  feet  lower),  aftenvards  the 

PI 


98  Reign  of  Solomoii. 

suburb  of  the  priests.  Some  modern  writers  have  regarded  this 
as  the  ancient  fort  of  the  Jebusites,  and  as  the  site  of  the  "  City 
of  David,"  the  original  Mount  Zion.  Although  this  is  opposed 
to  the  common  traditional  view,  which  regards  the  western  hill 
as  Mount  Zion,  the  arguments  in  favour  of  identifying  it  with 
the  eastern  hill  seem  very  strong.  These  it  would,  of  course, 
be  impossible  here  to  detail.  But  we  may  say  that  the  history 
of  David's  purchase  of  the  threshing-floor  of  Oman  the  Jebusite 
(2  Sam.  xxiv.  16-24;  ^  Chron.  xxi.  15-25)  conveys  these  two 
facts  :  that  the  Jebusites  had  settlements  on  the  western  hill, 
and  that  David's  palace  (which,  as  we  know,  was  in  the  City 
of  David)  was  close  by,  only  a  little  lower  than  Mount  Moriah, 
since  David  so  clearly  saw  from  his  palace  the  destroying 
Angel  over  the  threshing-floor  of  Oman.  All  this  agrees  with 
the  idea,  that  the  original  stronghold  of  the  Jebusites  was  on 
the  slopes  of  Moriah  and  Ophel,  and  that  David  built  his 
palace  in  that  neighbourhood,  below  the  summit  of  Moriah.^ 
Lastly,  if  the  term  "  Mount  Zion "  included  Moriah,  we  can 
understand  the  peculiar  sacredness  which  throughout  Holy 
Scripture  attaches  to  that  name.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the 
regular  quarter  of  the  Jebusites  was  on  the  western  hill,  to- 
wards the  slope  of  the  Tyropoeon,  while  the  Jewish  Benjamite 
quarter  (the  Upper  City)  was  on  the  higher  terrace  above  it 
(eastwards).  Fort  Millo  was  on  the  north-eastern  angle  of  the 
Western  City.  Here  King  David  had  continued  the  wall,  which 
had  formerly  enclosed  the  western  hill  northward  and  west- 
ward, drawing  it  eastward,  so  as  to  make  (the  western)  Jeru- 

^  The  above  would  give  a  new  view  of  the  taking  of  the  fortress  of  Jebus 
by  Joab.  There  undoubtedly  existed  a  subterranean  watercourse  dug 
through  the  solid  rock  on  which  Jebus  stood  on  Ophel,  leading  down  to 
the  "  En-Rogel,"  or  "Fountain  of  the  Virgin!"  It  is  suggested,  that  with 
the  connivance  of  Aravnah,  Joab  undertook  the  daring  feat  of  climbing  up 
into  Jebus  by  this  "gutter,"  and  opening  the  gates  to  his  comrades.  This 
would  also  account  for  the  presence  of  the  Jebusite  Aravnah  on  the  neigh- 
bouring Moriah  during  the  later  years  of  David's  reign,  and  explain  the 
isomewhat  difficult  passage,  2  Sam.  v.  8.  Comp.  Warren's  Recovery  of 
Jerusalem^  pp.  244-255. 


The  Palace  of  Solomon.  99 

salem  a  complete  fortress  (2  Sam.  v.  9 ;  i  Chron.  xi.  8).  On 
the  opposite  (eastern)  side  of  the  Tyropoeon  was  the  equally- 
fortified  (later)  Ophel.  Solomon  now  connected  these  two 
fortresses  by  enlarging  Millo  and  continuing  the  wall  across 
the  Tyropceon  (i  Kings  iii.  i ;    ix.  15  ;  xi.  27). 

Without  referring  to  the  various  buildings  which  Solomon 
reared,  it  may  be  safely  asserted  that  the  city  must  have 
rapidly  increased  in  population.  Indeed,  during  the  prosperous 
reign  of  Solomon  it  probably  attained  as  large,  if  not  larger, 
proportions  than  at  any  time  before  the  Exile.  The  wealthier 
part  of  the  population  occupied  the  western  terraces  of  the 
west  hill — the  Upper  City — the  streets  running  north  and 
south.  The  eastern  slopes  of  the  west  hill  were  covered  by 
"  the  middle  city  "  (2  Kings  xx.  4,  marginal  rendering).  It  will 
have  been  noticed,  that  as  yet  only  the  soiither7i  parts  of  both 
the  eastern  and  western  hills  of  Jerusalem  had  been  built  over. 
King  Solomon  now  reared  the  Temple  on  Mount  Moriah,  which 
formed  the  northern  slope  of  the  eastern  hill,  while  the  increase 
of  the  population  soon  led  to  building  operations  on  the  side 
of  the  western  hill  opposite  to  it.  Here  the  city  extended 
beyond  the  old  wall,  north  of  "  the  middle  city,"  occupying  the 
northern  part  of  the  Tyropoeon.  This  was  "the  other"  or  "second 
part  of  the  city"  (2  Kings  xxii.  14;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  22;  Neh. 
xi.  9,  the  "  maktesh  "  or  "  mortar  "  of  Zeph.  i.  11).  Here  was  the 
real  business  quarter,  with  its  markets,  "fishgate,"  "sheepgate," 
and  bazaars,  such  as  the  "Baker  Street"  (Jer.  xxxvii.  21),  the 
quarters  of  the  goldsmiths  and  other  merchants  (Neh.  iii.  8, 
32),  the  "valley  of  the  cheesemongers,"  etc.  This  suburb  must 
have  been  soon  inclosed  by  a  wall.  We  do  not  know  when  or 
by  whom  the  latter  was  commenced,  but  we  have  notices  of  its 
partial  destruction  (2  Kings  xiv.  13;  2  Chron.  xxv.  23),  and  of 
its  repair  (2  Chron.  xxxii.  5). 

We  have  purposely  not  taken  account  of  the  towers  and  gates 
of  the  city,  since  what  has  been  described  will  sufficiently 
explain  the  location  of  the  great  palace  which  Solomon  built 
during  the  thirteen  years  after  the  completion  of  the  Temple 


100  Reign  of  Solomon. 

(i  Kings  vil.  1-12  ;  2  Chron.  viii.  i).  Its  site  was  the  eastern 
terrace  of  the  western  hill,  probably  the  same  as  that  after- 
wards occupied  by  the  palace  of  the  Asmonaeans  (Maccabees) 
and  of  Agrippa  11.  The  area  covered  by  this  magnificent 
building  was  four  times  that  of  the  Holy  House  (not  including 
its  courts).  It  stood  right  over  against  the  Temple.  A 
descent  led  from  the  Palace  into  the  Tyropceon,  and  thence  a 
special  magnificent  "ascent"  (2  Chron.  ix.  4)  to  the  royal 
entrance  (2  Kings  xvi.  18),  probably  at  the  south-western 
angle  of  the  Temple.  The  site  was  happily  chosen — pro- 
tected by  Fort  Millo,  and  looking  out  upon  the  Temple-Mount, 
while  south  of  it  stretched  the  wealthy  quarter  of  the  city. 
Ascending  from  the  Tyropoeon,  one  would  pass  through  a  kind 
of  ante-building  into  a  porch,  and  thence  into  a  splendid  colon- 
nade. This  colonnade  connected  "  the  house  of  the  forest  of 
Lebanon,"  so  called  from  the  costly  cedars  used  in  its  con- 
struction, with  "the  porch  for  the  throne,"  where  Solomon 
pronounced  judgment  (i  Kings  vii.  6,  7).  Finally,  there  was 
in  the  inner  court,  still  further  west,  "  the  house  where  Solomon 
dwelt,"  and  "  the  house  for  Pharaoh's  daughter,"  with,  of  course^ 
the  necessary  side  and  outbuildings  (i  Kings  vii.  8).  Thus^ 
the  royal  palace  really  consisted  of  three  separate  buildings. 
Externally  it  was  simply  of  "  costly  stones  "  (ver.  9),  the  beauty 
of  its  design  only  appearing  in  its  interior.  Here  the  building 
extended  along  three  sides.  The  ground-floor  consisted  of 
colonnades  of  costly  cedar,  the  beams  being  fastened  into 
the  outer  walls.  These  colonnades  would  be  hung  with 
tapestry,  so  as  to  be  capable  of  being  formed  into  apartments. 
Above  these  rose,  on  each  side  of  the  court,  three  tiers  ot 
chambers,  fifteen  on  each  tier,  with  large  windows  looking  out 
upon  each  other.  Here  were  the  State  apartments  for  court 
feasts,  and  in  them  were  kept,  among  other  precious  things,  the 
golden  targets  and  shields  (i  Kings  x.  16, 17).  Passing  through 
another  colonnade,  one  would  next  reach  the  grand  Judgment- 
and  Audience-halls,  with  the  magnificent  throne  of  ivory, 
described  in   i  Kings  x.   18-20;    2  Chron.  ix.   17-19.      And, 


Description  of  JeriLsalem.  loi 

lastly,    the    innermost   court    contained    the    royal    dwellings 
themselves.* 

But  this  great  Palace,  the  Temple,  and  the  enlargement  of 
Millo  and  of  the  city  wall,  were  not  the  only  architectural 
undertakings  of  King  Solomon.  Remembering  that  there  were 
watchful  foes  on  all  sides,  he  either  built  or  repaired  a  number 
of  strong  places.  In  the  north,  as  defence  against  Syria,  rose 
the  ancient  stronghold  of  Hazor  (Josh.  xi.  13;  Judges  iv.  2). 
The  plain  of  Jezreel,  the  traditional  battlefield  of,  as  well  as  the 
highway  into  Palestine  from  the  west  and  the  north,  was  pro- 
tected by  Megiddo ;  while  the  southern  approach  from  Egypt 
and  the  Philistine  plain  was  guarded  by  Gezer,  which  Pharaoh 
had  before  this  taken  from  the  Canaanites  and  burnt,  but 
afterwards  given  to  his  daughter  as  dowry  on  her  marriage  with 
Solomon.  Not  far  from  Gezer,  and  serving  a  similar  defensive 
purpose,  rose  the  fortress  of  Baalath,  in  the  possession  of  Dan 
{comp.  Josephus,  Ant.  viii.,  6,  i).  The  eastern  and  north- 
eastern parts  of  Solomon's  dominions  were  protected  by  Tamar 
or  Tadmor,  probably  the  Palmyra  of  the  ancients,^  and  by 
Hamath-Zobah  (2  Chron.  viii.  4),  while  access  to  Jerusalem 
and  irruptions  from  the  north-western  plain  were  barred  by  the 
fortification  of  Upper  and  Nether  Bethhoron  (i  Kings  ix.  15-19; 
2  Chron.  viii.  3-6).  Besides  these  fortresses,  the  king  provided 
magazine-cities,  and  others  where  his  chariots  and  cavalry  were 
stationed — most  of  them,  probably,  towards  the  north.  In  all 
such  undertakings  Solomon  employed  the  forced  labour  of  the 
descendants  of  the  ancient  Canaanite  inhabitants  of  Palestine, 
his  Jewish  subjects  being  chiefly  engaged  as  overseers  and 
ofiicers  in  various  departments  (i  Kings  ix.  20-23).  ^^^ 
even  thus,  the  diversion  of  so  much  labour  and  the  taxation 
which   his   undertakings  must  have  involved  were  felt  as  a 

1  In  the  description  of  Jerusalem  and  of  Solomon's  palace,  I  have  largely 
availed  myself  of  the  Article  in  Riehm's  Hand-  Wbrtcrb.  d.  Bibl.  Alterth, 
Part  viii.  pp.  679-683,  with  which  compare  Unruh,  Das  alfe  Jerusalem. 

-  Comp.  the  admirable  article  of  Mr.  Twistleton,  in  Smith's  Bibl.  Diet, 
iii.,  pp.  1428-1430. 


102  Reign  of  Solomon. 

''grievous  service"  and  "heavy  yoke"  (i  Kings  xii,  4),  all  the 
more  that  Solomon's  love  of  building  and  of  Oriental  splen- 
dour seems  to  have  rapidly  grown  upon  him.  Thus,  once 
more  by  a  natural  jjrocess  of  causation,  the  inner  decay  marked 
by  luxury  led  to  the  weakening  of  the  kingdom  of  Solomon, 
and  scattered  the  seeds  of  that  disaffection  which,  in  the  days 
of  his  degenerate  son,  ripened  into  open  rebellion.  So  true  is 
it,  that  in  the  history  of  Israel  the  inner  and  the  outer  always 
keep  pace.  But  as  yet  Solomon's  devotion  to  the  services  of 
Jehovah  had  not  lessened.  For  we  read  that  on  the  great 
festivals  of  the  year  (2  Chron.  viii.  12,  13)  he  was  wont  to 
bring  numerous  special  offerings.^ 

As  regards  the  foreign  relations  of  Solomon,  reference  has 
already  been  made  (in  ch.  v.)  to  his  marriage  with  the  daughter 
of  Pharaoh  (i  Kings  iii.  i),  which  took  place  in  the  first  years 
of  his  reign.  In  all  likelihood  this  Pharaoh  was  one  of  the 
last  rulers  of  the  (21st)  Tanite  dynasty.  We  know  that  their 
power  had  of  late  greatly  declined,  and  Pharaoh  may  have 
been  glad  to  ally  himself  with  the  now  powerful  ruler  of  the 
neighbouring  country.  On  the  new  kingdom,  however,  such 
an  alliance  would  shed  great  lustre,  especially  in  the  eyes  of 
the  Jews  themselves.  The  frequent  references  to  Pharaoh's 
daughter  show  what  importance  the  nation  attached  to  this 
union.  It  may  be  well  here  again  to  note,  that  the  Egyptian 
princess,  who  brought  to  her  husband  the  dowry  of  an  important 
border-fortress  (Gezer),  was  not  in  any  way  responsible  for 
Solomon's  later  idolatry,  no  Egyptian  deities  being  named 
among  those  towards  whom  he  turned  (i  Kings  xi.  5-7). 

Solomon's  relations  to  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  at  one  time 

^  The  expression  "he  burnt  incense "(i  Kings  ix.  25)  has  been  regarded 
by  Keil  as  a  mistranslation — the  text  only  implying  the  burning  of  the 
sacrifices.  Bahr,  more  satisfactorily,  refers  it  to  the  burning  of  incense 
on  the  great  altar  which  accompanied  all  meat-offerings  (Lev.  ii.  i,  2). 
But  on  no  consideration  can  it  be  supposed  to  imply,  that  Solomon  arrogated 
to  himself  the  priestly  function  of  burning  incense  on  the  golden  altar  in  the 
Holy  Place  (Thenius).  How  such  an  idea  can  be  harmonised  with  the 
theory  of  the  later  origin  of  these  books  may  be  left  to  its  advocates  to  explain. 


Foreign  Relations  in  Solomons  Reign.  103 

threatened  to  become  less  friendly  than  they  had  been  at  first, 
and  afterwards  again  became.  It  appears  that,  besides  fur- 
nishing him  with  wood,  Hiram  had  also  advanced  gold  to 
Solomon  (i  Kings  ix.  11),  amounting,  if  we  may  connect  with 
this  the  notice  in  ver.  14,  to  120  talents  of  gold,  variously 
computed  at  ;^i, 250,000  (Poole),  ;^72o,ooo  (S.  Clarke), 
and  ;£"47 1,240  (Keil,  whose  estimate  seems  the  most  pro- 
bable). We  suppose  it  was  in  repayment  of  this  sum  that 
Solomon  ceded  to  Hiram  twenty  cities  in  Northern  Galilee, 
adjoining  the  possessions  of  Tyre.  With  these  he  might  the 
more  readily  part,  since  the  district  was  partially  "Gentile" 
(Is.  ix.  i).  But  Hiram,  who  probably  coveted  a  strip  of  land 
along  the  coast,  was  dissatisfied  with  his  new  acquisition,  and 
gave  it  the  contemptuous  designation  of  "  the  land  of  Cabul."  ^ 
The  district  seems,  however,  to  have  been  afterwards  restored 
to  Solomon  2  (2  Chron.  viii.  2).  no  doubt  on  repayment  of  the 
loan  and  other  compensation. 

The  later  relations  between  Hiram  and  Solomon  consisted 
chiefly  in  mercantile  alliances.  Although  most  writers  regard 
the  fleet  which  sailed  to  Ophir  (i  Kings  ix.  27,  28)  as  identical 
with  "the  navy  of  Tarshish"  (i  Kings  x.  22),  yet  the  names, 
the  imports,  as  well  as  the  regularity  in  the  passages  of  the 
latter  ("every  three  years"),  and  the  express  statement  that  its 
destiny  was  Tarshish  (2  Chron.  ix.  21)  seem  opposed  to  this 
view.  Opinions  are  also  divergent  as  to  the  exact  location  of 
Ophir,  and  the  share  which  Hiram  had  in  the  outfit  of  this 
expedition,  whether  he  only  furnished  sailors  (i  Kings  ix.  27), 
or  also  the  ships  (2  Chron.  viii.  18).  In  all  probability  the 
wood  for  these  ships  was  cut  in  Lebanon  by  order  of  Hiram, 
and  floated  to  Joppa,  whence  it  would  be  transported  by  land 
(comp.  2  Chron.  ii.  16)  to  Ezion-Geber  and  Elath,  at  the  head 
of  the  Gulf  of  Akabah  (the  Red  Sea),  where  the  vessels  would 

^  The  derivation  and  meaning  of  the  name  are  in  dispute.  Probably  it 
is  equivalent  to  "as  nothing." 

2  This  view  is,  however,  opposed  by  some  critics,  though,  as  I  think, 
on  insufficient  grounds. 


104  Reign  of  Solomon. 

be  built  under  the  direction  of  Phoenician  shipwrights.  Upon 
the  whole,  it  seems  most  likely  that  the  Ophir  whence  they 
fetched  gold  was  Arabia.  The  sacred  text  does  not  inform  us 
whether  these  expeditions  were  periodical,  the  absence  of  such 
notice  rather  leading  to  the  supposition  that  this  was  not  the 
case,  or  at  least  that  they  were  not  continued.  The  total 
result  of  these  expeditions  was  an  importation  of  gold  to  the 
amount  of  420  talents  ^  (according  to  Keil  about  i^  million 
sterling).  It  was  not  only  the  prospect  of  such  addition  to  the 
wealth  of  the  country,  but  that  this  was  the  first  Jewish  mari- 
time expedition — in  fact,  the  first  great  national  trading  under- 
taking, which  gave  it  such  importance  in  public  estimation  that 
Solomon  went  in  person  to  visit  the  two  harbours  where  the 
fleet  was  fitting  out  (2  Chron.  viii.  17).  According  to  i  Kings 
X.  II,  the  Phoenician  fleet  also  brought  from  "Ophir  "  "  precious 
stones  "  and  "  almug-trees,"  or  sandal-wood,  which  King  Solo- 
mon used  for  "  balustrades  "  in  the  Temple,  for  his  own  palace, 
and  for  making  musical  instruments. 

The  success  of  this  trading  adventure  may  have  led  to  another 
similar  undertaking,  in  company  with  the  Phoenicians,  to 
Tartessus  (Tarshish),^  the  well-known  great  mercantile  empo- 
rium on  the  south  coast  of  Spain.  The  duration  of  such  an 
expedition  is  stated  in  round  numbers  as  three  years ;  and  the 
trade  became  so  regular  that  afterwards  all  the  large  merchant- 
men were  popularly  known  as  "  Tarshish-ships  "  (comp.  i  Kings 
xxii.  48;  Ps.  xlviii.  7  ;  Is.  ii.  16).^  The  imports  from  Tarshish 
consisted  of  gold,  silver,  ivory,* apes,  and  peacocks  (i  Kings  x.  22). 

^  According  to  2  Chron.  viii.  18,  by  a  clerical  error  (3  for  3),  450  talents. 

'^  Critics  are  generally  agreed  that  Tarshish  is  the  Tartessus  of  Spain. 
This  was  the  great  place  for  the  export  of  silver,  and  a  central  depot  whence 
the  imports  from  Africa,  such  as  sandal-wood,  ivory,  ebony,  apes,  and 
peacocks,  would  be  shipped  to  all  parts  of  the  world.  Compare  here  the 
very  conclusive  reasoning  of  Canon  Rawlinson,  u.  s.  pp.  545,  546. 

3  From  this  passage  Bahr  and  others  have  concluded  that  the  Tarshish 
fleet  of  King  Solomon  went  to  Ophir ;  but  the  inference  is  incorrect. 

^  The  Hebrew  terms  are  not  easy  to  render.  Most  critics  have,  by  a 
slight  alteration,  translated  them  "ivory,  ebony."  But  Keil  and  Biihr  have 
shown  that  this  rendering  is  not  sufficiently  supported. 


Commerce  in  the  Time  of  Solomon.  105 

The  two  last-mentioned  articles  of  import  indicate  the  com- 
mencement of  a  very  dangerous  decline  towards  Oriental  luxury. 
It  has  been  well  observed  (by  Ewald),  that  there  was  a  moment  in 
Israel's  history  when  it  seemed  possible  that  David  might  have 
laid  the  foundation  of  an  empire  like  that  of  Rome,  and  another 
when  Solomon  might  have  led  the  way  to  a  philosophy  as  sove- 
reign as  that  of  Greece.^  But  it  was  an  equally,  if  not  more 
dangerous  path  on  which  to  enter,  and  one  even  more  opposed 
to  the  Divine  purpose  concerning  Israel,  when  foreign  trade, 
and  with  it  foreign  luxury,  became  the  object  of  king  and 
people.  The  danger  was  only  too  real,  and  the  public  display 
appeared  in  what  the  Queen  of  Sheba  saw  of  Solomon's  court 
(i  Kings  X.  5),  in  the  magnificence  of  his  throne  (vers. 
19,  20),  and  in  the  sumptuousness  of  all  his  appointments 
(ver.  21).  Two  hundred  large  targets  and  three  hundred 
smaller  shields,  all  covered  with  beaten  gold,^  hung  around 
the  house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon;  all  the  king's  drinking 
vessels,  and  all  the  other  appurtenances  for  State  receptions 
were  of  pure  gold ;  the  merchants  brought  the  spices  of  the 
East  into  the  country  (ver.  15);  while  traders,  importers,  and 
•vassal  chiefs  swelled  the  immense  revenue,  which  in  one  year  ^ 
rose  to  the  almost  incredible  sum  of  666  talents  of  gold, 
which  at  the  lowest  computation  amounts  to  upwards  of  2^ 
millions  of  our  money,  or  only  one  million  less  than  that  of 
the  Persian  kings  (Herod,  iii.  95).  Add  to  this  the  number  of 
Solomon's  chariots  and  horsemen,  the  general  wealth  of  the 
country,  and  the  importation  of  horses  ^  from  Egypt,  which 

^  See  Sir  Edward  Strachey's  veiy  thoughtful  book  on  Hebrew  Politics 
in  the  Times  of  Sargon  and  Sennacherib,  p.  200. 

^  These  shields  were  made  of  wood  or  of  twisted  material,  and  covered 
with  gold,  the  amount  of  the  latter  being  calculated  for  the  targets  at  plbs., 
and  for  the  smaller  shields  at  4|lbs  (Keil). 

^  I  Kings  X.  14  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  this  was  the  annual 
revenue,  only  that  it  came  to  him  in  one  year.  The  666  talents  may 
perhaps  be  a  round  sum. 

^  Our  Authorised  Version  renders  I  Kings  x.  28  "linen  yarn,"  but  this 
is  a  mistranslation  for:  "And  the  bringing  out  of  horses  which  was  for 
Solomon  from  Egypt— and  the  troop  of  the  merchants  of  the  king  brought  a 


lo6  Reign  of  Solomoji. 

made  Palestine  almost  an  emporium  for  chariots  and  horses;^ 
and  it  will  not  be  difficult  to  perceive  on  what  a  giddy  height 
king  and  people  stood  during  the  later  years  of  Solomon's 
reign. 

It  was  this  scene  of  wealth  and  magnificence,  unexampled 
even  in  the  East,  as  well  as  the  undisputed  political  influence 
and  supremacy  of  the  king,  combined  with  the  highest  intel- 
lectual activity  and  civilization  in  the  country,  which  so  much 
astounded  the  Queen  of  Sheba  on  her  visit  to  Solomon's 
dominions.  Many,  indeed,  were  the  strangers  who  had  been 
attracted  to  Jerusalem  by  the  fame  of  its  king  (i  Kings  x.  24). 
J  But  none  of  them  had  been  so  distinguished  as  she,  whose 
/  appearance  was  deeply  symbolical  of  the  glorious  spiritual 
j  destiny  of  Israel  (Ps.  Ixxii.  10,  11;  Is.  Ix.  6),  and  indicative 
of  the  future  judgment  on  the  unbelief  of  those  who  were 
even  more  highly  favoured  (Matt.  xii.  42  ;  Luke  xi.  31).  Sheba, 
which  is  to  be  distinguished  from  Seba,  or  Meroe  in  Ethiopia, 
was  a  kingdom  in  Southern  Arabia,^  on  the  shores  of  the  Red 
Sea,  and  seems  to  have  been  chiefly  governed  by  Queens. 
Owing  to  its  trade,  the  population  was  regarded  as  the  wealthiest 
in  Arabia.  It  may  have  been  that  Solomon's  fame  had  first 
reached  the  ears  of  the  Queen  through  the  fleet  of  Ophir.  In 
consequence,  she  resolved  to  visit  Jerusalem,  to  see,  to  test, 
and   to  learn   for   herself  whether   the   extraordinary  reports 


troop  (of  horses)  for  a  (definite)  price."  This  would  imply  that  there  was  a 
regular  trading  company  which  purchased  the  horses  by  contract.  But  the 
text  seems  to  be  here  corrupt,  and  the  LXX  render,  "From  Egypt  and  from 
Koa"  (doubtfully  Thekoa),  and  that  "  the  royal  merchants  fetched  them 
from  Koa  for  a  definite  price."  In  this  case  there  would  seem  to  have  been 
annual  horse  fairs  at  Koa,  at  which  the  royal  merchants  bought  at  a 
contract  price. 

1  The  price  mentioned  in  i  Kings  x.  29  amounts  (according  to  Keil) 
for  a  chariot — of  course,  complete,  with  two  or  rather  three  horses,  to  £']^i 
and  for  a  (cavalry)  horse,  to  ^19  los. 

-  Accordingly  the  story  of  the  descent  of  the  Ethiopian  royal  line  from 
Solomon  and  the  Queen  of  Sheba  must  be  dismissed  as  unhistorical, 
although  Judaism  may  have  spread  into  Ethiopia  from  the  opposite  shores 
of  Arabia. 


The   Visit  of  the  Queen  of  Sheha.  107 

which  had  reached  her  -were  true.  But,  whatever  may  have 
specially  influenced  her  to  undertake  so  novel  a  pilgrimage, 
three  things  in  regard  to  it  are  beyond  question.  She  was 
attracted  by  the  fame  of  Solomon's  wisdom  ;  she  viewed  that 
wisdom  in  connection  with  "the  Name  of  Jehovah"  (i  Kings 
X.  i^);  and  she  came  to  learn.  What  the  higher  import  of 
this  "  wisdom  "  was,  is  explained  by  Solomon  himself  in  Prov. 
iii.  14-18,  while  its  source  is  indicated  in  Prov.  ii.  4-6.  Thus 
viewing  it,  no  event  could  have  been  more  important,  alike 
typically  and  in  its  present  bearing  on  the  ancient  world.  The 
Queen  had  come,  scarcely  daring  to  hope  that  Eastern  exagge- 
ration had  not  led  her  to  expect  more  than  she  would  find.  It 
proved  the  contrary.  Whatever  difficulty,  doubt,  or  question 
she  propounded,  in  the  favourite  Oriental  form  of  "  riddles,"  ^ 
"whatever  was  with  her  heart," ^  "Solomon  showed  (disclosed 
to)  her  all  her  words  "^  (the  spoken  and  unspoken).  And  here 
she  would  learn  chiefly  this  :  that  all  the  prosperity  she  wit- 
nessed, all  the  intellectual  culture  and  civilisation  with  which 
she  was  brought  into  contact,  had  their  spring  above,  with  "  the 
Father  of  Hghts."  She  had  come  at  the  head  of  a  large 
retinue,  bearing  richest  presents,  which  she  left  in  remembrance 
and  also  in  perpetuation  of  her  visit — at  least,  if  we  may  trust 
the  account  of  Josephus,  that  the  cultivation  of  balsam  in  the 
gardens  of  Jericho  owed  its  origin  to  plants  which  the  Queen 
had  brought  (Jos.,  Afif.  viii.  6,  6).  The  notice  is  at  least 
deeply  symbolical.     The  spices  of  Sheba,  so  sweet  and  strong 

1  Without  here  entering  on  a  detailed  criticism  of  the  precise  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  expression  leShe7?i  Jehovah  ("to  the  name  of  Jehovah  "),  our 
inference  from  it  can  scarcely  be  called  in  question. 

-  Our  Authorised  Version  renders  **  hard  questions  " —  accurately  as 
regards  the  import,  but  not  the  literal  meaning  of  the  word.  Josephus 
relates,  on  the  authority  of  Dius  and  Menander,  some  curious  legends  about 
"  problems  "  propounded  by  Solomon  to  Hiram,  which  the  latter  could  not 
solve,  and  had  to  pay  heavy  fines  in  consequence, — a  like  fate,  however, 
overtaking  Solomon  in  regard  to  the  problems  propounded  to  him  by 
Abdemon  {Ag.  Ap.  i.  17,  18).  The  love  of  the  Easterns — especially  the 
Arabs — for  "riddles"  is  well  known. 

3  So  literally.  4  g^  literally. 


io8  Reign  of  Solomon. 

that,  according  to  ancient  accounts,  their  perfume  was  carried 
out  far  to  sea,  were  to  be  brought  to  Jerusalem,  and  their 
plants  to  strike  root  in  sacred  soil  (Ps.  Ixxii.  lo,  ii ;  Is.  Ix.  6). 
But  now  the  balsam-gardens  of  Jericho,  into  which  they  were 
transplanted,  are  lying  bare  and  desolate — for  "  the  Queen  of 
the  South"  hath  risen  up  in  judgment  with  that  "generation;" 
and  what  further  "  sign  "  can  or  need  be  given  to  the  generation 
that  turned  from  Him  Who  was  "greater  than  Solomon?" 


CHAPTER    IX. 

Solomon's  Court— His  Polygamy— Spread  of  Foreign  Ideas  in  tfie  Country 
— Imitation  of  Foreign  l\4anners — Growing  Luxury — Solomon's  spiritual 
Decline— Judgment  predicted — Solomon's  Enemies:  Hadad,  Rezon, 
Jeroboam— Causes  of  popular  discontent — Ahijah's  prediction  of  the 
separation  of  the  two  Kingdoms— Jeroboam's  Rebellion  and  Flight 
into  Egypt— Death  of  Solomon. 

(i  Kings  xi.) 

A  GREATER  contrast  could  scarcely  be  imagined  than  that 
between  the  state  of  Solomon's  court  and  of  the  country 
generally,  and  the  directions  and  restrictions  laid  down  in 
Deut.  xvii.  i6,  17  for  the  regulation  of  the  Jewish  monarchy. 
The  first  and  most  prominent  circumstance  which  here  presents 
itself  to  the  mind,  is  the  direct  contravention  of  the  Divine 
command  as  regarded  the  number  of  "  princesses "  and  con- 
cubines which  formed  the  harem  of  Solomon.  ^  Granting  that 
the  notice  in  Cant.  vi.  8  affords  reason  for  believing  that  the 
numerals  in  i  Kings  xi.  3  may  have  been  due  to  a  mistake 
on  the  part  of  a  copyist,  still  the  sacred  narrative  expressly 

^  Bahr  gives  a  number  of  instances,  both  from   ancient   and   modern 
history,  of  far  larger  harems  than  that  ascribed  to  Solomon. 


Solomons  Polygamy.  109 

states,  that  the  polygamy  of  Solomon,  and  especially  his  alliances 
with  nations  excluded  from  intermarriage  with  Israel,  ^  was 
the  occasion,  if  not  the  cause,  of  his  later  sin  and  punishment. 
While  on  this  subject  we  may  go  back  a  step  further,  and 
mark  (with  Ewald)  what  sad  consequences  the  infringement 
of  the  primitive  Divine  order  in  regard  to  marriage  wrought 
throughout  the  history  of  Israel.  It  is  undoubtedly  to  poly- 
gamy that  we  have  to  trace  the  troubles  in  the  family  of 
David ;  and  to  the  same  cause  were  due  many  of  those  which 
came  on  David's  successors.  If  Moses  was  obliged  to  tolerate 
the  infringement  of  the  original  institution  of  God,  ''the  hard- 
ness of  heart"  which  had  necessitated  it  brought  its  own 
punishment,  especially  when  the  offender  was  an  Eastern  king. 
Thus  the  sin  of  the  people,  embodied,  as  it  were,  in  the 
person  of  their  representative,  carried  national  judgment  as 
its  consequence. 

But  the  elements  which  caused  the  fall  of  Solomon  lay  deeper 
than  polygamy.  Indeed,  the  latter  was  among  the  effects,  as 
well  as  one  of  the  further  causes  of  his  spiritual  decline.  First 
among  these  elements  of  evil  at  work,  we  reckon  the  growing 
luxury  of  the  court.  The  whole  atmosphere  around,  so  to  speak, 
was  different  from  what  it  had  been  in  the  primitive  times 
which  preceded  the  reign  of  Solomon,  and  still  more  from  the 
ideal  of  monarchy  as  sketched  in  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy. 
Everything  had  become  un-Jewish,  foreign,  purely  Asiatic. 
Closely  connected  with  this  was  the  evident  desire  to  emulate, 
and  even  outdo  neighbouring  nations.  Such  wisdom,  such 
splendour,  such  riches,  and  finally,  such  luxury,  and  such  a 
court  were  not  to  be  found  elsewhere,  as  in  the  kingdom  of 
which  Jerusalem  was  the  capital.  An  ominous  beginning  this  of 
that  long  course  of  Jewish  pride  and  self-exaltation  which  led  to 

^  Properly  speaking,  only  Canaanite  women  were  excluded  by  the  Law 
(Ex.  xxxiv.  11-16  ;  Deut.  vii.  1-3).  But  alliance  with  those  of  other  nations 
was  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  law,  at  any  rate  so  long  as  they  continued 
idolaters.  Comp,  Ezra  ix.  i  ;  Neh.  xiii.  23.  There  is  a  legend  that 
Solomon  married  a  daughter  of  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre. 


1 10  Reign  of  Solomon. 

such  fearful  consequences.  It  is  to  this  desire  of  surpassing 
other  Eastern  courts  that  the  size  of  Solomon's  harem  must  be 
attributed.  Had  it  been  coarse  sensuality  which  influenced  him, 
the  earlier,  not  the  later  years  of  his  reign,  would  have  wit- 
nessed the  introduction  of  so  many  strange  wives.  Moreover, 
it  deserves  special  notice  that  the  700  wives  of  Solomon  are 
designated  as  "princesses"  (i  Kings  xi.  3).  Without  pressing 
this  word  in  its  most  literal  meaning,  we  may  at  least  infer  that 
Solomon  courted  influential  connections  with  the  reigning  and 
other  leading  families  of  the  clans  around,  and  that  the  chief 
object  of  his  great  harem  was,  in  a  worldly  sense,  to  strengthen 
his  position,  to  give  evidence  of  his  wealth  and  power  as  an 
Eastern  monarch,  and  to  form  promising  alliances,  no  matter 
what  spiritual  elements  were  thus  introduced  into  the  country. 
Closely  connected  with  all  this  was  the  rapidly  growing  inter- 
course between  Israel  and  foreign  nations.  For  one  reason  or 
another,  strangers,  whom  Israel  hitherto  had  only  considered 
as  heathens,  crowded  to  Jerusalem.  By  their  presence  king 
and  people  would  not  only  become  familiar  with  foreign  ideas, 
but  so-called  toleration  would  extend  to  these  strangers  the 
right  of  public  worship,  or  rather,  of  public  idolatry.  And 
so  strong  was  this  feeling,  that,  although  Asa,  Jehoshaphat, 
Joash,  and  Hezekiah  put  an  end  to  all  idolatry,  yet  the  high 
places  which  Solomon  had  built  on  the  southern  acclivity  of 
the  Mount  of  Olives  remained  in  use  till  the  time  of  Josiah 
(2  Kings  xxiii.  13),  avowedly  for  the  worship  of  those  foreigners 
who  came  to,  or  were  resident  in,  Jerusalem.  Viewed  in  con- 
nection with  what  has  just  been  stated,  even  the  intellectual 
culture  in  the  time  of  Solomon  may  have  proved  a  source  of 
serious  danger. 

All  this  may  help  us  to  form  a  more  correct  conception  of 
the  causes  which  led  to  the  terrible  decline  in  the  spiritual 
history  of  Solomon,  and  this  without  either  extenuating  his 
guilt  or,  as  is  more  commonly  the  case,  exaggerating  his  sin. 
As  Holy  Scripture  puts  it,  when  Solomon  was  old,  and  less 
able  to  resist  influences  around,  he  so  far  yielded  to  his  foreign 


Foreign  Ideas  and  Rites  in  jferusalem.         m 

wives  as  to  build  altars  for  their  worship.  This  in  the  Scriptural 
and  real  sense  was  already  to  "  go  after  Ashtoreth  and  Milcom" 
(i  Kings  xi.  5).  But  the  sacred  text  does  not  state  that 
Solomon  personally  "served  them;"i  nor  is  there  any  reason 
for  supposing  that  he  either  relinquished  the  service  of  Jehovah, 
or  personally  took  part  in  heathen  rites.  To  have  built  altars 
to  "  the  abominations  of  the  Gentiles,"  ^  and  to  have  tolerated, 
if  not  encouraged,  the  idolatrous  rites  openly  enacted  there 
by  his  wives,  implied  great  public  guilt.  In  the  language  of 
Scripture  :  "  Solomon's  heart  was  not  perfect  with  Jehovah 
his  God ;"  he  "  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,  and  went  not 
fully  after  Jehovah."  His  sin  was  the  more  inexcusable,  that 
he  had  in  this  respect  the  irreproachable  example  of  David. 
Besides,  even  closer  allegiance  to  the  Lord  might  have  been 
expected  from  Solomon  than  from  David,  since  he  had  been 
privileged  to  build  the  Temple,  and  had  on  two  occasions 
received  personal  communication  from  the  Lord,  whereas  God 
had  never  appeared  to  David,  but  only  employed  prophets  as 
intermediaries  to  make  known  His  good  pleasure. 

It  need  scarcely  be  said,  that  public  sin  such  as  that  of 
Solomon  would  soon  bring  down  judgment.  As  preparatory 
to  it  we  regard  that  solemij  warning,  when  the  Lord  a 
second  time  appeared  in  vision  to  Solomon  (i  Kings  ix.  4-9). 
This  being  misunderstood  or  neglected,  the  actual  announce- 
ment of  judgment  followed,  probably  through  Ahijah.  The 
terms  of  the  sentence  were  terribly  explicit.  Solomon's 
kingdom  would  be  rent  from  him,  and  given  to  his  servant. 

^  Whenever  the  Jewish  kings  were  personally  guilty  of  idolatry,  the 
Hebrew  word  avad^  "served,"  is  used.  Comp.  I  Kings  xvi.  31  ;  xxii.  53  ; 
2  Kings  xvi.  3 ;  xxi.  2-6,  20-22.  Jewish  tradition  also  emphatically 
asserts  {Shab.  56  b.)  that  Solomon  was  not  personally  guilty  of  idolatry. 
The  account  of  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  7,  5)  is  worthless. 

^  Ashtoreth,  the  goddess  of  the  Phoenicians,  was  worshipped  with  impure 
rites.  Milcom,  Malcom,  or  Molech,  was  the  principal  deity  of  the  Am- 
monites, but  must  be  distinguished  from  Moloch,  whose  terrible  rites  were 
only  introduced  at  a  later  period  (2  Kings  xvi.  3).  Chemosh  was  the  sun- 
god  and  war-god  of  the  Moabites  ;  his  name  frequently  occurs  on  the  cele- 
brated Moabite  Stone. 


112  Reign  of  Solomon. 

Yet  even  so  Divine  mercy  would  accord  a  twofold  limitation : 
the  event  foretold  should  not  happen  in  the  days  of  Solomon 
himself,  and  when  it  took  place  the  kingdom  should  not 
be  wholly  taken  away,  but  partially  remain  in  his  line.  And 
this  for  the  sake  of  David — that  is,  not  from  partiality  for  him^ 
nor  on  account  of  any  supposed  superabundant  merit,  but 
because  of  God's  promise  to  David  (2  Sam.  vii.  14-16),  and  for 
God's  own  glory,  since  He  had  made  choice  of  Jerusalem  as  the 
place  where  He  would  for  ever  reveal  His  Name  (i  Kings  ix.  3). 
But  although  execution  of  the  judgment  was  stayed,  indica- 
tions of  its  reality  and  nearness  soon  appeared.  Once  more 
we  mark  a  succession  of  natural  and  intelligible  causes,  of 
which  the  final  outcome  was  the  fulfilment  of  the  Divine  pre- 
diction. It  will  be  remembered  that,  of  the  two  great  wars  in 
which  David  was  involved  after  his  accession,  the  most  for- 
midable was  that  against  the  hostile  combination  of  tribes 
along  the  eastern  boundary  of  his  kingdom.  ^  The  distance, 
the  character  of  the  country,  the  habits  of  the  enemy — the 
alliance  of  so  many  nationalities,  their  determination,  and  the 
stubborn  resistance  which  they  offered,  made  this  a  really  great 
war.  We  know  that  the  armies  of  David,  under  the  leadership 
of  Joab  and  Abishai,  were  victorious  at  all  points  (2  Sam.  viii.; 
X. ;  I  Chron.  xix.).  But,  although  the  enemy  may  have  been 
subdued  and  even  crushed  for  a  time,  it  was,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  impossible  wholly  to  remove  the  elements  of  resistance. 
In  the  far  south-east,  terrible,  almost  savage,  vengeance  had 
been  taken  on  Edom  (i  Chron.  xviii.  12).  From  the  slaughter 
of  the  people  a  trusty  band  of  Edomites  had  rescued  one  of  the 
youthful  royal  princes,  Hadad^  (or  Adad),  and  brought  him 

^  Comp.  the  account  of  this  war  in  vol.  iv.  of  this  Bible  History, 
chapter  xviii. 

^  Hadad,  "the  Sun,"  or  "Sun-god" — an  ancient  name,  perhaps  a  royal 
title  among  the  Edomite  princes  (comp.  Gen.  xxxvi.  35).  But  it  seems 
an  ungrounded  inference  (by  Ewald,  Thenius,  and  even  Canon  Rawlinson) 
to  connect  him  (as  grandson)  with  the  last  king  of  the  Edomites,  who  in 
I  Chron.  i,  50  is  by  a  clerical  error  called  Hadad  instead  of  Hadar  (comp. 
Gen.  xxxvi.  39.) 


The  ^^Adversaries''  of  Solo7noii.  113 

ultimately  to  Egypt,  where  he  met  a  hospitable  reception  from 
the  then  reigning  Pharaoh — probably  the  predecessor  of  Solo- 
mon's father-in-law.  If  Pharaoh  had  at  first  been  influenced 
by  political  motives  in  keeping  near  him  one  who  might  become 
a  source  of  trouble  to  the  growing  Israelitish  power,  the  young 
prince  of  Edom  soon  enlisted  the  sympathy  and  affection  of  his 
host  (i  Kings  xi.  14-19).  He  married  the  sister  of  Tahpenes,^ 
the  Gevirah,  or  queen  dominant  (principal)  of  Pharaoh's  harem ; 
and  their  child  was  acknowledged  and  brought  up  among  the 
royal  princes  of  Egypt.  When  tidings  of  the  death  of  David 
and  afterwards  of  Joab  reached  Hadad,  he  insisted  on  returning 
to  Edom,  even  against  the  friendly  remonstrances  of  Pharaoh, 
who  by  this  time  would  rather  have  seen  him  enjoying  his 
peaceful  retreat  in  Egypt  than  entering  upon  difficult  and  dan- 
gerous enterprises.  But,  although  Hadad  returned  to  his  own 
country  in  the  beginning  of  Solomon's  reign,  it  was  only  to- 
wards its  close — when  growing  luxury  had  enervated  king  and 
people — that  his  presence  there  became  a  source  of  trouble  and 
anxiety. 2  This  we  infer,  not  only  from  i  Kings  iv.  24,  but 
from  such  a  notice  as  that  in  i  Kings  ix.  26. 

But  in  the  extreme  north-east,  as  well  as  in  the  far  south- 
east, a  dark  cloud  gathered  on  the  horizon.  At  the  defeat 
of  Hadadezer  by  the  troops  of  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  3 ;  x. 
18)  one  of  the  Syrian  captains,  Rezon  by  name,  had  "fled 
from  his  lord."  In  the  then  disorganized  state  of  the  country 
he  gradually  gathered  around  him  a  band  of  followers,  and 
ultimately  fell  back  upon  Damascus,  of  which  he  became  king. 
The  sacred  text  leads  us  to  infer  that,  although  he  probably  did 
not  venture  on  open  warfare  with  Solomon,   he  cast  off  the 

^  The  name  occurs  also  on  Egyptian  monuments.  Tahpenes,  or  rather 
Thacpenes,  was  also  the  name  of  an  Egyptian  goddess  (Gesenius,  The 
saurus,   vol.  iii.,  p.   1500  a.). 

^  The  LXX  have  here  an  addition,  upon  which  Josephus  bases  a  notice 
{Ant.  viii.  7,  6),  to  the  effect  that  Hadad  (Ader)  raised  the  standard  of 
revolt  in  Edom,  but,  being  unsuccessful,  combined  with  Rezon,  and  became 
king  of  part  of  Syria.  The  notice  cannot  be  regarded  as  of  historical 
authority. 

I 


114  Reign  of  Solomon. 

Jewish  suzerainty,  and  generally  "  was  an  adversary  " — or,  to 
use  the  pictorial  language  of  the  Bible,  "abhorred  Israel."  ^ 

Ill-suppressed  enmity  in  Edom  (far  south-east),  and  more 
active  opposition  and  intrigue  at  Damascus  (in  the  north-east) — 
in  short,  the  danger  of  a  combination  Hke  that  which  had  so 
severely  taxed  the  resources  of  David :  such,  then,  so  far  as 
concerned  external  politics,  were  the  darkening  prospects  of 
Solomon's  later  years.  But  the  terms  in  which  Holy  Scripture 
speaks  of  these  events  deserve  special  notice.  We  are  told,  that 
"  Jehovah  stirred  up  "  or,  rather,  "  raised  up  "  these  adversaries 
unto  Solomon  (i  Kings  xi.  14,  23).  The  expression  clearly 
points  to  Divine  Causality  in  the  matter  (comp.  Deut.  xviii. 
15,  18;  Judges  ii.  18;  i  Sam.  ii.  35;  Jer.  xxix.  15;  Ez.  xxxiv. 
23).  Not,  indeed,  that  the  ambitious  or  evil  passions  of  men's 
hearts  are  incited  of  God,  but  that  while  each,  in  the  exercise 
of  his  free  will,  chooses  his  own  course,  the  Lord  overrules 
all,  so  as  to  serve  for  the  chastisement  of  sin  and  the  carrying 
out  of  His  own  purposes  (comp.  Psa.  ii.  i,  2  ;  Is.  x.  1-3). 

But  yet  another  and  far  more  serious  danger  threatened 
Solomon's  throne.  Besides  "  adversaries  "  without,  elements  of 
dissatisfaction  were  at  work  within  Palestine,  which  only  needed 
favouring  circumstances  to  lead  to  open  revolt.  First,  there  was 
the  old  tribal  jealousy  between  Ephraim  and  Judah.  The 
high  destiny  foretold  to  Ephraim  (Gen.  xlviii.  17-22 ;  xlix.  22- 
26)  must  have  excited  hopes  which  the  leadership  of  Joshua, 
himself  an  Ephraimite  (Numb.  xiii.  8),  seemed  for  a  time  to 
warrant.  Commanding,  perhaps,  the  most  important  territorial 
position  in  the  land,  Ephraim  claimed  a  dominating  power  over 
the  tribes  in  the  days  of  Gideon  and  of  Jephthah  (Judg.  viii.  i ; 
xii.  i).  In  fact,  one  of  the  successors  of  these  Judges,  Abdon, 
was   an  Ephraimite  (Judg.   xii.    13).     But,  besides,  Ephraim 

^  Canon  Rawlinson  (in  the  Speaker's  Commentary,  vol.  ii.,  p.  550) 
arranges  the  succession  of  the  Damascus  kings  as  follows  :  Hadad-Ezer 
(Hadad  I.),  contemporary  of  David;  Rezon  (usurper),  contemporary  of 
Solomon;  Hezion  (Hadad  II.),  contemporaiy  of  Rehoboam ;  Tabrimon 
(Hadad  III.),  contemporary  of  Abijam ;  Ben-hadad  (Hadad  iv.),  con- 
temporary of  Asa. 


Elements  of  Dissatisfaction  in  the  Land.        115 

could  boast  not  only  of  secular,  but  of  ecclesiastical  supremacy, 
since  Shiloh  and  Kirjath-jearim  were  within  its  tribal  posses- 
sion. And  had  not  Samuel,  the  greatest  of  the  Judges,  the  one 
outstanding  personality  in  the  history  of  a  decrepit  priesthood, 
been,  though  a  Levite,  yet "  from  Mount  Ephraim"  (i  Sam.  i.  i)? 
Even  the  authority  of  Samuel  could  not  secure  the  undisputed 
acknowledgment  of  Saul,  who  was  only  too  painfully  conscious 
of  the  objections  which  tribal  jealousy  would  raise  to  his 
elevation  (i  Sam.  ix.  21).  It  needed  that  glorious  God-given 
victory  at  Jabesh-Gilead  to  hush,  under  strong  religious  con- 
victions, those  discordant  voices,  and  to  unite  all  Israel  in 
acclamation  of  their  new  king.  And  yet  the  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
to  which  Saul  belonged,  was  closely  allied  to  that  of  Ephraim 
(Judg.  xxi.  19-23).  Again,  it  was  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  which 
mainly  upheld  the  cause  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  ii.  9) ;  and  though 
the  strong  hand  of  David  afterwards  kept  down  all  active  oppo- 
sition, no  sooner  did  his  power  seem  on  the  wane  than  "  a  man 
of  Mount  Ephraim  "  (2  Sam.  xx.  2 1)  roused  the  tribal  jealousies, 
and  raised  the  standard  of  rebellion  against  him.  And  now, 
with  the  reign  of  King  Solomon,  all  hope  of  tribal  pre-eminence 
seemed  to  have  passed  from  Ephraim.  There  was  a  new 
capital  for  the  whole  country,  and  that  in  the  possession  of 
Judah.  The  glory  of  the  ancient  Sanctuary  had  also  been 
taken  away.  Jerusalem  was  the  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  the 
political  capital,  and  Ephraim  had  to  contribute  its  wealth  and 
even  its  forced  labour  to  promote  the  schemes,  to  support  the 
luxury,  and  to  advance  the  glory  of  a  new  monarchy,  taken 
from,  and  resident  in,  Judah ! 

But,  secondly,  the  burden  which  the  new  monarchy  imposed 
on  the  people  must,  in  the  course  of  time,  have  weighed  very 
heavily  on  them  (i  Kings  xii.  4).  The  building  of  a  great 
national  Sanctuary  was,  indeed,  an  exceptional  work  which 
might  enlist  the  highest  and  best  sympathies,  and  make  the 
people  willing  to  submit  to  any  sacrifices.  But  this  was  fol- 
lowed by  the  construction  of  a  magnificent  palace,  and  then  by 
a  succession  of  architectural  undertakings  (i  Kings  ix.  15,  17- 


Ii6  Reign  of  Solomon. 

19)  on  an  unprecedented  scale.  However  useful  some  of  these 
might  be,  they  not  only  marked  an  innovation,  but  involved  a 
continuance  of  forced  labour  (i  Kings  iv.  6;  v.  13,  14;  xi. 
28),  wholly  foreign  to  the  spirit  of  a  free  people,  and  which 
diverted  from  their  proper  channels  the  industrial  forces  of  the 
country.  Nor  was  this  all.  The  support  of  such  a  king  and 
court  must  have  proved  a  heavy  demand  on  the  resources  of 
the  nation  (i  Kings  iv.  21-27).  To  have  to  pay  enormous- 
taxes,  and  for  many  long  years  to  be  deprived  during  so  many 
months  of  the  heads  and  the  bread-winners  of  the  family, 
that  they  might  do  what  seemed  slaves'  labour  for  the  glori- 
fication of  a  king,  whose  rule  was  every  year  becoming  weaker, 
would  have  excited  dissatisfaction  even  among  a  more  enduring 
people  than  those  tribes  who  had  so  long  enjoyed  the  freedom 
and  the  privileges  of  a  federated  Republic. 

It  only  needed  a  leader — and  once  more  Ephraim  furnished 
him.  Jeroboam,  the  son  of  Nebat  and  of  a  widow  named 
Zeruah,  was  a  native  of  Zereda  or  Zererath^  (Judg.  vii.  22),. 
within  the  territory  of  Ephraim.  The  sacred  text  describes 
him  as  a  "mighty  man  of  valour."  His  energy,  talent,  and 
aptitude  pointed  him  out  as  a  fit  permanent  overseer  of  the 
forced  labour  of  his  tribe.  It  was  a  dangerous  post  to  assign 
to  a  man  of  such  power  and  ambition.  His  tribesmen,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  came  to  know  him  as  their  chief  and  leader, 
while  in  daily  close  intercourse  he  would  learn  their  grievances 
and  sentiments.  In  such  circumstances  the  result  which 
followed  was  natural.  The  bold,  strong,  and  ambitious- 
Ephraimite,  "ruler  over  all  the  burden  of  the  house  of 
Joseph,"  became  the  leader  of  the  popular  movement  against 
Solomon. 

It  was,  no  doubt,  in  order  to  foment  the  elements  of  dis- 
content already  existing,  as  well  as  because  his  position  in  the 

^  Most  critics  eiToneously  identify  it  with  Zarthan  (i  Kings  vii.  46),  or 
Zeredathah  (2  Chron.  iv.  17),  which,  however,  lay  outside  the  possessioa 
of  Ephraim. 


The  Revolt  of  Jeroboam,  117 

city  must  have  become  untenable,  that  "  Jeroboam  went  out  of 
Jerusalem"  (i  Kings  xi.  29).  When  "the  prophet  Ahijah  the 
Shilonite  found  him  in  the  way,"  Jeroboam  had  already 
planned,  or  rather  commenced,  his  revolt  against  Solomon. 
Himself  an  Ephraimite  (from  Shiloh),  the  prophet  would  not 
only  be  acquainted  with  Jeroboam,  but  also  know  the  senti- 
ments of  his  tribesmen  and  the  views  of  their  new  leader.  It 
was  not,  therefore,  Ahijah  who  incited  Jeroboam  to  rebellion  ^ 
by  the  symbolical  act  of  rending  his  new  garment  in  twelve 
pieces,  giving  him  ten  of  the  pieces, 2  while  those  retained  were 
emblematic  of  what  would  be  left  to  the  house  of  David. 
Rather  did  he  act  simply  as  the  Divine  messenger  to  Jeroboam, 
after  the  latter  had  resolved  on  his  own  course.  The  event 
was,  indeed,  ordered  of  God  in  punishment  of  the  sin  of 
Solomon  (vers.  11-13);  ^^d  the  intimation  of  this  fact,  with  its 
lessons  of  warning,  was  the  principal  object  of  Ahijah's  mission 
.and  message.  But  the  chief  actor  had  long  before  chosen 
his  own  part,  being  prompted,  as  Holy  Scripture  puts  it,  by  a 
settled  ambition  to  usurp  the  throne  (i  Kings  xi.  37) ;  while  the 
movement  of  which  he  took  advantage  was  not  only  the  result 
of  causes  long  at  work,  but  might  almost  have  been  forecast 
by  any  observer  acquainted  with  the  state  of  matters.  Thus 
we  learn  once  more  how,  in  the  Providence  of  God,  a  result 
which,  when  predicted,  seems  miraculous,  and  is  really  such,  so 
far  as  the  Divine  operation  is  concerned,  is  brought  about,  not 
only  through  the  free  agency  of  man,  but  by  a  series  of  natural 
causes,  while  at  the  same  time  all  is  guided  and  overruled  of 
God  for  His  own  wise  and  holy  purposes. 

Indeed,  closely  considered,  the  words  of  the  prophet,  so  far 
from  inciting  Jeroboam  to  rebellion  against  Solomon,  should 

^  This  is  the  view  of  some  German  critics. 

2  Much  needless  ingenuity  has  been  employed  to  show  in  what  sense 
Jeroboam  had  ten  "pieces"  or  tribes,  and  Rehoboam  "one" — or  rather 
two — assigned  to  him.  The  language  must  not  be  too  closely  pressed. 
The  "one  "  tribe  left  to  the  house  of  David  was  no  doubt  Judah,  including 
"little  Benjamin"  as  the  second  of  the  twelve  "pieces"  or  tribes. 


ii8  ReigJt  of  Solomon. 

rather  have  deterred  him  from  it.  The  scene  is  sketched  in 
vivid  outHne  :  Jeroboam,  in  whose  soul  tribal  pride,  disgust  at 
his  work,  contempt  for  the  king,  irrepressible  energy,  and  high- 
reaching  ambition,  combined  with  a  knowledge  of  the  feelings 
of  his  tribesmen,  have  ripened  into  stern  resolve,  has  left 
Jerusalem.  The  time  for  secret  intrigue  and  dissimulation  is 
past ;  that  for  action  has  arrived.  As  he  leaves  the  hated  city- 
walls — memorials  of  Ephraim's  servitude — and  ascends  to- 
wards the  heights  of  Benjamin  and  Ephraim,  a  strange  figure 
meets  him.  It  is  his  countryman  from  Shiloh,  the  prophet 
Ahijah.  No  salutation  passes  between  them,  but  Ahijah  takes 
hold  of  the  new  square  cloth  or  upper  mantle  in  which  he  has 
been  wrapped,  and  rends  it  in  twelve  pieces.  It  is  not,  as 
usually,  in  token  of  mourning  (Gen.  xxxvii.  29 ;  xliv.  13 ;  2  Sam. 
xiii.  19),  though  sadness  must  have  been  in  the  prophet's  heart, 
but  as  symbol  of  what  is  to  happen — as  it  were,  God's  answer 
to  Jeroboam's  thoughts.  Yet  the  judgment  predicted  is  not 
to  take  effect  in  Solomon's  lifetime  (i  Kings  xi.  34,  35)  -^  and 
any  attempt  at  revolt,  such  as  Jeroboam  seems  to  have  made 
(vers.  26,  4o),2  was  in  direct  contravention  of  God's  declared 
will. 

There  were  other  parts  of  the  prophet's  message  which 
Jeroboam  would  have  done  well  to  have  borne  in  mind.  David 
was  always  to  "  have  a  light  before  God  "  in  Jerusalem,  the  city 
"which  He  had  chosen  to  put  His  Name  there"  (i  Kings  xi.  36). 
In  other  words,  David  was  always  to  have  a  descendant  on  the 
throne,^  and  Jerusalem  with  its  Temple  was  always  to  be  God's 
chosen  place ;  that  is,  Israel's  worship  was  to  continue  in  the 
great  central  Sanctuary,  and  the  descendants  of  David  were  to 
be  the  rightful  occupants  of  the  throne  till  He  came  Who  was 

^  I  cannot  adopt  Canon  Rawlinson's  proposed  rendering  of  ver.  34  : 
"  I  will  not  take  aught  of  the  kingdom  out  of  his  hand." 

2  The  expression  "to  lift  up  the  hand,"  means  actual  revolt.  Comp. 
2  Sam.  xviii.  28;  xx.  21. 

'  That  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  figurative  expression  "light,"  may  be 
gathered  from  i  Kings  xv.  4 ;  2  Kings  viii.  19 ;  2  Chron.  xxi.  7 ;  Psa, 
xviii,  28 ;  Ixxii.  17. 


AhijaJUs  Message  to  Jeroboam.  119 

David's  greater  Son.  God  had  linked  the  Son  of  David  with 
His  City  and  the  Temple,  so  that  the  final  destruction  of  the 
latter  marked  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  concerning 
the  house  of  David.  Thus  gloriously  did  the  promise  stretch 
beyond  the  immediate  future,  with  its  troubles  and  afdic- 
tions.  Lastly,  so  far  as  regarded  Jeroboam,  the  promise 
of  succession  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel  in  his  family  was 
made  conditional  on  his  observance  of  the  statutes  and  com- 
mandments of  God,  as  David  had  kept  them  (ver.  38).  But 
Jeroboam  was  of  far  other  spirit  than  David.  His  main  motive 
had  been  personal  ambition.  Unlike  David,  who,  though 
anointed  king,  would  make  no  attempt  upon  the  crown  during 
Saul's  lifetime,  Jeroboam,  despite  the  express  warning  of  God, 
"lifted  up  his  hand  against  the  king."  The  result  was  failure^ 
and  flight  into  Egypt.  Nor  did  Jeroboam  keep  the  statutes 
and  commandments  of  the  Lord  ;  and  after  a  brief  reign  his  son 
fell  by  the  hand  of  the  assassin  (i  Kings  xv.  28).  Lastly,  and 
most  important  of  all — the  Messianic  bearing  of  the  promise 
to  David,  and  the  Divine  choice  of  Jerusalem  and  its  Temple, 
were  fatally  put  aside  or  forgotten  by  Jeroboam  and  his  suc- 
cessors on  the  throne  of  Israel.  The  schism  in  the  kingdom 
became  one  from  the  Theocracy;  and  the  rejection  of  the 
central  Sanctuary  resulted,  as  might  have  been  expected,  in 
the  establishment  of  idolatry  in  Israel. 

Nor  did  King  Solomon  either  live  or  die  as  his  father  David. 
A  feeble  attempt — perhaps  justifiable — to  rid  himself  of 
Jeroboam,  and  no  more  is  told  of  him  than  that,  at  the  close  of 
a  reign  of  forty  years,^  he  "slept  with  his  fathers,  and  was 
buried  in  the  city  of  David  his  father."  So  far  as  we  know,  in 
that  death-chamber  no  words  of  earnest,  loving  entreaty  to 
serve  Jehovah  were  spoken  to  his  successor,  such  as  David 

^  Of  course  this  is  only  an  inference  from  the  narrative. 

2  Josephus  [Ayit.  viii.  7,  8)  assigns  him  a  reign  of  eighty  years.  But  this 
must  either  be  a  clerical  error,  or  depend  on  one  in  Josephus'  copy  of  the 
LXX.  Solomon  probably  died  at  the  age  of  about  sixty.  The  question  of 
his  final  repentance,  so  largely  discussed  at  one  time  by  theologians,  may 
be  safely  left — where  the  Bible  has  left  it. 


120  Rehoboam,  first  Kmg  of  Judah. 

had  uttered ;  no  joyous  testimony  here  as  regarded  the 
past,  nor  yet  strong  faith  and  hope  as  concerned  the  future, 
such  as  had  brightened  the  last  hours  of  David.  It  is  to  us  a 
silent  death-chamber  in  which  King  Solomon  lay.  No  bright 
sunset  here,  to  be  followed  by  a  yet  more  glorious  morning. 
He  had  done  more  than  any  king  to  denationaUse  Israel.  And 
on  the  morrow  of  his  death  :  rebellion  within  the  land ;  outside 
its  borders — Edom  and  Syria  ready  to  spring  to  arms,  Egypt 
under  Shishak  gathering  up  its  might ;  and  only  a  Rehoboam 
to  hold  the  rudder  of  the  State  in  the  rising  storm. 


CHAPTER   X. 


REHOBOAM,   FIRST  KING  OF  JUDAH. 


?dimUy  of  Solomon— A^e  of  Rehoboam— His  Character— Religious  History 
of  Israel  and  Judah— The  Assembly  at  Shechem— Jeroboam's  return 
from  Egypt — Rehoboam's  Answer  to  the  Deputies  in  Shechem— Revolt 
of  the  Ten  Tribes— The  Reigns  of  Rehoboam  and  of  Jeroboam— In- 
vasion of  Judah  by  Shishak— Church  and  State  in  Israel— Rehoboam's 
attempt  to  recover  rule  over  the  Ten  Tribes— His  Family  History — 
Religious  Decline  in  Israel,  and  its  consequences. 

(i  Kings  xii.  ;  xiv.  21-31;  2  Chron.  x.-xii.) 

STRANGE  as  it  may  seem,  despite  the  multifarious  marriages 
of  the  king,  his  alliances  with  neighbouring  nations,  and 
his  immense  wealth,  '^  the  house  of  Solomon  "  was  far  from 
strong  at  the  time  of  his  decease.  It  may  have  been  that 
Solomon  left  other  sons  besides  Rehoboam,  though  it  is  strange 
that  we  find  no  notice  of  them,  nor,  indeed,  of  any  child, 


Accession  of  Rehoboam.  121 

except  a  casual  remark  about  two  of  Solomon's  daughters 
(i  Kings  iv.  II,  15).  If  other  children  survived  him,  their 
position  must  have  been  far  less  influential  than  that  of  the 
sons  of  David,  nor  does  Rehoboam's  succession  appear  to 
have  been  ever  contested  by  any  member  of  the  family. 

Rehoboam,  or  rather  Rechavam  ("he  who  enlargeth  the 
people  "),  must  have  been  very  young  at  his  accession.  This 
we  gather  from  the  expression  by  which  they  "  who  had  grown 
up  with  him "  are  described,  and  from  the  manner  in  which 
his  son  and  successor,  Abijah,  characterised  the  commence- 
ment of  his  reign  (2  Chron.  xiii.  7).  There  seems,  therefore, 
considerable  probability  attaching  to  the  suggestion,  that  the 
notice  of  his  age  at  his  accession — forty-one  (i  Kings  xiv.  21 ; 
2  Chron.  xii.  13) — is  the  mistake  of  a  copyist,  who  in  transcrib- 
ing the  figures  misread  the  two  letters  KD — twenty-one — for 
Kp — forty-one.  This  supposition  is  strengthened  by  the  fact 
that  Rehoboam  was  not  the  son  of  the  Egyptian  princess,  who 
seems  to  have  been  Solomon's  first  wife,  but  of  Naamah,  an 
Ammonitess ;  ^  and  we  know  that  it  was  only  after  his  religious 
decline  (i  Kings  xi.  i)  that  Solomon  entered  upon  alliances 
with  "strange  women,"  among  whom  Ammonitesses  are 
specially  mentioned.  ^ 

Of  the  character  of  Rehoboam  we  know  sufficient  to  form 
an  accurate  estimate.  David  had  taken  care  to  commit  the 
upbringing  of  his  son  and  successor  to  the  prophet  Nathan  ; 
and,  so  far  as  we  can  judge,  the  early  surroundings  of  Solomon 
were  such  as  not  only  to  keep  him  from  intimacy  with  light 
or  evil  associates,  but  to  train  him  in  earnest  piety.  But  when 
Rehoboam  was  born.  King  Solomon  had  already  entered  upon 
the  fatal  path  which  led  to  the  ruin  of  his  race ;  and  the  prince 

^  The  LXX  notice  that  she  was  the  gi-anddaughter  of  Nahash,  king  of 
Amnion. 

^  It  is  hardly  credible  that  Solomon  should  have  contracted  such  an 
alliance  before  his  accession  to  the  throne,  which,  of  course,  would  be 
implied  if  Rehoboam  was  forty-one  years  old  at  the  time  of  his  father's 
death.  The  Rabbis  find  a  parallel  to  the  marriage  of  Solomon  with 
Naamah  in  that  of  R.uth  with  Boaz  (Jalkut,  vol.  ii.,  p.  32  a). 


122  Rehoboam,  first  King  of  Judah. 

was  brought  up,  like  any  other  Eastern  in  similar  circumstances, 
with  the  young  nobles  of  a  court  which  had  learned  foreign 
modes  of  thinking  and  foreign  manners.  The  relation  between 
the  aristocracy  and  the  people,  between  the  king  and  his 
subjects,  had  changed  from  the  primitive  and  God-sanctioned 
to  that  of  ordinary  Eastern  despotism ;  and  the  notions  which 
Rehoboam  and  his  young  friends  entertained,  appeared  only 
too  clearly  in  the  first  act  of  the  king's  reign.  In  general,  we 
gather  that  Rehoboam  was  vain,  weak,  and  impulsive;  ready 
to  give  up  under  the  influence  of  fear  what  he  had  desired  and 
attempted  when  he  deemed  himself  secure.  Firm  religious 
principles  he  had  not,  and  his  inchnations  led  him  not  only 
towards  idolatry,  but  to  a  form  of  it  peculiarly  dissolute  in  its 
character  (i  Kings  xiv.  23,  24;  2  Chron.  xi.  13-17;  xii.  i). 
During  the  first  three  years  of  his  reign  he  remained,  indeed, 
faithful  to  the  religion  of  his  fathers,  either  through  the 
influence  of  the  Levites  who  had  gathered  around  him  from 
all  Israel — though  even  in  this  case  his  motives  might  be 
rather  political  than  conscientious — or  else  under  the  im- 
pression of  the  outward  consequences  of  his  first  great  mistake. 
But  this  mood  soon  passed  away,  and  when  the  state-reasons 
for  his  early  adherence  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah  had  ceased 
to  be  cogent,  or  he  felt  himself  secure  on  his  throne,  he  yielded, 
as  we  have  seen,  to  his  real  inclinations  in  the  matter. 

Here,  at  the  outset  of  the  separate  history  of  the  kingdoms 
of  Judah  and  Israel,  it  may  be  well  to  take  a  general  view  ot 
the  relation  of  these  two  divisions  of  the  Jewish  people  to 
Jehovah,  their  King.  That  the  sin  of  Israel  was  much  deeper, 
and  their  apostasy  from  God  much  sooner  and  more  fully 
developed  than  in  the  case  of  Judah,  appears  from  the  circum- 
stance, that  the  Divine  judgment  in  the  banishment  of  the 
people  from  their  land  overtook  Israel  123  years  earlier  than 
Judah.  1  Yet  at  first  sight  it  seems  almost  strange  that  such 
should  have  been  the  case.      Altogether,   the  period  of  the 

1  See  the  Chronological  Table  at  the  end  of  this  volume,  and  the  remarks 
on  the  chronology  of  that  period  there  appended. 


Israel  a7id  Jiidah  in  iheir  Relatioji  to  Jehovah.     123 

separate  existence  of  the  two  kingdoms  (to  the  deportation  of 
the  ten  tribes  under  Shalmaneser,  about  722  b.c.)  extended 
over  253  years.     During  that  time,  thirteen  monarchs  reigned 
over  Judah,  and  twenty  over  Israel — besides  two  periods  of 
probable  interregnum,  or  rather  of  anarchy  in  Israel.     The 
religious  history  of  the  ten  tribes  during  these  two  and  a  half 
centuries  may  be  written  in  very  brief  compass.     Of  all  the 
kings  of  Israel  it  is  uniformly  said,  that  they  "  walked  in  the 
ways  of  Jeroboam,  the  son  of  Nebat,"  except  of  Ahab  and 
his  two  sons  (Ahaziah  and  Joram),  under  whose  reigns  the 
worship  of  Baal  became  the  established  religion  of  the  country. 
It  follows,  that  there  was  not  a  single  king  in  Israel  who  really 
served  the  Lord  or  worshipped  in  His  Temple.     On  the  other 
hand,  there  were  at  least  five  kings  in  Judah  distinguished  for 
their  piety  (Asa,  Jehoshaphat,  Uzziah,  Jotham,  and  Hezekiah), 
while  of  the  other  eight,  two  (Joash  and  Amaziah)  continued 
for  a  considerable,  and  a  third  (Rehoboam)  for  a  short  period 
their  profession  of  the  religion  of  their  fathers.     Four  of  the 
other  five  kings  acquired,  indeed,  a  terrible  notoriety  for  daring 
blasphemy.      Abijam,   the  son  and  successor  of  Rehoboam, 
adopted  all  the  practices  of  his  father  during  the  last  fourteen 
years  of  that  monarch's  reign.      During  the  reign  of  Joram 
the  worship  of  Baal  was  introduced  into  Judah ;  and  we  know 
with  what  terrible  consistency  it  was  continued  under  Ahaziah 
and  Athaliah,    the  measure  ot  iniquity  being  filled  by  Ahaz, 
who  ascended  the  throne  twenty  years  before  the  deportation 
of  the  ten  tribes,  when  the  doors  of  the  Sanctuary  were  actually 
closed,  and  an  idol-altar  set  up  in  the  Temple  court.   But,  despite 
all  this,  idolatry  never  struck  its  roots  deeply  among  the  people, 
and  this  for  three   reasons.     There  was,  first,  the  continued 
influence  for  good  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem ;  and  in  this 
we  see  at  least  one  providential  reason  for  the  existence  of  a 
central  Sanctuary,  and  for  the  stringency  of  the  Law  which 
confined  all  worship  to  its  courts.      Secondly,  the  idolatrous 
kings    of  Judah   were    always    succeeded    by   monarchs   dis- 
tinguished for  piety,  who  swept  away  the  rites  of  their  pre- 


124  ReJioboavt^  first  King  of  Judah. 

decessors ;  while,  lastly  and  most  remarkably,  the  reign  of 
the  idolatrous  kings  was  uniformly  brief  as  compared  with 
that  of  the  God-fearing  rulers.  Thus,  on  a  review  of  the 
whole  period,  we  find  that,  of  the  253  years  between  the  ac- 
cession of  Rehoboam  and  the  deportation  of  the  ten  tribes, 
200  passed  under  the  rule  of  monarchs  who  maintained  the 
religion  of  Jehovah,  while  only  during  53  years  His  worship 
was  more  or  less  discarded  by  the  kings  of  Judah.^ 

We  repeat,  it  were  a  mistake  to  ascribe  the  separation  of  the 
ten  tribes  entirely  to  the  harsh  and  foolish  refusal  of  Rehoboam 
to  redress  the  grievances  of  the  people.  This  only  set  the 
spark  to  the  inflammable  material  which  had  long  been  ac- 
cumulating. We  have  seen  how  dissatisfaction  had  spread, 
especially  in  the  northern  parts  of  the  kingdom,  during  the 
later  part  of  Solomon's  reign ;  how,  indeed,  a  rising  seems  to 
have  been  actually  attempted  by  Jeroboam,  though  for  the 
time  it  failed.  We  have  also  called  attention  to  the  deep-seated 
tribal  jealousy  between  Ephraim  and  Judah,  which  ever  and 
again  broke  into  open  hostility  (Judg.  viii.  1-3 ;  xii.  1-6 ; 
2  Sam.  ii.  9 ;  xix.  42,  43).  This,  indeed,  may  be  described 
as  the  ultimate  (secondary)  cause  of  the  separation  of  the  two 
kingdoms.  And,  if  proof  were  required  that  the  rebellion 
against  Rehoboam  was  only  the  outcome  of  previously  existing 
tendencies,  we  would  find  it  even  in  the  circumstance  that 
the  language  used  by  the  representatives  of  Israel,  when  re- 
nouncing the  rule  of  Rehoboam,  was  exactly  the  same  as  that 
of  Sheba  when  he  raised  against  David  the  standard  of 
what  would  be  represented  as  the  ancient  federal  Republic 
of  Israel  (2  Sam.  xx.  i  comp.  with  i  Kings  xii.  16).  Still 
more  wrongful  would  it  be  to  account  for  the  conduct  either 
of  Israel  or  of  Jeroboam,  or  even  to  attempt  vindicating  it, 

1  We  arrive  at  this  result  by  the  following  computation  : — Years  of 
public  idolatry :  under  Rehoboam,  14;  under  Abijah,  3;  under  Joram,  6; 
under  Ahaziah,  I  ;  under  Athaliah,  6  ;  under  Ahaz,  16  ;  or  in  all  46  years, 
to  which  we  add  7,  for  the  later  idolatrous  reigns  of  Joash  and  Amaziah. 
See  Keil,  Bibl.  Co77imentar,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  137,  138, 


Deeper  Reasons  for  the  Separation  of  the  Tribes.     125 

on  the  ground  of  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah  (i  Kings  xi.  29-39). 
The  latter  foretold  an  event  in  history,  and  explained  the 
reason  of  what,  in  view  of  the  promises  to  David,  would  other- 
wise have  been  unaccountable.  But  such  prediction  and 
announcement  of  judgment — even  if  known  to  the  tribes — 
warranted  neither  their  rebellion  nor  the  usurpation  of  Jero- 
boam. It  is,  indeed,  true  that,  as  the  Old  Testament  considers 
all  events  as  directly  connected  with  God,  its  fundamental 
principle  being :  Jehovah  reigneth — and  that  not  merely  in  a 
pseudo-spiritual,  but  in  the  fullest  sense — this,  as  all  other  things 
that  come  to  man,  is  ultimately  traced  up  to  the  living  God. 
So  was  the  resistance  of  Pharaoh,  and  so  are  the  sword,  the 
pestilence,  and  the  famine.  For,  all  things  are  of  Him,  Who 
sendeth  blessings  upon  His  people,  and  taketh  vengeance  of 
their  inventions ;  Who  equally  ruleth  in  the  armies  of  heaven, 
and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth;  Who  maketh  the 
wrath  of  man  as  well  as  the  worship  of  His  people  to  praise 
Him ;  Who  always  doeth  marvellously,  whether  He  accomplish 
His  purposes  by  direct  interposition  from  heaven,  or,  as  much 
more  frequently,  through  a  chain  of  natural  causation,  of  which 
He  holds  the  first,  and  man  the  last,  link.  This  grand  truth, 
as  fully  expressed  and  applied  in  the  sublime  language  of 
Ps.  cxlvii.,  is  the  sheet-anchor  of  faith  by  which  it  rides  out 
the  storms  of  this  world.  Ever  to  look  up  straight  to  God, 
to  turn  from  events  and  secondary  causations  to  Jehovah  as  the 
living  God  and  the  reigning  King,  is  that  denial  of  things  seen 
and  affirmation  of  things  unseen,  which  constitute  the  victory 
of  faith  over  the  world. 

On  the  death  of  his  father,  Rehoboara  seems  to  have  at  once, 
and  without  opposition,  assumed  the  reins  of  government. 
His  enthronement  at  Jerusalem  implied  the  homage  of  Judah 
and  its  neighbour-tribe  Benjamin.  According  to  ancient 
custom,  the  representatives  of  the  more  distant  tribes  should 
have  assembled  at  the  residence  of  the  king,  when  in  a  great 
popular  assembly  the  royal  dignity  would  be  solemnly  con- 
ferred,  and   public   homage   rendered   to  the  new  monarch 


126  RcJioboain^  first  King  of  Jiidah. 

(comp.  I  Sam.  xi.  15  ;  2  Sam.  ii.  4;  v.  3 ;  i  Chron.  xxix.  22). 
But,  instead  of  repairing  to  Jerusalem,  the  representatives 
of  the  ten  tribes  gathered  at  Shechem,  the  ancient  capital 
of  Ephraim,  where  important  popular  assemblies  had  pre- 
viously been  held  (Josh.  viii.  30-35  ;  xxiv.  1-28),  and  the 
first  claimant  of  royalty  in  Israel,  Abimelech,  had  set  up  his 
throne  (Judg.  ix.  1-23).  Only  one  meaning  could  attach 
to  their  choice  of  this  place. ^  They  had  indeed  come  to 
make  Rehoboam  king,  but  only  with  full  concessions  to  their 
tribal  claims.  All  that  they  now  required  was  an  energetic 
leader.  Such  an  one  was  to  hand  in  the  person  of  Jeroboam, 
who  in  the  reign  of  King  Solomon  had  headed  the  popular 
movement.  After  the  failure  of  his  attempt,  he  had  fled  into 
Egypt,  and  been  welcomed  by  Shishak.  The  weak  (21st 
Tanite)  dynasty,  with  which  King  Solomon  had  formed  a 
matrimonial  alliance,  had  been  replaced  by  the  vigorous  and 
martial  rule  of  Shishak  (probably  about  fifteen  years  before 
the  death  of  Solomon).  The  rising  kingdom  of  Palestine 
— allied  as  it  was  with  the  preceding  dynasty — was  too 
close,  and  probably  too  threatening  a  neighbour  not  to  be 
attentively  watched  by  Shishak.  It  was  obviously  his  policy 
to  encourage  Jeroboam,  and  to  support  any  movement  which 
might  divide  the  southern  from  the  northern  tribes,  and 
thus  give  Egypt  the  supremacy  over  both.  In  point  of  fact, 
five  years  later  Shishak  led  an  expedition  against  Rehoboam, 
probably  not  so  much  for  the  purpose  of  humbling  Judah  as 
of  strengthening  the  new  kingdom  of  Israel. 

The  sacred  text  leaves  it  doubtful  whether,  after  hearing  of 
the  accession  of  Rehoboam,  Jeroboam  continued  in  Egypt  till 
sent  for  by  the  representatives  of  the  ten  tribes,  or  returned 
to  Ephraim  of  his  own  accord.  2     In  any  case,  he  was  not  in 

^  Jewish  commentators  expressly  account  for  the  gathering  of  the  ten 
tribes  at  Shechem  on  the  ground  of  their  intention  to  make  Jeroboam  their 
king. 

2  The  LXX  version  has  here  several  additions  about  the  mother  of  Jero- 
boam, his  stay  in  Egypt,  his  conduct  after  his  return,  etc.  This  is  not  the 
place  to  discuss  them  in  detail,  but  they  may  safely  be  rejected  as  legendary^ 
and,  indeed,  quite  in  the  spirit  of  later  Jewish  tradition. 


The  Assembly  at  Shechem.  127 

Shechem  when  the  assembly  of  the  Israelitish  deputies  met 
there,  but  was  expressly  sent  for  to  conduct  negotiations  on 
their  behalf.^  It  was  a  mark  of  weakness  on  the  part  of 
Rehoboam  to  have  gone  to  Shechem  at  all ;  and  it  must  have 
encouraged  the  deputies  in  their  demands.  Moderate  as 
these  sound,  they  seem  to  imply  not  only  a  lightening  of 
the  "  heavy "  burden  of  forced  labour  and  taxation,  but  of 
the  ''  grievous  yoke  "  of  what  they  regarded  as  a  despotism, 
which  prevented  their  free  movements.  It  is  on  this  suppo- 
sition alone  that  we  can  fully  account  for  the  reply  which 
Rehoboam  ultimately  gave  them.  The  king  took  three  days 
to  consider  the  demand.  First,  he  consulted  Solomon's 
old  advisers,  who  strongly  urged  a  policy  of  at  least  tem- 
porary compliance.  The  advice  was  evidently  ungrateful,  and 
the  king — as  Absalom  of  old,  and  most  weak  men  in  analo- 
gous circumstances — next  turned  to  another  set  of  counsellors. 
They  were  his  young  companions — as  the  text  throughout 
contemptuously  designates  them  :  "  the  children  (the  boys)  who 
had  grown  up  with  him."  With  their  notions  of  the  royal 
supremacy,  they  seem  to  have  imagined  that  such  daring 
attempts  at  independence  arose  from  doubt  of  the  king's 
power  and  courage,  and  would  be  best  repressed  if  sternly 
met  by  an  overawing  assertion  of  authority.  Rehoboam  was 
not  to  discuss  their  demands,  but  to  tell  them  that  they 
would  find  they  had  to  deal  with  a  monarch  far  more 
powerful  and  far  more  strict  than  his  father  had  been.  To 
put  it  in  the  vain-glorious  language  of  the  Eastern  "  boy- 
counsellors,"  he  was  to  say  to  them  :  "  My  little  finger  is  bigger 
than  my  father's  hips.  And  now  my  father  did  lade  upon 
you  a  heavy  yoke,  and  I  will  add  to  your  yoke  ;  my  father 
chastised  you  with  whips  [those  of  ordinary  slaves],  but  I 
will   chastise   you   with    [so-called]    '  scorpions ' "  ^ — or   whips 

1  Probably  Jeroboam  returned  of  his  own  account,  but  did  not  go  to 
Shechem  till  he  was  sent  for  by  the  deputies  of  Israel.  This  accords  with 
the  two  versions.  There  is  no  need  further  to  discuss  here  the  reading, 
or  rather  the  proper  punctuation  of  i  Kings  xii.  2,  3. 

2  So  literally 


128  Rehoboam^  first  King  of  Judah. 

armed  with  hooks,  such  as  were  probably  used  upon  criminals 
or  recalcitrants. 

Grossly  foolish  as  this  advice  was,  Rehoboam  followed  it 
— the  sacred  writer  remarking,  in  order  to  account  for  such 
an  occurrence :  "  for  the  turn  (of  events)  was  from  Jehovah, 
that  He  might  perform  His  word  which  Jehovah  spake 
by  the  hand  of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite  to  Jeroboam  the  son 
of  Nebat"!  The  effect  was,  indeed,  immediate.  To  the 
shout  of  Sheba's  ancient  war-cry  of  rebellion  the  assembly 
renounced  their  allegiance  to  the  house  of  David,  and  the 
deputies  returned  to  their  homes.  Rehoboam  perceived  his 
fatal  error,  when  it  was  too  late  to  retrieve  its  consequences. 
Even  his  attempt  in  that  direction  was  a  mistake.  The  king, 
sent  Adoram,2  the  superintendent  of  the  tribute  and  of  forced 
labour^ — the  two  forming  apparently  one  department  of  the 
king's  dues — to  arrange,  if  possible,  matters  with  the  re- 
bellious tribes.  But  this  seemed  only  like  trifling  with  their 
grievances,  and  a  fresh  insult.  The  presence  of  the  hated 
official  called  forth  such  feelings,  that  he  was  stoned,  and 
Rehoboam  himself  narrowly  escaped^  the  same  fate  by  flight 
to  Jerusalem. 

The  rebellion  of  the  ten  tribes  was  soon  followed  by 
their  formation  into  an  independent  kingdom.  When,  on 
their  return  from  Shechem,  the  deputies  made  known  the 
presence  of  Jeroboam,  the  tribes  sent  for  him,  and  in  a 
popular  assembly  appointed  him  king  over  all  Israel.  Still, 
it  must  not  be  thought  that  the  whole  land  was  absolutely 
subject  to  him.  When  thinking  of  monarchy  in  Palestine,  it 
is  always  necessary  to  bear  in  mind  the  long-established  and 
great    municipal  rights  and  liberties   which   made   every  city 

■^  So  literally. 

^  As  three  persons  of  that  name  are  mentioned  (2  Sam.  xx.  24 ;  i  Kings 
IV.  6;  xii.  18)  who  must  have  lived  at  different  times,  may  not  **  Adoram  " 
be  the  appellation  of  the  office? 

^  The  one  Hebrew  word  means  both — and  probably  the  two  belonged 
to  the  same  department  of  royal  dues. 

*  This  is  implied  in  ver.  18 ;  see  the  marginal  rendering. 


Skishak's  Expedition  against  Judah.  129 

with  its  district,  under  its  Elders,  almost  an  independent  state 
within  the  state.  Accordingly,  we  find  it  chronicled  as  a  note- 
worthy fact  (i  Kings  xii.  17),  that  King  Rehoboam  reigned 
over  those  Israelites  who  were  settled  in  Judaean  towns — 
either  wholly  inhabiting,  or  forming  the  majority  in  them ; 
while  it  is  marked  as  a  wise  measure  on  the  part  of  Reho- 
boam, that  he  distributed  ''his  children  throughout  all  the 
countries  (districts)  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  unto  every 
fenced  city  " — no  doubt,  with  the  view  of  making  sure  of  their 
allegiance.  It  seems  to  have  been  otherwise  within  the 
domains  of  Jeroboam.  From  2  Chron.  xi.  13-16  we  learn 
that,  on  the  substitution  by  Jeroboam  and  his  successors  of 
the  worship  of  the  golden  calves  for  the  service  of  Jehovah, 
the  old  religion  was  disestablished,  and  the  Levites  deprived 
of  their  ecclesiastical  revenues,  the  new  priesthood  which 
took  their  place  being  probably  supported  by  the  dues  of 
their  office,  and,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  history  of  Ahab 
(i  Kings  xviii.  19),  by  direct  assistance  from  the  royal 
treasury.  In  consequence  of  these  changes,  many  of  the 
Levites  seem  to  have  settled  in  Judaea,  followed  perhaps  by 
more  or  less  extensive  migrations  of  the  pious  laity,  varying 
according  to  the  difficulties  put  in  the  way  of  resorting  to 
the  great  festivals  in  Jerusalem.  It  would,  however,  be  a 
mistake  to  infer  the  entire  exodus  of  the  pious  laity  or  of 
the  Levites.^  But  even  if  such'  had  been  the  case,  the  feeling 
in  the  ancient  Levitical  cities  would  for  some  time  have  con- 
tinued sufficiently  strong  to  refuse  allegiance  to  Jeroboam. 

And  here  a  remarkable  document  throws  unexpected  light 
upon  our  history.  On  the  wall  of  the  great  Egyptian  Temple 
of  Karnak,  Shishak  has  left  a  record  of  his  victorious  expe- 
dition against  Judah.  Among  the  conquests  there  named 
133  have  been  deciphered — although  only  partially  identi- 
fied— while  14  are  now  illegible.     The  names  ascertained  have 

^  In  point  of  fact,  2  Chron.  xi.  i6  does  not  necessarily  imply  any  settle- 
ment of  the  pious  laity  in  Judah ;  and  even  the  evidence  for  that  of  the 
priests  and  Levites  is  not  quite  convincing  (see  the  next  chapter). 

K 


130  Rehoboafn,  first  King  of  Judah. 

been  arranged  into  three  groups  ^ — those  of  Judaean  cities 
(the  smallness  of  their  number  being  accounted  for  by  the 
erasures  just  mentioned) ;  those  of  Arab  tribes,  south  of 
Palestine  ;  and  those  of  Levitical  and  Canaanite  cities  within 
the  territory  of  the  new  kingdom  of  Israel.  It  is  the  latter  which 
here  alone  claim  our  attention.  Any  conquest  of  cities  within 
the  territory  of  Jeroboam  might  surprise  us,  since  the  expe- 
dition of  Shishak  was  against  Judah,  and  not  against  Israel — 
indeed,  rather  in  alliance  with  Jeroboam  and  in  support  of 
his  new  kingdom.  Another  remarkable  circumstance  is,  that 
these  Israelitish  conquests  of  Shishak  are  all  of  Levitical  or 
else  of  ancient  Canaanite  cities,  and  that  they  are  of  towns  in 
all  parts  of  the  territory  of  the  ten  tribes,  and  at  considerable 
distances  from  one  another,  there  being,  however,  no  mention 
of  the  taking  of  the  intervening  cities.  All  these  facts  point 
to  the  conclusion,  to  which  we  have  already  been  directed  on 
quite  independent  grounds,  that  the  Levitical  and  ancient 
Canaanite  cities  within  the  territory  of  Jeroboam  did  not 
acknowledge  his  rule.  This  is  why  they  were  attacked  and 
conquered  by  Shishak  on  his  expedition  against  Judah,  as 
virtually  subject  to  the  house  of  David,  and  hence  constituting 
an  element  not  only  of  rebellion  but  of  danger  within  the  new 
kingdom  of  Israel.  Before  quitting  this  subject,  these  two 
remarks  may  be  allowed :  how  wonderfully,  and  we  may  add, 
unexpectedly,  documents  of  secular  history — apparently  acci- 
dentally discovered — confirm  and  illustrate  the  narratives  of 
the  Bible  \  and  how  wise,  politically  and  religiously,  how  suited 
to  the  national  life,  were  the  institutions  of  the  Old  Testament, 
even  when  to  our  notions  they  seem  most  strange,  as  in  the 
case  of  Levitical  cities  throughout  the  land.  For,  these  cities, 
besides  serving  other  most  important  purposes,  formed  also 
the  strongest  bond  of  political  union,  and  at  the  same  time 
the  most  powerful  means  of  preserving  throughout  the  country 
the  unity  of  the  faith  in  the  unity  of  the  central  worship  of 

^  Compare  Mr.   Poole's  admiralDle  article  on   "Shishak,"  in   Smith's 
Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  1287-1295. 


Relations  of  Jtidah.  131 

Jehovah  at  Jerusalem.  Thus  national  union  and  religious 
purity  were  bound  up  together,  and  helped  to  preserve  each 
other. 

But  to  return.  On  the  elevation  of  Jeroboam  to  the  new 
throne  of  Israel,  Rehoboam  made  one  more  attempt  to  recover 
the  lost  parts  of  David's  kingdom.  He  assembled  an  army  of 
180,000  men  ^  from  Judah  and  Benjamin — the  latter  tribe 
having  apparently  become  almost  unified  with  Judah  since  the 
estabhshment  of  the  political  and  religious  capital  in  Jerusalem, 
through  which  ran  the  boundary-line  between  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin. But  the  expedition  was  at  its  outset  arrested  by  Divine 
direction  through  the  prophet  Shemaiah.^  This  abandonment 
of  an  expedition  and  dispersion  of  a  host  simply  upon  the 
word  of  a  prophet,  are  quite  as  remarkable  as  the  courage  of 
that  prophet  in  facing  an  army  in  such  circumstances,  and  his 
boldness  in  so  fully  declaring  as  a  message  from  Jehovah  what 
must  have  been  a  most  unwelcome  announcement  alike  to 
king  and  people.  Both  these  considerations  are  very  im- 
portant in  forming  an  estimate,  not  only  of  the  religious  and 
poHtical  state  of  the  time,  and  their  mutual  inter-relations, 
but  of  the  character  of  "  Prophetism  "  in  Israel. 

The  expedition  once  abandoned  was  not  again  renewed, 
although  throughout  the  reign  of  Rehoboam  there  were  con- 
stant incursions  and  border-raids — probably  chiefly  of  a  pre- 
datory character — on  the  part  of  Judah  and  of  Israel  (i  Kings 
xiv.  30).  The  remaining  notices  of  Rehoboam's  reign  concern 
the  internal  and  external  relations  of  Judah,  as  well  as  the  sad 
religious  change  which  passed  over  the  country  after  the  first 
three  years  of  his  rule.  They  are  recorded,  either  solely  or 
with  much  fuller  details,  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles  (2  Chron. 
xi.  4  to  xii.  16).  The  first  measure  referred  to  is  the  building 
of   fifteen  fortresses,  of  which  thirteen  were  in  the  land  of 

^  The  LXX  has  120,000,  but  the  number  in  the  Hebrew  text  is  moderate 
(comp.  2  Sam.  xxiv.  9). 

2  From  2  Chron.  xii.  15  we  iearn  that  Shemaiah  wrote  a  history  of  the 
reign  of  Rehoboam. 


132  Rehoboam,  first  Kmg  of  Jiidah. 

Judah — Hebron  forming,  as  it  were,  the  centre  of  them — and 
only  two  (Zorah  and  Aijalon)  within  the  later  possession  of 
Benjamin.  1  They  served  as  a  continuous  chain  of  forts  south 
of  Jerusalem,  and  to  defend  the  western  approaches  into  the 
country.  The  northern  boundary  was  left  wholly  unprotected. 
From  this  it  would  appear  that  Rehoboam  chiefly  dreaded 
an  incursion  from  Egypt,  though  it  does  not  by  any  means 
follow  that  these  fortresses  were  only  built  after  the  campaign 
of  Shishak,  which  took  place  five  years  after  the  accession  of 
Solomon's  son. 

The  next  notice  concerns  the  family  relations  of  Rehoboam. 
It  appears  that  he  had  eighteen  wives  and  sixty  concubines 
(thirty,  according  to  Josephus,  A7if.  viii.  lo,  i),  following 
in  this  respect  the  evil  example  of  Solomon.  Of  his  wives 
only  two  2  are  named  :  his  cousin  Mahalath,  the  daughter  of 
Jerimoth,  a  son  of  David  (either  the  same  as  Ithream,  i 
Chron.  iii.  3,  or  the  son  of  one  of  David's  concubines, 
I  Chron.  iii.  9),  and  of  Abihail,  the  daughter  of  Eliab,  David's 
eldest  brother;  and  Maachah,  the  daughter,  or  rather,  evidently, 
the  granddaughter  of  Absalom,^  through  his  only  child,  Tamar 
(2  Sam.  xiv.  27;  xviii.  18;  comp.  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  10,  i),  who 
had  married  Uriel  of  Gibeah  (2  Chron.  xiii.  2).  Maachah, 
named  after  her  paternal  great-grandmother  (the  mother  of 
Absalom,  i  Chron.  iii.  2),  was  the  favourite  of  the  king,  and  her 
eldest  son,  Abijah,  made  "chief  among  his  brethren,"  with 
succession  to  the  throne.  As  already  noticed,  Rehoboam 
took  care  to  locate  his  other  sons  in  the  different  districts  of 

1  Originally  they  belonged  to  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  41,  42),  but  see  i  Chron. 
vi.  66-69. 

2  Some  commentators  have  regarded  Abihail  (2  Chron.  xi.  18)  as  the 
name  of  a  third  Avife,  and  accordingly  represented  her,  not  as  a  daughter 
but  as  a  granddaughter  of  Eliab.  But  even  if  this  were  not  contrary  to  the 
plain  meaning  of  vers.  18,  19,  a  granddaughter  of  Eliab  would  have  been 
too  old  for  the  wife  of  Rehoboam. 

3  This  appears  clearly  from  2  Chron.  xiii.  2.  At  the  death  of  Solomon 
the  daughter  of  Absalom  would  be  about  fifty  years  of  age.  In  2  Chron. 
xiii.  2  the  name  is  misspelt  Michaiah. 


Religious  Changes.  133 

his  territory,  giving  them  ample  means  for  sustaining  their 
rank,  and  forming  numerous  and  influential  alliances  for 
them.i  Altogether  Rehoboam  had  twenty-eight  sons  and  sixty 
daughters. 

From  these  general  notices,  which  must  be  regarded  as 
referring  not  to  any  single  period,  but  to  the  whole  reign  of 
Rehoboam,  we  pass  to  what,  as  regards  the  Scripture  narrative, 
is  the  most  important  event  in  this  history.  The  fact  itself 
is  told  in  fullest  detail  in  the  Book  of  Kings  (i  Kings  xiv, 
22-24);  its  punishment  at  the  hand  of  God  in  the  Book  of 
Chronicles  (2  Chron.  xii.  2,  12). 

After  the  first  three  years  of  Rehoboam's  reign  a  great 
change  seems  to  have  come  over  the  religious  aspect  of  the 
country.  Rehoboam  and  Judah  did  not,  indeed,  openly 
renounce  the  worship  of  Jehovah.  On  the  contrary,  we  find 
that  the  king  continued  to  attend  the  house  of  the  Lord  in 
royal  state,  and  that  after  the  incursion  of  Shishak  there  was 
even  a  partial  religious  revival^  (2  Chron.  xii.  11,  12).  Still 
the  general  character  of  this  period  was,  that  '•'  Rehoboam 
forsook  the  law  of  Jehovah,  and  all  Israel  with  him,"  that 
"  he  did  evil  in  that  he  did  not  set  his  heart  on  seeking 
Jehovah"  (2  Chron.  xii.  i,  14,  ///.),  and,  lastly,  that  "Judah 
did  the  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,  and  provoked  Him  to 
jealousy  (viewing  the  relation  between  the  Lord  and  Israel 
as  one  of  marriage.  Numb.  v.  14) — more  than  anything  which 
their  fathers  had  done  by  their  sins  which  they  sinned " 
(i  Kings  xiv.  22).  These  sins  consisted  in  building  Bamoth^ 
or  "  high  places,"  /.  ^.,  altars  on  every  high  hill,  and  setting  up 

^  Our  Authorised  Version  renders  2  Chron.  xi.  23  :  "  he  desired  many 
wives,"  which  seems  to  imply  that  Rehoboam  sought  them  for  himself. 
But  this  is  not  the  case.  The  original  has  it,  that  he  "demanded  (or 
sought)  "  these  alliances  for  his  sons,  evidently  to  strengthen  his  connection 
with  the  noble  families  of  the  land. 

2  It  must  not  be  thought  that  there  was  a  formal  renunciation  in  Judah 
of  the  worship  of  Jehovah ;  but,  side  by  side  with  it,  other  services  were 
carried  on,  which  Holy  Scripture  rightly  describes  as  so  inconsistent  with 
it  as  to  amount  to  idolatry. 


134  Rehohoam,  first  Ki7ig  of  Judah. 

in  every  grove  Mazzehoth^  or  memorial-stones  and  pillars  dedi- 
cated to  Baal,  and  Asheri??i,  or  trunks  of  trees  dedicated  to 
Astarte  (with  all  the  vileness  which  their  service  implied).^ 
This  idolatry  was,  indeed,  not  new  in  Israel — though  it  had 
probably  not  been  practised  to  the  same  extent.  But  in 
addition  to  this  we  now  read  of  persons  "  consecrated "  to 
the  Syrian  goddess,  with  the  nameless  abominations  connected 
therewith.  This  form  of  heathen  pollution  was  of  purely 
Canaanite  origin.  As  indicating  the  influence  of  the  Canaanites 
upon  Judah,  it  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  another  evidence 
of  the  connection  subsisting  between  Rehoboam  and  the 
ancient  Canaanite  cities  within  the  territory  of  Israel. 

The  Divine  punishment  was  not  long  withheld.  Once 
more  it  came  in  the  course  of  natural  causation,  through 
the  political  motives  which  influenced  Shishak,  and  led  him 
to  support  Jeroboam.  In  the  fifth  year  of  Rehoboam's  reign 
Shishak  marched  a  large  army  of  Egyptians,  Lybians,  Sukkiim, 
("  tent  -  dwellers "  ?  Arabs?),  and  Ethiopians,  with  1200 
chariots  ^  and  60,000  horsemen,  into  Judaea,  and,  after  taking 
the  fenced  cities  along  his  route,  advanced  upon  Jerusalem, 
where  Rehoboam  and  his  army  were  gathered.  Once  more 
the  prophet  Shemaiah  averted  a  contest,  which  could  only 
have  ended  in  disaster.  On  showing  them  that  the  national 
danger,  though  apparently  arising  from  political  causes,  was 
really  due  to  their  sin  against  Jehovah  (2  Chron.  xii.  2) ;  and 
that  it  was  needless  to  fight,  since,  as  they  had  been  God-for- 
saking, they  were  now  God-forsaken  (ver.  5) — the  king  and  his 
princes  humbled  themselves.  Thereupon  the  Lord  intimated 
through  His  prophet,  that  He  would  "grant  them  deliverance 
for  a  little  while,"  on  condition  of  their  submitting  to  Shishak. 
The  reason  for  this  :  "  that  they  may  know  My  service,  and  the 
service  of  the  kingdoms   of  the  countries,"  as   well   as   the 

^  The  Bamoth  would  be  on  the  heights,  the  Baal-  and  Astarte-worship 
in  the  groves. 

2  This  number  is  thoroughly  consistent  with  such  notices  as  Exod.  xiv. 
7  ;  I  Kings  x.  26,  and  other  well-ascertained  historical  instances. 


Shishak  enters  Jerusalem.  135 

terms  by  which  the  promised  deliverance  was  qualified, 
contained  the  most  solemn  warning  of  the  ultimate  conse- 
quences of  apostasy.  Yet  the  Divine  forbearance  continued 
other  370  years  before  the  threatened  judgment  burst  upon 
the  nation.  But  at  this  time  Jerusalem  was  spared.  Voluntary 
submission  having  been  made,  Shishak  entered  the  city,  and 
contented  himself  with  carrying  away  the  treasures  of  the 
Temple  and  of  the  Palace,  including  among  the  latter  the 
famous  golden  shields  used  by  Solomon's  body-guard  on  state 
occasions,^  for  which  Rehoboam  now  substituted  shields  of 
brass.  2 

^  These  were  kept  in  the  guard-house,  or  "house  of  the  runners,"  who 
kept  watch  at  the  entrance  of  the  king's  house — and  not,  as  before,  in  the 
house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon  (i  Kings  x.  17). 

2  And  yet  the  Rabbis  speak  of  the  reign  of  Rehoboam  as  one  of  the  five 
brilliant  periods  (those  of  David,  Solomon,  Rehoboam,  Asa,  and  Abijah, 
Shem.  R.  15).  The  Rabbinical  notices  are  collated  in  the  Nachalath 
Shim.,  p.  61,  cols,  c  and  d.  There  is  a  curious  legend  [Pes.  119,  a),  that 
Joseph  gathered  in  Egypt  all  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  world,  and  that  the 
children  of  Israel  brought  it  up  with  them  from  Egypt.  On  the  capture  of 
Jerusalem,  Shishak  is  said  to  have  taken  it,  and  the  possession  of  this 
treasure  is  then  traced  through  various  wars  to  Rome,  where  it  is  said 
now  to  be. 


136  Jeroboam,  first  King  of  Israel. 


CHAPTER   XI. 


JEROBOAM,   FIRST   KING   OF   ISRAEL. 

Political  Measures  of  Jeroboam— The  Golden  Calves— The  New  Priesthood 
and  the  New  Festival— The  Man  of  Elohim  from  J ud all— His  Message 
and  Sign— Jeroboam  Strucl(  by  Jehovah  and  miraculously  Restored 
—Invitation  to  the  Man  of  Elohim— Heathen  view  of  Miracles— The 
Old  Prophet— Return  of  the  Man  of  Elohim  to  Bethel— Judgment 
on  his  Disobedience— Character  of  the  Old  Prophet  and  of  the  Man 
of  Elohim— Sicliness  of  the  Pious  Child  of  Jeroboam— Mission  of  his 
Mother  to  Ahijah  — Predicted  Judgment  — Death  of  the  Child  — 
Remaining  Notices  of  Jeroboam. 

(i  Kings  xii.  25-xiv.  20.) 

FROM  the  history  of  Judah  under  Rehoboam,  we  turn  to 
that  of  the  newly  -  estabUshed  kingdom  of  Israel,  the 
record  of  which  is  only  found  in  the  Book  of  Kings  (i  Kings 
xii.  25 — xiv.  20).  The  first  object  of  Jeroboam  ("  He  shall 
increase  the  people")  was  to  strengthen  the  defences  of  his 
throne.  For  this  purpose  he  fortified  Shechem,  the  modern 
Nablus — which  he  made  his  residence  till  he  exchanged  it  for 
Tirzah  (i  Kings  xiv.  17) — and  also  the  ancient  Penuel  (Gen. 
xxxii.  30,  31;  Judges  viii.  8),  on  the  other  side  Jordan. 
As  the  latter  place  commanded  the  great  caravan-route  to 
Damascus  and  Palmyra,  its  fortification  would  serve  the  double 
purpose  of  establishing  the  rule  of  Jeroboam  in  the  territory 
east  of  the  Jordan,  and  of  protecting  the  country  against  in- 
cursions from  the  east  and  north-east.  His  next  measure, 
though,  as  he  deemed  it,  also  of  a  protective  character,  not  only 
involved  the  most  daring  religious  innovation  ever  attempted 
in  Israel,  but  was  fraught  with  the  most  fatal  consequences  to 


Jerohoa^n's  Political  and  Religious  Measures.      137 

Jeroboam  and  to  Israel.  How  deeply  Israel  had  sunk  appears 
alike  from  the  fact  that  the  king  acted  with  the  approbation  of 
his  advisers  ^ — no  doubt  the  representatives  of  the  ten  tribes — 
and  that  the  people,  with  the  exception  of  the  Levites  and  a 
minority  among  the  laity,  readily  acquiesced  in  the  measure. 
It  implied  no  less  than  a  complete  transformation  of  the 
religion  of  Jehovah,  and  that  for  a  purely  political  object. 

The  danger  that,  if  the  people  regularly  resorted  to  the  great 
festivals  at  Jerusalem,  their  allegiance  might  be  won  back  to 
their  rightful  king,  who  held  rule  in  the  God-chosen  capital, 
was  too  obvious  not  to  have  occurred  to  a  mind  even  less 
suspicious  than  that  of  an  Oriental  despot,  who  had  gained 
his  throne  by  rebellion.  To  cut  off  this  source  of  dynastic 
and  even  personal  peril,  Jeroboam,  with  the  advice  of  his 
council,  introduced  a  complete  change  in  the  worship  of 
Israel.  In  so  doing,  his  contention  would  probably  be,  that 
he  had  not  abolished  the  ancient  religion  of  the  people,  only 
given  it  a  form  better  suited  to  present  circumstances — one, 
moreover,  derived  from  primitive  national  use,  and  sanctioned 
by  no  less  an  authority  than  that  of  Aaron,  the  first  High-priest ^ 
It  was  burdensome  and  almost  impossible  to  go  up  to  the 
central  Sanctuary  at  Jerusalem.  But  there  was  the  ancient 
symbol  of  the  "golden  calf,"^  made  by  Aaron  himself,  under 
which  the  people  had  worshipped  Jehovah  in  the  wilderness. 
Appealing,  perhaps  at  the  formal  consecration  of  these  symbols, 
lo  the  very  words  which  Aaron  had  used  (Ex.  xxxii.  4),  Jero- 

^  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  expression  (i  Kings  xii.  28)  :  "the 
king  took  counsel,"  only  refers  to  deliberation  in  his  own  mind.  But  the 
view  given  in  the  text  seems  the  more  rational,  consistent,  and  accordant 
with  the  language  of  the  original. 

2  The  idea,  that  these  golden  calves  of  Jeroboam  were  intended  as 
imitations  o  the  cherubim  over  the  ark  (Speaker's  Co?nment.),  is  manifestly 
untenable. 

3  It  has  been  objected,  that  Jeroboam  could  not  have  wished  to  have 
recalled  to  Israel  the  service  of  the  golden  calf  in  the  wilderness,  in  view 
of  the  punishment  which  followed  that  sin.  But  the  words  and  the  fact 
clearly  point  to  it ;  and  many  ways  might  be  found  of  either  ignoring  or 
explaining  away  the  consequences  of  Israel's  conduct  at  that  time. 


138  Jeroboam^  first  King  of  Israel. 

boam  made  two  golden  calves,  and  located  them  at  the  southern 
and  the  northern  extremities  of  the  territory  of  the  ten  tribes. 
This  was  the  more  easy,  since  there  were  both  in  the  south 
and  north  "sacred"  localities,  associated  in  popular  opinion 
with  previous  worship.  Such  in  the  extreme  south  was  Beth-el 
— "  the  house  of  God  and  the  gate  of  heaven  " — consecrated 
by  the  twofold  appearance  of  God  to  Jacob ;  set  apart  by 
the  patriarch  himself  (Gen.  xxviii.  11-19;  xxxv.  i,  7,  9-15); 
and  where  of  old  Samuel  had  held  solemn  assemblies  (i  Sam. 
vii.  16).  Similarly,  in  the  extreme  north  Dan  was  a  "con- 
secrated "  place,  where  "  strange  worship  "  may  have  lingered 
from  the  days  of  Micah  (Judges  xviii.  30,  31). 

The  setting  up  of  the  golden  calves  as  the  symbol  of 
Jehovah  brought  with  it  other  changes.  An  "  house  of  Bamoth," 
or  Temple  for  the  high-place  altars,  probably  with  priests' 
dwellings  attached,  was  reared.  The  Levitical  priesthood  was 
extruded,  either  as  inseparably  connected  with  the  old  worship, 
or  because  it  would  not  conform  to  the  new  order  of  things, 
and  a  new  priesthood  appointed,  not  confined  to  any  tribe 
or  family,  but  indiscriminately  taken  from  all  classes  of  the 
people,^  the  king  himself  apparently  acting,  in  true  heathen 
fashion,  as  Chief  Pontiff  (i  Kings  xii.  32,  2)'h)'^  Lastly,  the 
great  Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  transferred  from  the  7th  to  the 
8th  month,  probably  as  a  more  suitable  and  convenient  time  for 
a  harvest-festival  in  the  northern  parts  of  Palestine,  the  date 
(the  15th)  being,  however,  retained,  as  that  of  the  full  moon. 
That  this  was  virtually,  and  would  in  practice  almost  imme- 
diately become  idolatry,  is  evident.  Indeed,  it  is  expressly 
attested  in  2  Chron,  xi.  15,  where  the  service  of  the  "Calves" 
is  not  only  associated  with  that  of  the  Ba??ioth^  or  high-place 
altars,  but  even  with  that  of  "  goats  "  ^ — the  ancient  Egyptian 

^  Our  Authorised  Version  renders  "  the  lowest  of  the  people."  But  this 
is  not  implied  in  the  original,  which  uses  an  expression  conveying  the  idea 
of  all  ranks  and  classes,  in  opposition  to  the  Levites. 

^  This  is  implied  in  his  offering  the  incense,  which  was  the  highest  act 
in  worship. 

^  So  literally,  and  not  "devils,"  as  in  our  Authorised  Version  and 
according  to  the  Rabbis. 


TIte  New   Worship  and  Priesthood.  139 

worship  of  Pan  under  the  form  of  a  goat  (Lev.  xvii.  7).  It 
is  true,  the  text  does  not  imply,  as  our  Authorised  Version 
suggests,  that  the  new  priests  were  taken  "from  the  lowest 
of  the  people."  But  the  emphatic  and  more  detailed  repetition 
of  the  mode  of  their  appointment  (i  Kings  xii.  31,  comp.  xiii. 
33),  of  which  apparently  the  only  condition  was  to  bring  an 
offering  of  one  young  bullock  and  seven  rams  (2  Chron.  xiii.  9), 
enables  us  to  judge  on  what  class  of  people  the  conduct  of 
the  religious  services  must  soon  have  devolved. 

A  more  daring  attempt  against  that  God-ordained  symbolical 
religion,  the  maintenance  of  which  was  the  ultimate  reason 
for  Israel's  call  and  existence — so  to  speak,  Israel's  very  raison 
d'etre — could  not  be  conceived.  It  was  not  only  an  act  of  gross 
disobedience,  but,  as  the  sacred  text  repeatedly  notes,  a  system 
devised  out  of  J  eroboam's  own  heart,  when  every  religious  insti- 
tution in  Israel  had  been  God-appointed,  symboHcal,  and  form- 
ing a  unity  of  which  no  part  could  be  touched  without  impairing 
the  whole.  It  was  a  movement  which,  if  we  may  venture  so 
to  say,  called  for  immediate  and  unmistakable  interposition 
from  on  high.  Here,  then,  if  anywhere,  we  may  look  for  the 
miraculous,  and  that  in  its  most  startling  manifestation.  Nor 
was  it  long  deferred. 

It  was,  as  we  take  it,  the  first  occasion  on  which  this  new 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  celebrated — perhaps  at  the  same 
time  also  the  dedication  of  the  new  Temple  and  the  inaugura- 
tion of  its  services.  Bethel  was  in  festive  array,  and  thronged 
by  pilgrims — for  no  less  a  personage  than  the  king  himself  was 
to  officiate  as  Chief  Pontiff  on  that  occasion.  Connecting,  as 
we  undoubtedly  should  do,  the  last  verse  of  i  Kings  xii.  with 
the  first  of  chapter  xiii.,  and  rendering  it  literally,  we  read  that 
on  this  feast  which  he  "  made  "  {i.e.  of  his  own  devising)  "  to  the 
children  of  Israel,"  the  king  "  went  up  on  the  altar,"  that  is, 
up  the  sloping  ascent  which  led  to  the  circuit  around  the  altar 
on  which  the  officiating  priest  stood.  The  sacrifices  had 
already  been  offered,  and  their  smouldering  embers  and  fat 


140  Jeroboam,  first  King  of  Israel. 

had  mingled  with  the  ashes  (i  Kings  xiii.  3).^  And  now  the 
most  solemn  and  central  part  of  the  service  was  reached.  The 
king  went  up  the  inclined  plane  to  the  middle  of  the  altar  2 
to  burn  the  incense,  when  he  was  suddenly  arrested,  and  the 
worshippers  startled  by  a  voice  from  among  the  crowd  (comp. 
here  the  similar  event  in  John  vii.  37).  It  was  a  stranger 
who  spoke,  and,  as  we  know  him,  a  Judaean,  "a  man  of 
Elohim''  He  had  come  ''in^  the  word  of  Jehovah"  (i  Kings 
xiii.  i) — hot  merely  in  charge  of  it,  nor  only  in  its  constraining 
power,  but  as  if  the  Word  of  Jehovah  itself  had  come,  and  this 
"  man  of  God  "  been  carried  in  it  to  deliver  the  message  which 
he  "  cried  to  the  altar  in  the  word  of  Jehovah  "  (ver.  2).  It  was 
to  the  spurious  and  rival  altar  that  he  spake,  and  not  to  the 
king — for  it  was  a  controversy  with  spurious  worship,  and  King 
Jeroboam  was  as  nothing  before  Jehovah.  That  altar,  and  the 
policy  which  had  reared  it,  would  be  shivered  —  the  altar 
desecrated,*  and  that  by  a  son  of  David  ^ — whereof  he  gave 

^  I  Kings  xiii.  3,  not  "ashes,"  as  in  the  Authorised  Version,  but  "fat" 
— or  rather  ashes  laden  with  fat. 

2  Ver.  I  in  the  original :  "Jeroboam  stood  upon  the  altar" — this  because 
"going  up  "  the  inclined  plane  to  the  middle  of  the  altar,  he  would  stand 
on  the  circuit  of  the  altar,  when  laying  on  it  either  sacrifices  or  incense. 

2  So  literally. 

^  The  most  effectual  mode  of  desecration  would  be  by  the  bones  of 
dead  men  (comp.  Numb.  xix.  16).  For  the  fulfilment  of  this  prediction, 
see  2  Kings  xxiii.   16. 

5  We  would  put  the  words  in  i  Kings  xiii.  2,  "  Josiah  by  name,"  within 
hyphens,  thus:  " — ^Josiah  by  name — ,"  as  not  those  of  the  original  pro- 
phecy, but  of  the  writer  of  the  Book  of  Kings,  being  added  for  the  purpose 
of  pointing  to  the  fulfilment  of  that  prediction.  Our  reasons  for  this  view 
are :  i.  That  there  is  a  similar,  and  in  that  case,  unquestionable,  ex- 
planatory addition  by  the  writer  in  ver.  32,  where  the  "cities  of  Samaria" 
are  mentioned  (see  our  note  below) ;  2.  That  prophecy  never  deals  in 
details  ;  3.  That  the  present  would  be  the  only  exception  to  this  rule. 
For,  the  mention  of  Cyrus  by  name  in  Isa.  xliv.  28  ;  xlv.  I,  affords  no 
parallel  instance,  since  Cyrus,  or  Coresh,  means  "  Sun, "  and  may  be  regarded 
as  the  designation  (appellation)  of  the  Persian  kings,  which  Cyrus  after- 
wards made  his  own  name  (like  Augustus  Ccesar).  Keil,  indeed,  argues 
that  Josiah  was  also  an  appellative  title,  meaning  "Jehovah  supports 
him" — but  this  explanation  seems,  to  say  the  least,  strained.     There  is  no 


In  the  Temple  of  Bethel.  141 

them  immediate  symbolic  evidence  that  Jehovah  had  spoken 
by  his  mouth  that  day,i  by  this  "  wondrous  sight,"  ^  that  the 
altar  would  be  rent,  and  the  ashes  laden  with  the  fat  of  the 
sacrifices  poured  out.  Arrested  by  this  uncompromising  an- 
nouncement from  one  whom  he  regarded  as  a  daring  fanatical 
intruder,  the  king  turned  quickly  round,  and  stretching  out  his 
hand  towards  him,  commanded:  "Seize  him!"  But  already 
a  mightier  Hand  than  King  Jeroboam's  was  stretched  out. 
Now,  if  ever,  would  Jehovah  vindicate  His  authority,  prove 
His  Word,  and  show  before  all  the  people  that  He,  Whose 
authority  they  had  cast  off,  was  the  Living  God.  Then  and 
there  must  it  be  shown,  in  the  idol-temple,  at  the  first  con- 
secration of  that  spurious  altar,  at  the  first  false  feast,  and  upon 
King  Jeroboam,  in  the  pomp  of  his  splendour  and  the  boast- 
fulness  of  his  supposed  power  (comp.  here  Acts  xii.  22,  23). 
The  king  had  put  forth  his  hand,  but  he  could  not  draw  it 
back :  the  Hand  of  the  Lord  held  it.  Some  mysterious 
stroke  had  fallen  upon  him ;  and  while  he  thus  stood,  himself  a 
sign,  the  top  of  the  altar  suddenly  parted,  and  the  ashes,  clogged 
and  heavy  with  the  fat  of  idol-sacrifices,  poured  out  around  him. 
No  hand  was  stretched  out  to  seize  the  "  man  of  God."  Nor 
was  there  need  of  it — the  "  man  of  God  "  had  neither  design 
nor  desire  to  escape.  Rather  was  it  now  the  king's  turn,  not 
to  command  but  to  entreat.  In  the  expressive  language  of  the 
original :  "  And  the  king  answered  "  (to  the  unspoken  word  of 
Jehovah  in  the  stroke  that  had  arrested  his  hand),  "  and  said, 


need  to  suppose  that,  contrary  to  the  universal  canon  of  prophecy,  a  pre- 
diction would  give  a  name  300  years  before  the  time.  Of  course,  fully- 
believing,  as  we  do,  in  the  reality  of  prophecy,  we  admit  that  this  would  be 
quite  possible ;  but  on  the  grounds  mentioned,  and  on  others  which  will 
readily  suggest  themselves,  it  seems  so  unlikely,  that  we  have  adopted  a 
view,  supported,  if  not  suggested,  by  the  reference  to  Samaria  in  ver.  32. 
True  and  reverent  faith  in  Divine  revelation  will  make  us  only  the  more 
careful  in  our  study  of  its  exact  meaning. 

^  I  Kings  xiii.  3  reads:  "This  is  the  portent  (marvellous  sign)  that 
Jehovah  hath  spoken"  (not  "which  Jehovah  hath  spoken,"  as  in  our 
Authorised  Version). 

-  The  Hebrew  word  means  a  marvellous  sign. 


142  Jeroboam^  first  King  of  Israel. 

Soften  now  the  Face  of  Jehovah  thy  God,  and  make  entreaty 
on  my  behalf,  and  "  (or,  that)  "  my  hand  shall  return  to  me." 

It  was  as  he  craved — for  the  prophecy  and  controversy  were 
not  with  the  king,  but  with  the  Altar.  And  all  this  had  been 
only  a  sign,  which  had  fulfilled  its  purpose,  and  would  fulfil 
it  still  more,  if  the  same  Power  that  had  appeared  in  the 
sudden  stroke  would  again  become  manifest  in  its  equally 
sudden  removal.  As  for  Jeroboam,  Jehovah  had  no  contro- 
versy with  him  then  and  there,  nor  indeed  anywhere.  The 
judgment  of  his  sins  would  soon  enough  overtake  him  and  his 
house.  It  might,  indeed,  seem  passing  strange  that  the  king 
could  now  invite  this  "  man  of  God  "  to  his  palace  and  table, 
and  even  promise  him  "a  reward,"  if  we  did  not  bear  in  mind 
the  circumstances  of  the  times,  and  the  heathen  idea  of 
miracles.  To  the  heathen  the  miraculous,  as  direct  Divine 
manifestation,  was  not  something  extraordinary  and  unexpected. 
Heathenism — may  we  not  say,  the  ancient  world  ? — expected  the 
miraculous ;  and  hence  in  those  times  God's  manifestation  by 
miracles  might  almost  be  designated  not  as  an  extraordinary, 
but,  according  to  the  then  notions,  as  the  ordinary  mode  of 
teaching.  Moreover,  heathenism  regarded  miracles  as  simply 
manifestations  of  power^  and  the  worker  of  miracles  as  a 
magician,  possessed  of  power — the  question  being,  whether  the 
power  of  the  deity  whom  he  represented  was  greater  than  that 
of  other  gods,  or  not.  It  was,  no  doubt,  in  this  light  that 
Jeroboam  regarded  this  "  man  of  Elohim  " — the  name  Elohim 
itself  expressing  especially  '-^ power.'''' '^  This,  as  well  as  know- 
ledge of  the  character  of  his  own  "  prophets,"  and  perhaps  a 
secret  hope  that  he  might  attach  him  to  himself  by  a  "  reward," 
prompted  the  words  of  the  king.  He  would  do  honour  to  the 
man  of  power,  and,  through  him,  to  the  deity  whom  he  repre- 
sented— perhaps  even  gain  the  man  of  God.^ 

^  In  contradistinction  to  Jehovah^  which  added  the  idea  of  the  covenant 
to  that  of  power. 

2  I  prefer  this  to  the  view  that  Jeroboam's  conduct  was  merely  prompted 
by  the  wish  to  nullify  the  effect  upon  the  people.  Such  a  motive  seems, 
psychologically,  unlikely  in  the  circumstances. 


Jeroboam  invites  the  "  Man  of  Elohimr        143 

It  need  scarcely  be  said,  that  the  mere  fact  of  the  "  man  of 

God  "  entering  the  king's  palace  and  sharing  his  feast — probably 
a  sacrificial  idol-feast — would  not  only  have  been  contrary  to 
the  whole  scope  and  spirit  of  his  embassy,  but  have  destroyed 
the  moral  effect  of  the  scene  enacted  before  the  people.  So, 
to  mention  a  much  lower  parallelism,  is  the  moral  effect  of  all 
Christian  testimony,  whether  by  word  or  life,  annulled  by 
every  act  of  conformity  to,  and  fellowship  with  the  world 
(comp.  Rom.  xii.  i,  2).  But  in  the  present  instance  any 
danger  of  this  kind  had  by  anticipation  been  averted.  God 
had  given  His  messenger  express  command,  neither  to  eat 
bread  nor  to  drink  water  in  that  place,  nor  even  to  return  by 
the  way  that  he  had  come.  These  directions  had,  of  course, 
a  much  deeper  and  symbolical  meaning.  They  indicated  that 
Bethel  lay  under  the  ban ;  that  no  fellowship  of  any  kind  was 
to  be  held  with  it;  and  that  even  the  way  by  which  the 
messenger  of  God  had  come,  was  to  be  regarded  as  conse- 
crated, and  not  to  be  retraced.^  In  the  discharge  of  the 
commission  entrusted  to  him,  the  "man  of  God,"  who  had 
"  come  in  the  word  of  Jehovah,"  was  to  consider  himself  as 
an  impersonal  being — till  he  was  beyond  the  place  to  which, 
and  the  road  by  which  he  had  been  sent.  Whatever  view, 
therefore,  we  may  take  of  his  after-conduct,  it  cannot  at  least 
surprise  us,  that  at  that  moment  no  earthly  temptation  could 
have  induced  him  to  accept  the  king's  offer  (i  Kings  xiii.  8,  9). 
Yet,  as  we  think  of  it,  the  answer  of  the  "  man  of  God " 
seems  to  us  disappointing.  It  is  like  that  of  Balaam  to  the 
messengers  of  Balak  (Numb.  xxii.  13,  18),  and  yet  we  know  that 
all  along  his  heart  was  with  them,  and  that  he  afterwards  yielded 
to  their  solicitations,  to  his  own  destruction.  We  would  have 
expected  more  from  the  "  man  of  God  "  than  a  mere  recital  ot 
his  orders — some  expression  of  feeling  like  that  of  Daniel 
under  analogous  circumstances  (Dan.  v.  17).     But,  in  repeating 

^  The  general  explanation,  that  this  was  added,  in  order  that  it  should 
not  be  known  what  route  he  took,  so  that  he  might  be  fetched  back,  needs 
no  refutation. 


144  JeroboaMy  first  Ki7ig  of  Israel. 

before  all  the  people  the  express  command  which  God  had 
given  him,  the  "man  of  God,"  like  Balaam  of  old,  also  pro- 
nounced his  own  necessary  doom,  if  he  swerved  from  the 
injunction  laid  upon  him.  He  had  borne  testimony — and  by 
the  testimony  of  his  own  mouth  he  must  be  content  to  be 
judged ;  he  was  quite  certain  of  the  command  which  God  had 
laid  upon  him,  and  by  that  certainty  he  must  abide. 

And  at  first  it  seemed  as  if  he  would  have  done  so.  His 
message  delivered,  he  left  Bethel  by  another  way  than  that 
which  he  had  come.  Among  his  astonished  audience  that  day 
had  been  the  sons  of  an  old  resident  in  Bethel,  whose  real 
character  it  is  not  easy  to  read.^  In  the  sacred  narrative  he  is 
throughout  designated  as  Navi^  or  Prophet  (literally  :  one  who 
"wells  forth"),  while  the  Divine  messenger  from  Judah  is 
always  described  as  "man  of  Elohim" — a  distinction  which 
must  have  its  meaning.  On  their  return  from  the  idol-temple, 
the  eldest  of  his  sons  ^  described"  to  the  old  prophet  the  scene 
which  they  had  witnessed.  Inquiring  from  them  what  road 
the  "man  of  God"  had  taken — which  they,  and  probably 
many  others  had  watched^ — he  hastily  rode  after  him,  and 
overtook  him.  The  "  man  of  Elohim  "  was  resting  under  "  the 
terebinth  " — apparently  a  well-known  spot  where  travellers  were 
wont  to  unlade  their  beasts  of  burden,  and  to  halt  for  shelter 
and  repose  (a  kind  of  "  Travellers'  Rest " ).  Repeating  the  in- 
vitation of  Jeroboam,  he  received  the  same  answer  as  the  king. 
There  could  be  even  less  hesitation  now,  since  the  "man  of 
God"  had  actually  left  Bethel,  nor  could  he  possibly  have 

^  See  the  remarks  further  on. 

2  In  the  second  clause  of  ver.  ii  the  singular  is  used,  *'  his  son,"  not,  as 
in  our  Authorised  Version,  "sons."  The  plural  which  follows  shows, 
however,  that  several  sons  were  present,  though  one  was  the  spokesman. 
From  the  presence  of  the  "old  prophet"  in  Bethel,  and  that  of  Ahijah  in 
Shiloh,  we  infer  that,  if  there  was  a  migration  of  pious  laity  into  the  territory 
of  Rehoboam — which,  however,  is  not  expressly  stated  in  2  Chron.  xi.  id- 
it  must  have  been  that  of  a  minority. 

3  This  disposes  of  the  argument  quoted  in  the  previous  page  as  to  the 
reason  why  the  "  man  of  God  "  was  to  return  by  another  road. 


TJie  ^^ Man  of  EloJiim^''  rettcms  to  Bethel.       145 

deemed  it  right  to  return  thither.  Upon  this  the  old  prophet 
addressed  him  as  a  colleague,  and  falsely  pretended,  not  indeed 
that  Jehovah,  but  that  "  an  angel  in  the  word  of  Jehovah,"  had 
directed  him  to  fetch  him  back,  when  the  other  immediately 
complied.  As  the  two  sat  at  table  in  Bethel,  suddenly  "  the 
word  of  Jehovah  was  upon  the  prophet  ^  who  had  brought  him 
back."  Because  he  had  "  resisted  (rebelled  against)  the  mouth 
of  Jehovah,  and  not  kept  the  commandment  which  Jehovah 
had  commanded  him,"  2  his  dead  body  should  not  come  into 
the  sepulchre  ^  of  his  fathers.  Startling  as  such  an  announce- 
ment must  have  been,  it  would  set  two  points  vividly  before 
him  :  his  disobedience  and  his  impending  punishment — the 
latter  very  real,  according  to  the  views  prevailing  at  the  time 
(Gen.  xlvii.  30;  xlix.  29;  1.  25  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  37,  etc.),  although 
not  implying  either  immediate  or  even  violent  death.  It  is 
very  surprising  to  us — and  indicative  of  the  absence  of  the 
hjgher  moral  and  spiritual  elements  —  that  this  announce- 
ment was  not  followed  by  any  expression  of  sorrow  or  repent- 
ance, but  that  the  meal  seems  to  have  continued  uninter- 
rupted to  the  end.  Did  the  old  prophet  seem  to  the  other 
only  under  an  access  of  ecstatic  frenzy?  Did  the  fact  that 
he  announced  not  immediate  death  blunt  the  edge  of  his 
message  ?  Had  disobedience  to  the  Divine  command  carried 
as  its  consequence  immediate  spiritual  callousness  ?  Or  had 
the  return  of  the  "  man  of  God  "  to  Bethel  after  all  been  the 
result  of  a  deeper  estrangement  from  God,  of  which  the  first 
manifestation  had  already  appeared  in  what  we  have  described 
as  his  strangely  insufficient  answer  to  Jeroboam's  invitation  and 
offer?  These  are  necessarily  only  suggestions — and  yet  it 
seems  to  us  as  if  all  these  elements  had  been  present  and  at 
work  to  bring  about  the  final  result. 

^  So  literally.  2  So  literally. 

3  The  sepulchres  in  Palestine  were  not  like  ours,  but  generally  rock- 
hewn,  and  consisted  of  an  ante-chamber  and  an  inner  cave  in  which  the 
bodies  were  deposited  in  niches — the  entrance  to  the  sepulchre  being 
guarded  by  a  stone.  For  details,  comp.  Sketches  of  Jewish  Social  Life  in 
the  Days  of  Christ,  p.   171. 

L 


146  Jeroboam,  first  King  of  Israel. 

The  meal  was  past,  and  the  "  old  prophet "  saddled  his  ass 
to  convey  his  guest  to  his  destination.  But  the  end  of  the 
journey  was  never  reached.  As  some  travellers  were  passing 
that  way,  they  saw  an  unwonted  spectacle  which  must  have 
induced  them  to  hasten  on  their  journey.  Close  by  the  roadside 
lay  a  dead  body,  and  beside  it  stood  the  ass  ^  which  the  unhappy 
man  had  ridden — both  guarded,  as  it  were,  by  the  lion,  who 
had  killed  the  man,  evidently  by  the  weight  of  his  paw  as  he 
knocked  him  down, 2  without,  however,  rending  him,  or  attempt- 
ing to  feed  on  his  carcase.  Who  the  dead  man  was,  the 
travellers  seem  not  to  have  known,  nor  would  they,  of  course, 
pause  by  the  road.  On  passing  through  Bethel — which  from 
the  narrative  does  not  seem  to  have  been  their  ultimate  destina- 
tion, but  the  first  station  which  they  reached — they  naturally 
"  talked  in  the  town  "  about  what  they  had  just  seen  in  its 
neighbourhood.  When  the  rumour  reached  the  "  old  prophet," 
he  immediately  understood  the  meaning  of  all.  Riding  to  the 
spot,  he  reverently  carried  home  with  him  the  dead  body  of  the 
"man  of  God,"  mourned  over,  and  buried  him  in  his  own 
sepulchre,  marking  the  place  by  a  monumental  pillar  to  distin- 
guish this  from  other  tombs,  and  to  keep  the  event  in  perpetual 
remembrance.  But  to  his  sons  he  gave  solemn  direction  to  lay 
him  in  the  same  tomb — in  the  rock-niche  by  the  side  of  that 
in  which  the  "  man  of  God  "  rested.  This  was  to  be  a  dying 
testimony  to  "  the  man  of  God  :"  that  his  embassy  of  God  had 
been  real,  and  that  surely  the  "  thing  would  be  "  (that  it  would 
happen)  "  which  he  had  cried  in  the  word  of  Jehovah  against 
the  altar  which  (was)  at  Bethel,  and  against  all  the  Ba77ioth- 
houses  which   (are)^  in  the   cities   of  Samaria."      With   this 

^  From  2  Kings  ii.  24  we  gather,  that  the  forest  around  Bethel  was  the 
haunt  of  wild  beasts.  It  will  be  easily  understood,  that  it  was  almost 
necessary  the  lion  should  remain  by  the  dead  body,  alike  to  show  the 
Divine  character  of  the  judgment,  and  to  induce  the  passers-by  to  make 
haste  on  their  journey. 

^  This  is  clearly  implied  by  the  word  "broken"  in  I  Kings  xiii.  26, 
marginal  rendering. 

^  So  literally.  The  reference  to  the  other  BamoihAxonsas,  besides  those 
of  Bethel  and  Dan,  is,  of  course,  prophetic. 


The  Prophecy  Ftdfilled.  \^y 

profession  of  faith  in  the  truth  of  Jehovah's  message,  and  in 
the  power  of  the  Lord  certainly  to  bring  it  to  pass  at  some 
future  time,  would  the  old  prophet  henceforth  live.  With 
it  would  he  die  and  be  buried — laying  his  bones  close  to  those 
of  the  "  man  of  God,"  sharing  his  grave,  and  nestling,  as  it  were, 
for  shelter  in  the  shadow  of  that  great  Reality  which  "  the  man 
of  God  "  had  cast  over  Bethel,  So  would  he,  in  life  and  death, 
speak  of,  and  cling  to  Jehovah — as  the  True  and  the  Living  God. 
More  than  three  hundred  years  later,  and  nearly  a  century  had 
passed  since  the  children  of  Israel  had  been  carried  away  from 
their  homes.  Theii  it  was  that  what,  centuries  before,  the  *'  man 
of  God"  had  foretold,  became  literally  true  (2  Kings  xxiii.  1 5-18). 
The  idol-temple,  in  which  Jeroboam  had  stood  in  his  power 
and  glory  on  that  opening  day,  was  burned  by  Josiah;  the 
Bamoth  were  cast  down ;  and  on  that  altar,  to  defile  it,  they 
gathered  from  the  neighbouring  sepulchres  the  bones  of  its 
former  worshippers,  and  burned  them  there.  Yet  in  their 
terrible  search  of  vengeance  one  monument  arrested  their 
attention.  They  asked  of  them  at  Bethel.  It  marked  the 
spot  where  the  bones  of  "  the  man  of  God "  and  of  his 
host  the  "  old  prophet  "  of  Samaria  ^  lay.  And  they  reverently 
left  the  bones  in  their  resting-places,  side  by  side — as  in  life, 
death,  and  burial,  so  still  and  for  aye  witnesses  to  Jehovah ; 
and  'safe  in  their  witness-bearing.  But  three  centuries  and 
more  between  the  prediction  and  the  final  fulfilment :  and 
in  that  time  symbolic  rending  of  the  altar,  changes,  wars, 
final  ruin,  and  desolation  !  And  still  the  word  seemed  to 
slumber  all  those  centuries  of  silence,  before  it  was  literally 
fulfilled.  There  is  something  absolutely  overawing  in  this 
absence  of  all  haste  on  the  part  of  God,  in  this  certainty  of 
the  final  event,  with  apparent  utter  unconcern  of  what  may 

^  The  mention  of  Samaria  here  and  in  I  Kings  xiii.  32  must  have  been 
explanatory  additions  by  the  writer,  since  Samaria  was  only  built  by  Omri 
( I  Kings  xvi.  24).  This,  of  course,  confirms  the  view  we  have  expressed 
about  the  mention  of  the  name  of  Josiah.  It  need  scarcely  be  stated,  that 
this  in  no  way  invalidates  the  truthfulness  of  the  narrative,  but  rather 
confirms  it. 


148  Jeruhoam^  first  King  of  Israel. 

happen  during  the  long  centuries  that  intervene,  which  makes 
us  tremble  as  we  realise  how  much  of  buried  seed  of  warning 
or  of  promise  may  sleep  in  the  ground,  and  how  unexpectedly, 
but  how  certainly,  it  will  ripen  as  in  one  day  into  a  harvest  of 
judgment  or  of  mercy. 

But  too  many  questions  and  lessons  are  involved  in  this 
history  to  pass  it  without  further  study.  Who  was  this  "  old 
prophet?"  was  he  a  true  prophet  of  Jehovah?  and  why  did 
he  thus  "  lie "  to  the  destruction  of  the  "  man  of  God  ?" 
Again,  why  was  such  severe  punishment  meted  out  to  the 
"man  of  God?"  did  he  deserve  any  for  what  might  have 
been  only  an  error  of  judgment  ?  and  w^hy  did  his  tempter  and 
seducer  apparently  escape  all  punishment  ?  To  begin  wath 
the  old  "prophet"  of  Bethel — we  do  not  regard  him  as  simply 
a  false  prophet,  w^hose  object  it  was  to  seduce  "  the  man  of 
God,"  either  from  jealousy  or  to  destroy  the  effect  of  his 
mission.^  On  the  other  hand,  it  seems  equally  incorrect  to 
speak  of  him  as  a  true  prophet  of  God,  roused  from  sinful 
conformity  with  those  around  by  the  sudden  appearance  of  the 
Judsean  messenger  of  Jehovah,  and  anxious  to  recover  him- 
self by  fellowship  with  "  the  man  of  God,"  even  if  that  inter- 
course could  only  be  secured  by  means  of  a  falsehood.^  Nor 
would  we  describe  his  conduct  as  intended  to  try  the  steadfast 
obedience  of  the  "man  of  God."  The  truth  seems  to  lie 
between  these  extreme  opinions.  Putting  aside  the  general 
question  of  heathen  divination,  which  we  have  not  sufficient 
materials  satisfactorily  to  answer,  it  is  at  least  certain  that 
not  every  Navi  was  a  prophet  of  Jehovah.  That  God  should 
have  sent  a  message  through  one  who  was  not  His  prophet, 
need  not  surprise  us  when  we  recall  the  history  of  Balaam. 
Moreover,  it  was  peculiarly  appropriate,  that  the  announcement 
of  guilt  and  punishment  should  come  to  the  "  man  of  God " 
through  the  person  who  had  misled  him   by  false    pretence 

1  This,  in  one  form  or  another,  is  the  view  of  Josephus,  the  Targum,  and 
of  most  of  the  Rabbinical  and  Christian  commentators. 

^  So  Ephr.  Syr,,  Theodor.,  Witsius,  Hengstenberg,  Keil,  and  Bahr. 


Character  and  Motives  of  the  *'  Old  Prophet ^    149 

of  an  angelic  command,  and  at  the  very  meal  to  which  the 
''man  of  God"  should  never  have  sat  down.  Again,  it  is 
evident  that,  from  the  moment  he  heard  of  the  scene  in 
the  idol-temple,  the  "  old  prophet "  believed  in  the  genuine- 
ness and  authority  of  the  message  brought  to  Bethel.  Every 
stage  in  the  history  deepened  this  conviction,  till  at  last  it 
became,  so  to  speak,  the  fundamental  fact  of  his  religious 
life,  which  must  have  determined  his  whole  after-conduct. 
May  it  not  have  been  that  this  "old  NavV  was  one  of 
the  fruits  of  the  "Schools  of  the  Prophets" — the  prophetic 
order  having  apparently  been  widely  revived  during  the  later 
part  of  Solomon's  reign?  Settling  in  Bethel  (as  Lot  in 
Sodom),  he  may  have  gradually  lapsed  into  toleration  of 
€vil — as  the  attendance  of  his  children  in  the  idol-temple 
seems  to  imply — without,  however,  surrendering  his  character, 
perhaps  his  office  of  "  Prophet,"  the  more  so  as  the  service 
of  Jehovah  might  be  supposed  to  be  only  altered  in  form,  not 
abolished,  by  the  adoption  of  the  symbol  of  the  Golden  Calves. 
In  that  case  his  immediate  recognition  of  the  "  man  of  God," 
and  his  deepening  conviction  may  be  easily  understood ;  his 
earnest  desire  to  claim  and  have  fellowship  with  a  direct 
messenger  of  God  seems  natural ;  and  even  his  unscrupulous 
use  of  falsehood  is  accounted  for. 

These  considerations  will  help  to  show  that  there  was  an 
essential  difference  between  him  and  "the  man  of  God," 
and  that  the  punishment  which  overtook  the  latter  bears 
no  possible  relation  to  the  apparent  impunity  of  the  "  old 
prophet."  That  terrible  judgment  ought  to  be  viewed  from 
two  different  points  :  as  it  were,  absolutely — from  heaven 
downwards ;  and  relatively  to  the  person  whom  it  overtook 
— from  earth  heavenwards.  The  most  superficial  considera- 
tion will  convince,  that,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  the 
authority  of  God  must  have  been  vindicated,  and  that  by  a 
patent  and  terrible  judgment,  if  the  object  and  meaning  of 
the  message  which  He  had  sent  were  not  to  be  nullified. 
When  "  the  man  of  God  "  publicly  proclaimed  in  the  temple 


I50  Jeroboam,  first  King  of  Israel. 

the  terms  which  God  had  prescribed,  he  pronounced  his  own 
sentence  in  case  of  disobedience.  Besides,  the  main  idea 
underlying  the  Divine  employment  of  such  messengers  was 
that  of  their  absolute  and  unquestioning  execution  of  the 
exact  terms  of  their  commission.  This  essential  condition  of 
the  prophetic  office  it  w^as  the  more  necessary  to  vindicate 
in  Bethel,  as  also  at  the  commencement  of  a  period  marked 
by  a  succession  of  prophets  in  Israel,  who,  in  the  absence  of 
the  God-ordained  services,  were  to  keep  alive  the  knowledge 
of  Jehovah,  and,  by  their  warnings  and  teaching,  to  avert, 
if  possible,  the  catastrophe  of  national  judgment  which  would 
overtake  apostate  Israel. 

As  regards  "the  man  of  God"  himself,  we  have  already 
noticed  the  increasing  spiritual  callousness,  consequent  upon 
his  first  unfaithfulness.  But  putting  this  aside,  surely  there 
never  could  have  been  any  serious  question  in  his  mind  as  to 
his  duty.  By  his  own  testimony,  he  had  received  express  and 
unmistakable  command  of  God,  which  Scripture  again  and 
again  repeats,  for  the  sake  of  emphasis;  and  his  conduct 
should  have  been  guided  on  the  plain  principle,  that  an  obvious 
and  known  duty  can  never  be  set  aside  by  another  seeming 
duty.  Besides,  what  evidence  had  he  that  an  angel  had 
really  spoken  to  the  "old  prophet;"  or  even  that  his  tempter 
was  a  "  prophet  "  at  all,  or,  if  a  prophet,  acted  in  the  prophetic 
spirit?  All  these  points  are  so  obvious,  that  the  conduct 
of  the  "man  of  God"  would  seem  almost  incredible,  if  we 
did  not  recall  how  often  in  every-day  life  we  are  tempted  to 
turn  aside  from  the  plain  demands  of  right  and  duty  by  a 
false  call  in  contravention  to  it.  In  all  moral  and  spiritual 
questions  it  is  ever  most  dangerous  to  reason  :  simple  obedi- 
ence and  not  argument  is  the  only  safe  path  (comp.  here 
Gal.  i.  8).  One  duty  can  never  contravene  another — and  the 
plainly  known  and  clear  command  of  God  must  silence  all 
side-questions. 

Viewing  the  conduct  of  the  "  man  of  God  "  as  a  fall  and  a 
sin,  all  becomes  plain.     He  had  publicly  announced  his  duty, 


Character  and  Cond'itct  of  the  "  Man  of  Elohim!'     151 

and  he  had  publicly  contravened  it ;  and  his  punishment  was, 
through  the  remarkable,  though  not  miraculous,  circumstances  ^ 
under  which  it  overtook  him,  equally  publicly  known.  Through- 
out the  whole  history  there  is,  so  to  speak,  a  remarkable  equi- 
poise in  the  circumstances  of  his  sin  and  of  his  punishment, 
as  also  in  the  vindication  of  God's  authority.  And  yet  even 
so,  the  moral  effect  of  God's  message  was  apparently  weakened 
through  the  sin  of  His  messenger.  So  terribly  fatal  in  their 
consequences  are  our  sins,  even  when  publicly  punished.  For 
it  is  scarcely  possible  to  believe  that,  had  it  not  been  so,  Jero- 
boam would  "  after  this  thing  "  have  uninterruptedly  continued 
his  former  course  of  defiance  of  the  authority  of  God.  But 
here  the  history  also  turns  from  Israel  to  its  wi-etched  king, 
and  in  a  narrative  of  deepest  pathos  shows  us  at  the  same  time 
the  punishment  of  his  sin,  and  the  wonderful  tenderness  of 
God's  dealings  towards  those  who,  in  the  midst  of  greatest 
temptations,  have  kept  their  hearts  true  to  Him,  and  are  pre- 
served by  His  mercy  from  the  evil  to  come.  And  most  com- 
forting is  it  to  know  that  God  has  and  keeps  His  own — even 
though  it  be  in  the  family  of  a  Jeroboam,  and  that  true  piety 
finds  its  respectful  acknowledgment,  even  among  a  people  so 
sunken  as  was  Israel  at  that  time. 

If  it  were  necessary  to  show  how  unhappiness  and  sin  ga 
hand  in  hand,  the  history  about  to  be  told  would  furnish  ample 
evidence  of  it.  The  main  reason  of  its  insertion  in  the  Biblical 
record  is,  of  course,  that  it  gave  occasion  to  announce  the 
Divine  punishment  upon  the  race  of  Jeroboam,  as  having 
traversed  the  fundamental  condition  on  which  the  possibility 
of  the  new  dynasty  rested  (i  Kings  xi.  38).  At  the  same  time, 
it  seems  also  to  cast  an  important  side-light  on  the  transaction 
between  Ahijah  the  prophet  and  Jeroboam,  when  the  former 
first  announced  to  him  his  future  elevation  to  the  kingdom 
(i  Kings  xi.  29-39).  Keil  renders  i  Kings  xiv.  7  :  "Thussaith 
Jehovah,  the   God  of  Israel :   Therefore,  because  thou  hast 

^  It  is  well  known  that  lions  do  not  prey  upon  dead  bodies,  except 
through  stress  of  hunger. 


152  Jeroboam,  first  King  of  Israel. 

elevated  thyself  from  amongst  the  people,  and  I  have  given 
thee  ruler  over  My  people  Israel"  If  this  rendering  is  cor- 
rect, it  would  imply  that  his  elevation,  or  leadership  of  Israel, 
was  in  the  first  place  entirely  Jeroboam's  own  act,  and  that, 
having  so  elevated  himself  and  assumed  the  leadership,  God 
afterwards  bestowed  on  him  the  rule  to  which  he  aspired, 
leaving  for  future  trial  the  fitness  of  his  race  for  the  kingdom. 

But,  besides  the  higher  Divine  meaning  of  this  history, 
it  possesses  also  a  deep  human  interest.  It  gives  us  a 
glimpse  into  the  inner  family-life  of  the  wretched  king,  as, 
divested  of  crown  and  purple,  and  having  cast  aside  state- 
craft and  religious  falsehood,  he  staggers  under  a  sore  blow. 
For  once  we  see  the  man,  not  the  king,  and,  as  each  man 
appears  truest,  when  stricken  to  the  heart  by  a  sorrow  which 
no  earthly  power  can  turn  aside.  From  Shechem  the  royal 
residence  had  been  transferred  to  the  ancient  Canaanite  city 
(Josh.  xii.  24)  Tirzah,  the  beautiful  (Cant.  vi.  4),  two  hours 
to  the  north  of  Samaria,  amidst  cultivated  fruit-and-olive- 
clad  hills,  up  on  a  sweUing  height,  with  glorious  outlook  over 
the  hills  and  valleys  of  rich  Samaria."^  The  royal  palace  seems 
to  have  stood  at  the  entering  in  of  the  city  (comp.  i  Kings 
xiv.  17  with  ver.  12).  But  within  its  stately  apartments  reigned 
silence  and  sorrow.  Abijah,  Jeroboam's  son,  and  apparently 
the  intended  successor  to  his  throne,  lay  sick.  He  seems  like 
the  last  link  that  bound  Jeroboam  to  his  former  better  self. 
The  very  name  of  the  child — Abijah,  "Jehovah  is  my  Father," 
or  else  "  my  Desire  " — indicates  this,  even  if  it  were  not  for  the 
touching  notice,  that  in  him  was  "  found  a  good  thing  towards 
Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  in  the  house  of  Jeroboam  "  (ver. 
13).  We  can  conceive  how  this  "  good  thing  "  may  have  sprung 
up ;  but  to  keep  and  to  cause  it  to  grow  in  such  surroundings, 
surely  needed  the  gracious  tending  of  the  Good  Husbandman. 
It  was  the  one  green  spot  in  Jeroboam's  life  and  home ;   the 

^  The  fullest  description  is  that  in  Guerin's  Safnarie,  tome  i.,  pp.  365-368. 
It  is  the  modern  Thalhisah  :  comp.  Bottger,  Topogr.  Ilisior.  Lex.  zic  Flavins 
yoscphus,  p.  243. 


By  the  DcatJi-bed  of  Abijah.  153 

one  germ  of  hope.  And  as  his  father  loved  him  truly,  so  all 
Israel  had  set  their  hopes  on  him.  Upon  the  inner  life  of 
this  child — its  struggles  and  its  victories — lies  the  veil  of 
Scripture-silence  ;  and  best  that  it  should  be  so.  But  now 
his  pulses  were  beating  quick  and  weak,  and  that  life  of 
love  and  hope  seemed  fast  ebbing.  None  with  the  father 
in  those  hours  of  darkness — neither  counsellor,  courtier, 
prophet,  nor  priest — save  the  child's  mother.  As  they  two  kept 
sad  watch,  helpless  and  hopeless,  the  past,  to  which  this  child 
bound  him,  must  have  come  back  to  Jeroboam.  One  event 
in  it  chiefly  stood  out :  it  was  his  first  meeting  with  Ahijah  the 
Shilonite.  That  was  a  true  prophet — bold,  uncompromising 
withal.  With  that  impulse  of  despair  which  comes  upon  men  in 
their  agony,  when  all  the  delusions  of  a  misspent  life  are  swept 
away,  he  turned  to  the  opening  of  his  life,  so  full  of  hope  and 
happy  possibility,  ere  ambition  had  urged  him  upon  the  path 
of  reckless  sacrifice  of  all  that  had  been  dearest  and  holiest ; 
ere  unlimited  possession  had  dazzled  his  sight  and  the  sound 
of  flattery  deafened  his  ears.  As  to  Saul  of  old  on  the  eve 
of  that  fatal  battle,  when  God  and  man  had  become  equally 
silent  to  him,  the  figure  of  Samuel  had  stood  out — that 
which  to  us  might  seem  the  most  unhkely  he  could  have 
wished  to  encounter — so  now  to  Jeroboam  that  of  Ahijah. 
Could  he  have  wished  to  blot  out,  as  it  were,  all  that  had 
intervened,  and  to  stand  before  the  prophet  as  on  the  day  when 
first  he  met  him,  when  great  but  not  yet  unholy  thoughts  rose 
within  him  ?  Had  he  some  unspoken  hope  of  him  who  had 
first  announced  to  him  his  reign  ?  Or  did  he  only  in  sheer 
despair  long  to  know  what  would  come  to  the  child,  even 
though  he  were  to  learn  the  worst?  Be  this  as  it  may,  he 
must  have  word  from  Ahijah,  whatever  it  might  be. 

In  that  hour  he  has  no  friend  nor  helper  save  the  mother 
of  his  child.  She  must  go,  in  her  love,  to  the  old  prophet  in 
Shiloh.  But  how  dare  she,  Jeroboam's  wife,  present  herself 
there  ?  Nay,  the  people  also  must  not  know  what  or  whither 
her  errand  was.     And  so  she  must  disguise  herself  as  a  poor 


154  Jeroboamy  fii'st  King  of  Israel. 

woman,  carrying  with  her,  indeed,  as  customary,  a  gift  to 
the  prophet,  but  one  such  as  only  the  poorest  in  the  land  would 
offer.  While  alone  and  in  humble  disguise  the  wife  of  Jero- 
boam goes  on  her  heavy  embassy,  across  the  hills  of  Samaria, 
past  royal  Shechem,  Another  has  already  brought  her  message 
to  Shiloh.  No  need  for  the  queen  to  disguise  herself,  so  far 
as  Ahijah  was  concerned,  since  age  had  bhnded  his  eyes. 
But  Jehovah  had  spoken  to  His  aged  servant,  and  charged 
him  concerning  this  matter.  And  as  he  heard  the  sound  of 
her  feet  within  the  door,  he  knew  who  his  unseen  visitor  was, 
and  addressed  her  not  as  queen  but  as  the  wife  of  Jeroboam. 
Stern,  terrible  things  they  were  which  he  was  commissioned 
to  tell  her ;  and  with  unswerving  faithfulness  and  unbending 
truth  he  spake  them,  though  his  heart  must  have  bled  within 
him  as  he  repeated  what  himself  called  "hard //^zV^^j-."^  All 
the  more  deeply  must  the  aged  prophet  have  felt  them,  that 
it  was  he  who  had  announced  to  Jeroboam  his  future  elevation. 
They  concerned  Jeroboam ;  but  they  also  touched  every  heart- 
string  in  the  wife  and  the  mother,  and  mast  well  nigh  have  torn 
each  one  of  them  as  they  swept  across  her.  First :-  an  uncom- 
promising recital  of  the  past,  and  a  sternly  true  representation 
of  the  present — all  glare,  dazzle,  and  self-delusion  dispelled,  till 
it  stood  in  naked  reaUty  before  her.  Only  two  persons  are  in 
this  picture,  Jehovah  and  Jeroboam — all  else  is  in  the  far 
background.  That  is  enough ;  and  now  once  in  full  sight  of 
those  two  persons,  the  wife,  the  mother,  must  hear  it  all,  though 
her  ears  tingle  and  her  knees  tremble.  Not  this  child  only, 
but  every  child,  nay,  every  descendant,  down  to  the  meanest, 
whether  it  be  child  or  adult  ^ — swept  away  :  "  And  I  will  sweep 

^  In  the  original  it  is  simply  '■'■  Jiardy 

^  Commentators  have  noted  in  the  ten  verses  of  Ahijah's  message 
(vers.  7-16)  a  rhythmic  arrangement,  viz.,  twice  5  verses — the  first  stanza 
(vers.  7-1 1)  consisting  of  3  -f  2,  the  last  stanza  (vers.  12-16)  of  2  -f  3. 
verses. 

^  This  seems  to  be  the  correct  meaning  of  a  proverbial  expression  which, 
scarcely  occurs  except  during  the  period  from  the  time  of  David  to  that 
of  Jehu. 


Death  of  Abijah.  155 

out  after  the  house  of  Jeroboam,  as  one  sweepeth  out  dirt  till 
it  is  quite  gone"  (i  Kings  xiv.  lo).^  And  not  only  this,  but 
also  horrible  judgment ;  the  carcases  of  her  children  lying  like 
carrion  in  street  and  on  field,  their  flesh  torn  and  eaten  by 
the  wild,  unclean  dogs  that  prowl  about,  or  picked  from  their 
limbs  by  birds  of  prey  who  swoop  round  them  with  hoarse 
croaking.-  Thus  far  for  Jeroboam.  And  now  as  for  the  child 
that  lay  sick  in  the  palace  of  Tirzah — it  shall  be  in  God's 
keeping,  removed  from  the  evil  to  come.  As  her  feet  touched 
the  threshold  of  her  doomed  home,  it  would  die.  As  it  were, 
such  heavy  tidings  shall  not  be  brought  within  where  he  sleeps ; 
its  terrors  shall  not  darken  his  bed.  Before  they  can  reach 
him,  he  shall  be  beyond  their  shadow  and  in  the  light.  But 
around  that  sole  -  honoured  grave  all  Israel  shall  be  the 
mourners,  and  God  Himself  wills  to  put  this  mark  of  honour 
upon  His  one  child  in  that  now  cursed  family.  Lastly,  as  for 
apostate  Israel,  another  king  raised  up  to  execute  the  judgment 
of  God — nay,  all  this  not  merely  in  the.  dim  future,  but  the 
scene  seems  to  shift,  and  the  prophet  sees  it  already  in  the 
present.^  Israel  shaken  as  a  reed  in  the  water  by  wind  and 
waves ;  Israel  uprooted  from  their  land, — cast  away  and  scat- 
tered among  the  heathen  beyond  the  river,  and  given  up  to 
be  trampled  under  foot.  Such  is  the  end  of  the  sins  of  Jero- 
boam and  of  his  people ;  such,  in  the  bold  figure  of  Scripture, 
is  the  sequel  of  casting  Jehovah  "behind  their  back."* 

Of  the  further  course  of  this  history  we  know  no  more. 

1  This  is  the  literal,  and,  as  will  be  perceived,  much  more  forcible 
rendering. 

2  Comp.  here  Exod.  xx.  4,  5  ;  Deut,  xxviii.  26.  Even  the  alteration  of 
this  latter  passage  in  i  Kings  xiv.  11  is  in  favour  of  the  earlier  age  of 
the  Book  of  Deutei-. — since  the  addition  about  the  "dogs"  points  to 
Eastern  tmvn-\\iQ,  where  the  wild  dogs  act  as  scavengers  of  cities. 

^  The  words  of  the  original  are  somewhat  difficult  to  render  on  account 
of  the  abruptness  of  the  speech ;  but  the  above,  which  corresponds  with 
our  Authorised  Version,  gives  the  correct  meaning. 

^  It  is  remarkable,  that  the  same  strong  expression  occurs  only  in  Ezek. 
xxiii.  35,  in  reference  to  the  same  sin  of  apostate  Judah  as  followed  by  the 
same  punishment  as  that  of  Israel. 


156  The  End  cf  Jeroboam. 

The  queen  and  mother  went  back,  stricken,  to  her  home ;  and 
it  was  as  the  prophet  had  told  her  from  Jehovah.  And  this 
literal  fulfihiient  would  be  to  her  for  ever  afterwards  the 
terrible  pledge  of  what  was  yet  to  come. 

Nor  do  we  read  any  more  of  Jeroboam.  It  almost  seems  as 
if  Holy  Scripture  had  nothing  further  to  say  of  him — not  even 
concerning  his  later  and  disastrous  war  with  the  son  of  Reho- 
boam  (2  Chron.  xiii.  2-20).  That  is  told  in  connection  with 
the  reign  of  the  second  king  of  Judah.  Of  Jeroboam  we  only 
read  that  he  "  reigned  two  and  twenty  years,"  that  "  he  slept 
with  his  fathers,"  and  that  "Nadab  his  son  reigned  in  his 
stead."! 

^  We  subjoin  the  following  as  the  most  interesting  of  the  Rabbinical 
notices  about  Jeroboam  (comp.  the  NacJialath  Shimoni,  vol.  i.,  p.  37, 
b  and  c)  :  The  name  of  Jeroboam  is  explained  as  "making  contest  among 
the  people,"  either  in  reference  to  their  relationship  to  God,  or  as  between 
Israel  and  Judah  {Sati/i.  loi,  d).  His  father  Nebat  is  identified  with 
Micah,  and  even  with  Sheba,  the  son  of  Bichri  {San/i.  ib.).  The  Talmud 
records  various  legendary  accounts  of  Jeroboam's  quarrel  with  Solomon,  in 
which  the  former  appears  more  in  the  right  {SanA.  ib,),  although  he  is 
blamed  alike  for  the  public  expression  of  his  feelings  and  for  his  rebellion. 
That  rebellion  is  regarded  as  the  outward  manifestation  of  long-existing 
disunion.  The  government  of  Jeroboam  is  looked  upon  as  distinguished 
by  firmness,  and  he  is  praised  for  his  wisdom,  which  had  given  rise  to  great 
hope.  Pride  is  stated  to  have  been  the  reason  of  his  apostasy  from  God 
{San/i.  102  a).  The  promise  to  Jacob  in  Gen.  xxxv.  ii,  "Kings  shall 
come  out  of  thee,"  is  applied  in  BercsM/i  R.  82  (ed.  Warsh.  p.  146,  h),  to 
Jeroboam  ;  but  he  is  regarded  as  not  having  share  in  the  world  to  come. 
Seven  such  are  mentioned  :  three  kings — ^Jeroboam,  Ahab,  and  Manasseh, 
and  four  private  persons — Balaam,  Doeg,  Ahithophel,  and  Gehazi  {Sank. 
90,  a).  He  is  also  mentioned  among  those  who  are  condemned  eternally 
to  Gehenna  in  Rosh  ka-Shanah,  17,  a. 


Accession  of  Abijah.  157 


CHAPTER    XII. 


ABIJAH  AND  ASA  {%id  6-  Zrd)  KINGS  OF  JUDAH. 


Accession  of  Abijah — His  Idolatry — War  between  Judafj  and  Israel — Abijah's 
Address  to  Israel  and  Victory— Deaths  of  Jeroboam  and  of  Abijah— 
Accession  of  Asa — Religious  Reformation  in  Judah — Invasion  by  Zerah 
the  Ethiopian— Victory  of  Zephathah—Azariah's  Message  to  the  Army 
of  Asa— Great  Sacrificial  Feast  at  Jerusalem — Renewal  of  the  Covenant 
with  Jehovah. 

(i  Kings  xv.  1-15;  2  Chron.  xiii.-xv.) 

JEROBOAM  did  not  only  survive  Rehoboam,  but  he  witnessed 
the  accession  of  two  other  kings  of  Judah,  Abijah 
and  Asa.  The  reign  of  Abijah  ^  was  very  brief.  Both  in 
I  Kings  XV.  2  and  in  2  Chron.  xiii.  2  it  is  said  to  have  lasted 
f/iree  years — an  expression  which  must  be  understood  according 
to  this  canon  laid  down  by  the  Rabbis,  that  the  commence- 
ment of  a  year  in  the  reign  of  a  king  is  to  be  reckoned  as 
a  full  year.  Thus,  as  Abijah  ascended  the  throne  in  the 
eighteenth  (i  Kings  xv.  i),  and  Asa  in  the  twentieth  (ver.  9) 
year  of  Jeroboam's  reign,  it  follows  that  the  former  actually 
reigned  only  somewhat  over  two  years.  Two  things  are 
specially  noticed  concerning  Abijah :  his  relation  towards 
Jehovah  (in  i  Kings  xv.  3-5),  and  his  relation  to  the  kingdom 
of  Jeroboam  (2  Chron.  xiii.  2-20). 

To  begin  with  the  former.     It  is  stated  that  "  he  walked  in 

^  Ahijah — "my  father  Jehovah  !  "  Two  other  forms  of  the  name  occur. 
In  the  Book  of  Kings  he  is  always  called  Abijam,  while  in  2  Chron.  xiii.  21 
he  is  also  designated  (in  the  Hebrew)  AbijaJm.  Probably  Abija??i  (in 
I  Kings)  was  the  older  form — and  it  is  not  impossible  that  it  may  have 
been  altered  into  Abijah,  when  that  monarch  made  his  loud  profession  of 
Jehovahism  (2  Chron.  xiii.  4,  etc.). 


158  Abijah  and  Asa,  Kings  of  Judah. 

all  the  sins  of  his  father,"  and  that  ''his  heart  was  not  perfect 
with  Jehovah  his  God."  These  two  statements  are  not  expla- 
natory of,  but  supplementary  to,  each  other.  We  know  that 
Rehoboam  had  not  abolished  the  service  of  Jehovah  (see,  for 
example,  i  Kings  xiv.  28),  but  that,  by  its  side,  a  spurious 
worship  had  been  tolerated,  if  not  encouraged,  which,  in  the 
view  of  Holy  Scripture,  was  equal  to  idolatry.  In  this  matter 
Rehoboam  had  not  only  followed  the  example  of  his  father 
Solomon,  during  his  later  years,  but  greatly  increased  the  evil 
which  had  then  begun.  A  similar  remark  applies  to  the 
reign  of  Abijah,  as  compared  with  that  of  Rehoboam.  That 
the  idolatry  of  the  reign  of  Rehoboam  had  grown  both  worse 
in  character  and  more  general  in  practice  under  that  of  Abijah, 
appears  from  the  notices  of  the  reformation  instituted  by  his 
successor,  Asa.  The  former  circumstance  is  implied  in  the 
terms  by  which  the  idolatry  of  that  period  is  described  (2  Chron. 
xiv.  3,  5),  and  by  the  circumstance  that  "the  queen-mother" 
(Maachah,  Abijah's  mother  and  Asa's  grandmother),^  who 
under  Abijah  held  the  official  rank  of  Gevirah,  "Queen"  (the 
modern  Sultana  Valide),  had  made  and  set  up  "  a  horror  for 
Asherah"^ — some  horrible  wooden  representation,  equally  vile 
and  idolatrous  in  its  character.  Again,  that  idolatry  had 
become  more  widely  spread,  and  that  its  hold  was  stronger,  we 
infer  from  the  fact  that,  despite  Asa's  example,  admonitions, 
and  exertions  (2  Chron.  xiv.  4,  5),  "  the  high  places  did  not 
cease"  (i  Kings  xv.  14).  This  progressive  spiritual  decline 
under  the  reigns  of  Solomon,  Rehoboam,  and  Abijah  was  so 
marked  as  to  have  deserved  the  removal  of  the  family  of 
David  from  the  throne,  had  it  not  been  for  God's  faithfulness  to 
His  covenant-promises  (i  Kings  xv.  4,  5).     But,  although  such 

^  As  Maachah,  the  daughter  (granddaughter)  of  Abishalom  (Absalom) 
was  the  mother  of  Abijah,  she  must  have  been  the  grandmother  of  Asa. 
She  is  designated  as  '*  Queen,"  or  rather  (in  the  original)  as  Get'irah,  which 
is  an  official  title. 

^  It  is  needless  to  inquire  into  the  nameless  abominations  connected  with 
what  the  original  designates  as  a  "horror,"  rendered  in  the  Authorised 
Version  "idol." 


War  between  Judah  and  Israel.  159 

was  the  state  of  religion,  Abijah  not  only  made  loud  pro- 
fession of  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  but  even  brought  votive 
offerings  to  the  Temple,  probably  of  part  of  the  spoil  taken 
in  war  (i  Kings  xv.  15 ;  comp.  2  Chron.  xiii.  16-19). 

Concerning  the  relations  of  Judah  to  the  neighbouring  king- 
dom of  Israel,  it  may  be  said  that  the  chronic  state  of  warfare 
which  had  existed  during  the  time  of  Rehoboam  now  changed 
into  one  of  open  hostilities.  Two  reasons  for  this  may  be  given. 
Abijah  was  a  much  more  vigorous  ruler  than  his  father,  and 
the  power  of  Egypt,  on  which  Jeroboam  relied  for  support, 
seems  at  that  time  to  have  decreased.  This  we  gather,  not 
only  from  the  non-interference  of  Egypt  in  the  war  between 
Abijah  and  Jeroboam,  but  from  the  fact  that,  when  Egypt  at 
length  sought  to  recover  its  lost  ascendancy,  it  was  under 
the  rule  of  Zerah  the  Ethiopian  (probably  Osorkon  11.),  who 
was  not  the  son,  but  the  son-in-law,  of  the  preceding  monarch 
(2  Chron.  xiv.  9) ;  and  we  know  the  fate  that  overtook  the 
huge,  undisciplined  army  which  Zerah  led. 

The  language  of  the  sacred  narrative  (2  Chron.  xiii.  2,  3) 
implies,  that  the  war  between  Judah  and  Israel  was  begun 
by  Abijah.  On  both  sides  a  levy  of  all  capable  of  bearing  arms 
was  raised,  though,  so  far  as  the  numerical  strength  of  the 
two  armies  was  concerned,  the  response  seems  not  to  have 
been  so  universal  in  Judah  as  in  Israel.^     But  perhaps  the 

^  The  numbers  :  400,000  for  Judah,  800,000  for  Israel,  and  500,000 
killed,  have  always  seemed  a  difficulty.  Bishop  Kennicott  and  others 
have  regarded  these  numerals  as  a  copyist's  mistake.  But  it  seems  difficult 
to  imagine  three  consecutive  errors  in  copying.  Professor  Ravvlinson 
(in  the  Speaker's  Conwientary,  vol.  iii.,  p.  306)  thinks,  that  both  the 
combatants  and  the  slain  represent  those  engaged  throughout  the  whole 
Avar.  But  this  scarcely  removes  the  difficulty.  Two  points  may  help  our 
better  understanding  of  the  matter,  though  we  would  only  suggest  them 
hypothetically.  First,  comparing  these  numbers  with  more  exact  nu- 
merical details,  as  in  2  Chron.  v.-vii.,  and  xii.,  they  read  rather  like  what 
might  be  called  "round  numbers"  than  as  precise  numeration.  Secondly, 
comparing  these  numbers  with  the  census  under  King  David  (2  Sam. 
xxiv.  9),  we  find  that  the  number  of  the  Israelites  is  exactly  the  same  in 
both  cases,  while  that  of  Judah  is  larger  by  100,000  in  the  census  of  David 


i6o  AbijaJi  and  Asa,  Kings  of  Jiidah. 

seeming  discrepancy  may  be  explained  by  the  necessity  of 
leaving  strong  garrisons  in  the  south  to  watch  the  Egyptian 
frontier  (comp.  2  Chron.  xiv.  9).  The  two  armies  met  at  the 
boundary  of  the  two  kingdoms,  though,  as  we  judge,  within  the 
territory  of  Israel.  They  camped  in  close  proximity,  only 
separated  by  Mount  Zemaraim,i  a  height  to  the  east  of  Bethel 
and  some  distance  north  of  Jericho,  forming  part  of  the  ridge 
known  as  "  Mount  Ephraim,"  which  stretched  from  the  plain 
of  Esdraelon  southwards.  From  this  height  Abijah  addressed 
the  army  of  Israel  just  before  the  battle  began,  in  the  hope 
of  securing  their  voluntary  submission,  or  at  least  weakening 
their  resistance.  Ignoring  all  that  told  against  himself,^  Abijah 
tried  to  impress  on  his  opponents  that  right  was  wholly  on 
his  side.^  In  language  full  of  irony  he  set  before  them  their 
weakness,  as  the  necessary  result  of  their  apostasy  from  Jehovah, 
the  God  of  their  fathers,  and  of  their  adoption  of  a  worship 
neither  conformable  to  their  ancient  faith  nor  even  respectable 
in  the  sight  of  men.  Lastly,  he  loudly  protested  that,  since 
Judah  had  gone  to  war  under  the  leadership  of  Jehovah  and 
in  the  manner  appointed  by  Him,  Israel  was  really  fighting 
against  Jehovah,  the  God  of  their  fathers,  and  could  not  expect 
success.  Whatever  hollowness  there  may  have  been  in  this 
profession  on  the  part  of  Abijah,  it  was  at  least  the  true  war- 
cry  of  Israel  which  he  raised.     It  found  an  echo  in  the  hearts 


than  in  the  army  of  Abijah,  though  it  included  Benjamin.  If  we  assume  that 
Abijah  invaded  Israel  with  a  regular  army — "began  the  war  with  an 
army  of  war-heroes,"  and  that  in  defence  Jeroboam  raised  a  levy  of  all 
capable  of  bearing  arms,  we  can  understand  the  use  of  these  "round 
numbers,"  derived  from  a  previous  census.  In  that  case  the  number  of  the 
slain  would  represent  rather  the  proportion  of  those  who  fell  during  the 
war  than  a  numerically  exact  statement. 

^  The  Semaron  of  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  II,  2),  probably  the  modern 
Kharbet-es-Soincra  (Guerin,  La  Samarie,  vol.  i.  pp.  226,  227 ;  vol.  ii. 
p.  175).     But  this  localisation  is  by    no  means  certain. 

^  Such  as  the  conditions  of  David's  royalty  (Ps.  cxxxii.  12),  the  sin  of 
Solomon,  the  folly  and  sin  of  Rehoboam,  and  his  own  unfaithfulness  to 
the  Lord. 

^  "A  covenant  of  salt" — comp.   Lev.  ii.  13;  Numb,  xviii.  19. 

4 


Religions  Reformation  in  JiidaJi.  i6i 

of  his  followers.  In  vain  Jeroboam,  by  a  cleverly  executed 
movement,  attacked  Judah  both  in  front  and  rear.  The  terror 
excited  by  finding  themselves  surrounded  only  led  the  people 
to  cry  unto  Jehovah  (2  Chron.  xiii.  14),  and  He  was  faithful  to 
His  promise  (Numb.  x.  9).  The  shout  of  the  combatants  mingled 
with  the  blast  of  the  priests'  trumpets,  as  Judah  rushed  to  the 
attack.  Israel  fled  in  wild  disorder,  and  a  terrible  carnage 
ensued.  The  fugitives  were  followed  by  the  army  of  Judah, 
and  Abijah  recovered  from  Israel  the  border-cities,^  with  the 
districts  around  them.  In  consequence  of  this  victory  the 
power  of  Jeroboam  was  henceforth  on  the  wane,  and  that  of 
Abijah  in  the  ascendancy  Not  long  afterwards  Jehovah  struck 
Jeroboam,  either  suddenly  or  with  lingering  disease,  of  which 
he  died.  He  had,  however;  survived  his  rival,  Abijah,^  for 
more  than  two  years. 

Abijah  was  succeeded  on  the  throne  of  Judah  by  his  son, 
Asa,  probably  at  the  time  a  boy  of  only  ten  or  eleven  years.^ 
This  may  in  part  account  for  his  pious  up-bringing,  as,  during 
his  minority  he  would  be  chiefly  under  the  oflicial  guardianship 
of  the  High-priest  (comp.  2  Chron.  xxii.  12).  It  also  explains 
how  a  bold,  resolute  woman,  such  as  Maachah,  could  still  retain 
her  official  position  as  Gevirah^  or  "  queen-mother,"  till,  on 
attaining  majority,  the  young  king  commenced  his  religious 
reformation.  During  the  first  ten  years  of  Asa's  reign  the  land 
had  rest  (2  Chron.  xiv.  i).  While  devoutly  acknowledging 
the  goodness  of  God  in  this,  it  is  easy  to  understand  the 
outward  circumstances  by  which  it  was  brought  about.     The 

1  The  localisation  of  **  Jeshanah  "  and  **  Ephrain  "  has  not  been  satisfac- 
torily made  out.  But  in  all  probability  these  towns  were  not  at  a  great 
distance  from  Bethel. 

2  The  expression  (2  Chron.  xiii.  21) :  "Abijah  waxed  mighty,"  or  rather 
** strengthened  himself,"  may  also  refer  to  his  league  with  Syria  (2  Chron. 
xvi.  3).  The  notice  of  his  wives  and  children  includes,  of  course,  an  earlier 
period  of  .his  life. 

^  If  Rehoboam  was  twenty-one  years  old  at  his  accession,  and  reigned 
eighteen  years,  and  then  after  two  or  three  years  was  followed  by  his  grand- 
son, the  latter  could  scarcely  have  been  more  than  ten  or  eleven  years  old. 

M 


1 62  Abijah  and  Asa,  Kings  of  JndaJL 

temporary  weakness  of  Egypt,  the  defeat  of  Jeroboam,  and  an 
alliance  which  Abijah  seems  to  have  contracted  with  Syria 
(2  Chron.  xvi.  3),  as  well  as  afterwards  the  rapid  succession  of 
rival  dynasties  in  Israel,  sufficiently  explain  it.  For,  during  his 
long  reign  of  forty-one  years,  Asa  saw  no  fewer  than  seven 
kings  ascend  the  throne  of  Israel. ^  The  first  work  which  Asa 
took  in  hand  was  a  thorough  religious  reformation ;  his  next, 
the  strengthening  of  the  defences  of  the  country.  For  this  the 
temporary  state  of  security  prevailing  offered  a  happy  oppor- 
tunity— "  the  land  "  being  "  still  before  them  " — open  and  free 
from  every  enemy,  though  it  was  not  difficult  to  foresee  that 
such  would  not  long  be  the  case.  And,  as  king  and  people 
owned  that  this  time  of  rest  had  been  granted  them  by  Jehovah, 
so  their  preparations  ^  against  future  attacks  were  carried  on  in 
dependence  upon  Him.  The  period  of  trial  came  only  too 
soon. 

An  almost  countless  ^  Egyptian  host,  under  the  leadership  of 
Zerah,*  the  Ethiopian,  swarmed  into  Judah.  Advancing  by  the 
south-west,  through  the  border  of  the  Philistines,  who,  no 
doubt,  made  common  cause  with  the  Egyptians  (2  Chron.  xiv. 
14),  they  appeared  before  Mareshah  (comp.  Josh.  xv.  44). 
This  was  one  of  the  border  fortresses  which  Jeroboam  had 
built  {2  Chron.  xi.  8).  The  natural  capabilities  of  the  place 
and  its  situation,  so  near  the  south-western  angle  of  the  country, 
and  almost  midway  between  Hebron  and  Ashdod,  must  have 
marked  it  as  one  of  the  most  important  strategical  points  in 
the  Jewish  line  of  defensive  works  against  Philistia,  or  rather, 


^  At  his  accession  Jeroboam  reigned  in  Israel.  The  other  seven  were : 
Nadab,  Baasha,  Elah,  Zimri,  Tibni,  Omri,  and  Ahab.  These  seven  kings 
represented  four  rival  dynasties. 

2  Evidently  all  the  males  capable  of  bearing  weapons  were  trained  to 
arms.  The  proportion  of  Benjamin  relatively  to  Judah,  though  great,  is  not 
excessive  (comp.  Gen.  xlix.  27). 

^  We  regard  these  numerals  also  as  round  numbers. 

^  Briigsch  regards  Zerah  not  as  Osorkon,  but  as  an  independent  Ethiopian 
monarch.     But  there  is  no  evidence  in  support  of  this  hypothesis. 


Victory  of  Zephathah,  163 

against  Egypt.  ^  About  two  miles  north  of  Mareshah  a 
beautiful  valley  debouches  from  between  the  hills. ^  This 
is  the  valley  of  Zephathah,  where  the  relieving  army  of  Asa, 
coming  from  the  north-east,  now  took  up  its  position.  Here  a 
decisive  battle  took  place,  which  ended  in  the  complete  rout  of 
the  Egyptians.  It  has  been  well  noted,^  that  this  is  the  only 
occasion  on  which  the  armies  of  Judah  ventured  to  meet,  and 
with  success,  either  Egypt  or  Babylon  in  the  open  field  (not 
behind  fortifications).  On  the  only  other  occasion  when  a  battle 
in  the  open  was  fought  (2  Chron.  xxv.  20-24),  it  ended  in  the 
signal  defeat  of  Judah.  But  this  is  only  one  of  the  circum- 
stances which  made  the  victory  of  Asa  so  remarkable.  Although 
the  battle-field  (a  valley)  must  have  been  unfavourable  for 
handling  so  unwieldy  a  mass  of  soldiers  and  for  deploying  their 
war-chariots,  yet  the  host  of  Egypt  was  nearly  double  that  of 
Asa,  and  must  have  included  well-disciplined  and  long-trained 
battalions.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  never  before  had  a  battle 
been  fought  in  the  same  manner ;  never  had  there  been  more 
distinct  negation  of  things  seen  and  affirmation  of  things  un- 
seen— which  constitutes  the  essence  of  faith — nor  yet  more 
trustful  application  of  it  than  in  Asa's  prayer  before  the  battle : 
"  Is  it  not  with  Thee  to  help  between  the  much  (the  mighty) 
relatively  to  no  strength  (in  regard  to  the  weak)  ?  *  Help  us, 
Jehovah  our  God,  for  upon  Thee  do  we  put  our  trust ;  and  in 
Thy  name  have  we  come  (do  we  come)  upon  this  multitude. 
O  Jehovah,  Thou  art  our  God  (the  God  of  power,  Elohiiri)  :  let 
not  man  retain  strength  by  the  side  of  Thee  (have  power  before 

^  The  Marissa  of  Josephus,  the  modern  Mardsk.  Comp.  Robinson's 
Bibl.  Researches,  vol.  ii.  pp.  67,  68.  Its  importance  as  a  fortress  is  shewn 
by  the  part  it  sustained  in  later  Jewish  history,  having  been  taken  and 
retaken  several  times  at  different  periods. 

^  Not  where  Robinson  finds  it  {tc.s.  p.  31). 

^  Professor  Rawlinson  in  the  Speaker's  Co7nmentary. 

^  The  words  are  not  easy  of  exact  rendering,  though  their  meaning  is 
plain.  Different  translations  have  been  proposed.  We  have  ventured  to 
put  it  interrogatively.  If  this  view  be  not  adopted,  that  which  would  most 
commend  itself  to  us  would  be  :  **It  is  nothing  with  Thee,  Jehovah,  to 
help  between  the  mighty  in  regard  to  the  weak." 


164  Abijah  and  Asa,  Kings  of  JiidaJi. 

Thee)  ! "  Such  an  appeal  could  not  be  in  vain.  In  the  sig- 
nificant language  of  Holy  Scripture,  it  was  "Jehovah"  Who 
"  smote  "  the  Ethiopians,  and  *'  Asa  and  the  people  that  were 
with  him"  only  ''pursued  them."^  Far  away  to  Gerar,  three 
hours  south-east  from  the  border-city,  Gaza,  continued  the  chase 
amidst  unnumbered  slain,  and  still  the  destroying  sword  of 
Jehovah  was  before  His  host  (2  Chron.  xiv.  13),  and  His  fear 
fell  upon  all  the  cities  round  about.  To  wrest  the  hostile  cities 
of  the  Philistines  and  to  carry  away  much  spoil  was  only  one 
sequence.  Henceforth  Egypt  ceased  to  be  a  source  of  terror 
cr  of  danger,  and  full  330  years  passed  before  its  army  was 
again  arrayed  against  Judah.^ 

The  occasion  was  too  favourable  not  to  have  been  improved. 
Asa  had  entered  on  a  course  of  right-doing,  and  the  Lord, 
upon  Whom  he  and  his  people  had  called,  had  proved  a  faith- 
ful and  prayer-hearing  God.  If  the  religious  reformation  so 
happily  begun,  and  the  religious  revival  which  had  appeared, 
only  issued  in  a  thorough  return  to  the  Lord,  the  evil  which 
had  been  in  the  far  and  near  past  and  which  threatened  in  the 
future,  might  yet  be  averted.  The  morrow  of  the  great  God- 
given  victory  seemed  the  most  suitable  time  for  urging  this  upon 
Judah.  Accordingly,  Azariah,  the  son  of  Oded,^  was  Divinely 
commissioned  to  meet  the  returning  victorious  army  of  Asa, 
and  to  urge  such  considerations  upon  the  people.  "  The  Spirit 
of  Elohim"  was  upon  him,  and  what  he  spake  bore  reference  not 
only  to  the  past  and  the  present,  but  also  to  the  future.  Hence 
his  message  is  rightly  described  as  both  "words"  and  "a  pro- 
phecy "  (2  Chron.  xv.  8).  Carefully  examined,  it  contains  alike 
an  address  and  a  prophecy.    For  it  were  a  mistake  to  suppose, 

^  In  2  Chron.  xiv.  13  the  Hebrew  expression  is  :  "they  were  broken  before 
Jehovah  " — as  it  were  by  the  weight  of  His  Hand. 

2  In  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  20-24). 

^  There  is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  Oded  was  Iddo  the  prophet.  In 
2  Chron.  xv.  8  the  words  :  "Of  Oded  the  prophet,"  are  either  defective,  or 
more  probably  a  gloss.  This  is  evident,  not  only  from  the  ascription  of  the 
prophecy  to  Oded,  but  from  the  fact  that  the  grammatical  structure  requires 
either  the  omission  of  these  words  or  the  addition  to  them  of  others. 


AzariaJis  Message  to  the  Army  of  Asa.        165 

that  the  picture  which  Azariah  drew  of  Israel's  sin  and  its  con- 
sequence in  vers.  3,  5,  6  was  only  that  of  the  far  past  in  the 
time  of  the  Judges,  of  the  religious  decHne  under  Jeroboam 
and  Abijah,  or  even  of  their  future  apostasy  and  its  punish- 
ment. All  these  were  included  in  what  the  prophet  set  before 
the  people.^  And  not  only  so,  but  his  words  extended 
beyond  Judah,  and  applied  to  all  Israel,  as  if  the  whole 
people  were  viewed  as  still  united,  and  ideally  one  in  their 
relation  to  the  Lord.^  Accordingly,  it  deserves  special  notice, 
that  neither  in  ver.  3  nor  in  ver.  5  any  verb  is  used,  as  if 
to  indicate  the  general  application  of  the  "prophecy."  But 
its  present  bearing,  alike  as  regarded  Judah's  sin  and  repent- 
ance, and  God's  judgment  and  mercy,  was  an  earnest  call 
to  carry  on  and  complete  the  good  work  which  had  already 
been  begun  (ver.  7). 

And  king  and  people  hearkened  to  the  voice  of  God  through 
His  prophet.  Again  and  more  energetically  than  before,  the 
religious  reformation  was  taken  in  hand.  The  idol-"  abomi- 
nations "  were  removed,  not  only  from  Judah  and  Benjamin, 
but  from  the  conquered  cities  of  the  north,  and  the  great  altar 
of  burnt-offering  in  the  Temple  was  repaired.  The  earnest- 
ness of  this  movement  attracted  the  pious  laity  from  the  neigh- 
bouring tribes,  and  even  led  those  of  Simeon  (in  the  far  south) 
who,  apparently,  had  hitherto  sympathised  with  the  northern 
kingdom,  as  they  shared  their  idolatry  (comp.  Amos  iv.  4 ;  v.  5  ; 
viii.  14),  to  join  the  ranks  of  Judah.  At  a  great  sacrificial  feast, 
which  the  king  held  in  Jerusalem,  the  solemn  covenant  into  which 
Israel  had  originally  entered  with  Jehovah  (Ex.  xxiv.  2r'^)  was 
renewed,  in  repentant  acknowledgment  that  it  had  been  broken, 
and  in  believing  choice  of  Jehovah  as  henceforth  their  God — 
just  as  it  was  afterwards  renewed  on  two  analogous  occasions : 

^  As  regards  the  past  compare  Judges  ii.  lo ;  iii.  14  ;  v.  6  ;  vi.  2  ;  xii.  4 ; 
XX.  As  regards  the  future  compare  here,  Deut.  iv.  27-30 ;  xxviii.  20 ; 
Is.  ix.  17-20;  Iv.  6;  Jer.  xxxi.  i;  Ezek.xxxvi.  24;  Amos  iii.  9;  Zechar. 
xiv.  13. 

-  In  regard  to  Israel  comp.  here  Hos.  iii.  5  ;  v.  13-15- 


1 66  Abijah  a7id  Asa,  Kings  of  Jiidah. 

in  the  time  of  Josiah  (2  Kings  xxiii.  3;  2  Chron.  xxxiv,  31), 
and  in  that  of  Nehemiah  (Nehem.  x.  28-39).  The  movement 
was  the  outcome  of  heart-conviction  and  earnest  purpose,  and 
consisted,  on  the  one  hand,  in  an  undertaking  that  any  intro- 
duction of  idolatry  should  be  punished  by  death  ^  (according  to 
Deut.  xiii.  9),  and,  on  the  other,  in  an  act  of  solemn  national 
consecration  to  Jehovah. 

To  Asa  at  least  all  this  was  a  reality,  although,  as  regarded 
his  subjects,  the  religious  revival  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
equally  deep  or  permanent  (2  Chron.  xv.  17).  But  the  king 
kept  his  part  of  the  solemn  engagement.  However  difficult  it 
might  be,  he  removed  "  the  Queen-mother  "  from  her  exalted 
position,  and  thus  showed  an  example  of  sincerity  and  earnest- 
ness in  his  own  household.  And,  in  token  of  his  consecra- 
tion to  Jehovah,  he  brought  into  His  House  alike  those  war- 
spoils  which  his  father  had,  after  the  victory  over  Jeroboam, 
set  apart  as  the  portion  for  God,  and  what  he  himself  now 
consecrated  from  the  spoil  taken  in  the  war  with  Egypt.  These 
measures  were  followed  by  a  period  of  happy  rest  for  the  land 
— even  to  the  twenty-fifth  ^  year  of  King  Asa's  reign. 

^  The  Authorised  Version  conveys  the  impression,  that  in  every  case  want 
of  personal  piety  would  be  punished  by  death.  Such,  however,  is  not  the 
meaning  of  the  original.  It  only  implies,  that  the  introauction  of  idolatry 
by  any  person  should  be  punishable  by  death  (comp.  Deut.  xvii.  2-7). 

2  As  the  dates  in  2  Chron.  xv.  19 ;  xvi.  i  are  incompatible  with  that  of 
Baasha's  death  (i  Kings  xvi.  8),  and  consequently,  of  course,  with  that  of 
Baasha's  war  against  Asa,  commentators  have  tried  to  obviate  the  diffi- 
culty, either  by  supposing  that  the  numeral  35  refers,  not  to  the  date  of 
Asa's  accession,  but  to  that  of  the  separation  of  the  kingdoms  of  Judah 
and  Israel,  or  else  by  emendating  the  numeral  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles. 
The  latter  is,  evidently,  the  only  satisfactory  solution.  There  is  manifestly 
here  a  copyist's  mistake,  and  the  numeral  which  we  would  substitute  for 
35  is  not  15  (as  by  most  German  commentators)  but  25 — and  this  for  reasons- 
too  long  to  explain  (ns  instead  of  n^). 


Murder  by  Baasha.  167 


CHAPTER    XIII. 

ASA    {2>rd)   KING   OF   JUDAH— NADAB,    BAASHA, 

ELAH,  ZIMRI,  TIBNI,  AND  OMRI  (2«^,  Zrd,  ^th, 

6th,  6//?,  1th)  KINGS  OF  ISRAEL. 


Rei^n  of  Nadab—His  Murder  by  Baasha— War  between  Judah  and  Israel — 
Baasha's  Alliance  with  Syria — Asa  gains  over  Ben-hadad— Prophetic 
Message  to  Asa— Resentment  of  the  King— Asa's  Religious  Decline- 
Death  of  Asa— Death  of  Baasha— Reign  of  Elah—His  Murder  by  Zimrl 
— Omri  dethrones  Zimri—War  between  Omri  and  Tibni— Rebuilding 
of  Samaria. 

(i  Kings  xv.  i6-xvi.  28;  2  Chron.  xvi.) 

WHILE  these  things  were  going  on  in  Judah,  the  judgment, 
which  the  Lord  had,  through  Ahijah,  pronounced 
upon  Jeroboam  and  his  house,  was  rapidly  preparing.  After 
an  apparently  uneventful  reign  of  only  two  years,  Nadab,  the 
son  and  successor  of  Jeroboam,  was  murdered  while  engaged 
in  the  siege  of  Gibbethon  (the  Gabatha  and  Gabothane  of 
Josephus).  This  border-city,  on  the  edge  of  the  plain  of 
Esdraelon  (not  many  miles  south-west  of  Nazareth,  and 
originally  in  the  possession  of  Dan,  Josh.  xix.  44),  must  have 
been  of  great  importance  as  a  defence  against  incursions  from 
the  west — to  judge  from  the  circumstance  that  not  only  Nadab 
but  his  successors  sought,  although  in  vain,  to  wrest  it  from 
the  Philistines  (comp.  i  Kings  xvi.  15).  No  other  event  in 
the  reign  of  Nadab  is  recorded.  "  He  walked  in  the  way  of 
his  father,  and  in  his  sin,"  and  sudden  destruction  overtook 
him.  Baasha — probably  the  leader  of  a  military  revolution — 
murdered  him,  and  usurped  his  throne.     The  first  measure  of 


1 68  Baasha  tisiirps  the  TJirone  of  Israel. 

the  new  king  was,  in  true  Oriental  fashion,  to  kill  the  whole 
family  of  his  predecessor.  Although  the  judgment  of  God 
upon  Jeroboam  and  his  house,  as  announced  by  the  prophet, 
was  thus  fulfilled,  it  must  not  for  a  moment  be  thought  that 
the  foul  deed  of  Baasha  was  thereby  lessened  in  guilt.  On 
the  contrary^  Holy  Scripture  expressly  marks  this  critJie  as  one  of 
the  grounds  of  Baasha' s  later  Judg??ient  (i  Kings  xvi.  7).  It  is 
perhaps  not  easy,  and  yet  it  is  of  supreme  importance  for  the 
understanding  of  the  Old  Testament,  to  distinguish  in  these 
events  the  action  of  man  from  the  overruling  direction  of  God. 
Thus  when,  after  his  accession,  the  prophet  Jehu,  the  son  of 
Hanani,!  was  commissioned  to  denounce  the  sin,  and  to  an- 
nounce the  judgment  of  Baasha,  these  two  points  were  clearly 
put  forward  in  his  message :  The  sin  of  Baasha  in  the  murder 
of  Jeroboam's  house,  and  the  fact  that  his  exaltation  was  due 
to  the  Lord  (i  Kings  xvi.  7  ;  comp.  ver.  2).  2 

Baasha  had  sprung  from  a  tribe  wholly  undistinguished  by 
warlike  achievements,^  and  from  a  family  apparently  ignoble 
and  unknown  (i  Kings  xvi.  2).  His  only  claim  to  the  crown 
lay  in  his  military  prowess,  which  the  neighbouring  kingdom 
of  Judah  was  soon  to  experience.  Under  his  reign  the  state  of 
chronic  warfare  between  the  two  countries  once  more  changed 
into  one  of  active  hostility.  From  the  concordant  accounts  in 
the  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  (i  Kings  xv.  16-22  ;  2  Chr. 
xvi.  1-6),  we  gather  what  was  Baasha's  object  in  this  war, 
and  what  his  preparations  for  it  had  been.  It  seems,  that  Asa's 
father,  Abijah,  had  formed  an  alliance  with  the  rising  power 
of  Syria  under  Tabrimon  ("  good  is  Rimmon  "),*  with  the  view 

^  As  to  Jehu  comp.  2  Chron.  xix.  2,  3  ;  his  death  xx.  34.  As  to  Hanani, 
comp.  2  Chron.  xvi.   7-10. 

2  In  fact  the  last  clause  in  i  Kings  xvi.  7  seems  added  to  explain  the 
statement  in  ver.  2. 

3  The  tribe  of  Issachar;  comp.  Gen.  xlix.  14,  15.  That  tribe  furnished 
the  Judge  Jola  (Judg,  x.   i). 

*  The  god  Rimmon — or  more  probably  Hadad-Rimmon,  the  Sun-god 
of  the  Syrians,  2  Kings  v.  18.  Hadad,  "the  sun,"  seems  from  ancient 
history  to  have  been  a  royal  title  both  in  Syria  and  Edom.     As  stated 


Asa  gains  over  Ben-Hadad.  169 

of  holding  Israel  in  check  by  placing  it  between  two  enemies — 
Syria  in  the  north  and  Judah  in  the  south.  This  "  league  " 
was,  as  we  infer,  discontinued  by  Asa  during  the  earlier  part 
of  his  reign,  when  his  confidence  was  more  entirely  placed 
in  Jehovah  his  God.  In  these  circumstances  Baasha  eagerly 
sought  and  entered  upon  an  alliance  with  Syria.  His  primary 
object  was  to  arrest  the  migration  of  Israelites  into  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  and  the  growing  influence  of  Asa  upon  his  own 
subjects,  consequent,  as  we  know,  upon  his  great  reHgious 
reformation  (i  Kings  xv.  17).  His  secondary  object  was  so 
to  overawe  Jerusalem,  as  virtually  to  paralyse  the  power  of 
Judah.  The  invasion  was  at  first  successful,  and  Baasha 
penetrated  as  far  as  Ramah,  about  midway  between  Bethel 
and  Jerusalem,  thus  obtaining  command  of  the  two  roads 
which  led  from  the  north  and  the  east  to  the  Jewish  capital. 
This,  of  course,  implied  not  only  the  re-conquest  of  the  towns 
which  Abijah  had  taken  from  Israel  (2  Chron.  xiii.  19;  comp. 
also  XV.  8),  but  the  complete  isolation  and  domination  of 
Jerusalem.  Ramah  was  to  be  immediately  converted  into  a 
strong  fortress. 

In  these  straits  Asa  seems  to  have  forgotten  the  manner  in 
which  his  former  brilliant  victory  over  Zerah  had  been  obtained. 
Instead  of  relying  wholly  on  Jehovah  his  God,  he  appears  to 
have  imagined  that  his  former  policy  in  regard  to  Syria  had 
been  a  mistake.  Like  many  who,  on  losing  the  first  freshness 
of  their  faith,  seek  to  combine  trust  in  the  Lord  with  what  they 
regard  as  most  likely  means  of  worldly  success,  Asa  entered 
into  a  new  alliance  ^  with  Ben-Hadad,  purchasing  it  with  the 
silver  and  gold  treasured  up  in  the  Temple  and  in  the  royal 


in  a  previous  note,  there  seem  to  have  been  four  kings  of  Syria  who 
bore  that  name:  Hadad-ezer,  in  time  of  David;  Hezion  (Hadad  ii.)  in 
that  of  Rehoboam  ;  Tab-Rimmon  (Hadad  III.)  in  the  time  of  Abijah  ;  and 
Ben-Hadad  (Hadad  iv.)  in  the  time  of  Asa.  It  is  doubtful,  whether  the 
Rezon  in  the  time  of  Solomon  (i  Kings  xi.  23-25)  was  identical  with  Hezion, 
or  whether  the  former  was  a  usurper. 

^  The  meaning  of  i  Kings  xv.  19  is  :  Let  there  be  a  league. 


170  Asa's  League  with  Syria. 

palace.  He  may  have  argued,  that  this  did  not  Imply  a  renun- 
ciation of  his  former  allegiance  to  Jehovah ;  that  he  had  no 
personal  intercourse  with  Syria,  which,  indeed,  was  far  sepa- 
rated from  his  dominions ;  that  his  was  only  a  countermove 
to  Baasha's  schemes;  and  that  a  similar  league  had,  during 
the  reign  of  his  father,  proved  eminently  successful.  But  the 
result  of  an  alliance  so  incongruous,  and  purchased  in  so 
dubious  a  manner,  proved  the  beginning  of  spiritual  declension 
and  of  little  honour  or  real  benefit  to  his  country. 

Ben-Hadad  was  only  too  ready  to  entertain  Asa's  proposals. 
It  could  never  have  been  his  real  policy  to  strengthen  the 
neighbour-state  of  Israel,  and  to  weaken  that  of  Judah.  On 
receiving  the  rich  bribe,  which  made  Judah  virtually  tributary 
to  him,  he  broke  his  league  with  Baasha,  and  immediately 
invaded  Israel,  overrunning  the  northern  territory,  penetrating 
as  far  as  the  district  of  Chinneroth  (Josh.  xi.  2 ;  xii.  3 ;  xix. 
35), — which  gave  its  name  to  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret, — 
and  occupying  the  land  of  Naphtali.  This  threatening  danger 
in  the  north  of  his  dominions  obliged  Baasha  hastily  to  quit 
Ramah.  Asa  now  summoned  all  Judah.  The  materials  accu- 
mulated for  the  fortress  of  Ramah  were  removed,  and  used 
for  building  two  new  forts  :  Geba  ("  the  height ")  and  Mizpah 
("the  outlook")  (comp.  Josh,  xviii.  24,  26;  also  Jer.  xli.  5-9). 
Both  these  cities  lay  within  the  territory  of  Benjamin,  about 
three  miles  to  the  north  of  Ramah,  in  very  strong  positions, 
and  commanded  the  two  roads  to  Jerusalem. 

But  with  the  retreat  of  Baasha  from  Ramah,  the  troubles  of 
Asa  did  not  end ;  rather  did  they  only  then  begin.  When,  alone 
and  unaided,  he  had,  in  the  might  of  Jehovah,  encountered  the 
hosts  of  Egypt,  signal  success  had  been  his ;  peace  and  pros- 
perity had  followed ;  and  God's  prophet  had  been  specially  sent 
to  meet  the  returning  army  with  good  and  encouraging  tidings. 
It  was  all  otherwise  now.  Hanani  the  prophet  was  directed  to 
meet  Asa  with  a  message  of  reproof  and  judgment ;  instead  of, 
as  formerly,  peace,  there  would  henceforth  be  continual  warfare 
(2  Chron.  xvi.  9) ;  and  the  alliance  with  Syria  would  prove 


Asa,  King  of  Judah.  171 

neither  to  honour  nor  profit.  On  the  other  hand,  even  had 
his  fears  been  realised,  and  the  combined  armies  of  Israel  and 
Syria  invaded  Judah,  yet  if,  instead  of  buying  the  alliance  of 
Ben-Hadad,  he  had  gone  forward  in  the  name  of  the  Lord, 
victory  such  as  that  over  the  Ethiopians  would  again  have  been 
his  (2  Chron.  xvi.  7).  As  it  was,  Asa  had  chosen  a  worldly 
policy,  and  by  its  issue  he  must  abide.  Henceforth  it  was  no 
more  Jehovah  Who  was  arrayed  against  the  might  of  man,  but 
the  contest  would  be  simply  one  of  cunning  and  strength,  as 
between  man  and  man  (2  Chron.  xvi.  9). 

Hanani  had  spoken,  as  all  the  prophets  of  Jehovah,  fear- 
lessly, faithfully,  and  only  too  truly.  It  was  probably  con- 
viction of  this  which,  in  the  unhumbled  state  of  the  king, 
kindled  his  anger  against  "  the  seer."  Once  more  it  might 
seem  to  Asa  as  not  implying  rebellion  against  God,  only 
a  necessary  precaution  against  disunion  and  dissatisfaction 
among  his  own  subjects,  threatening  to  upset  his  political 
calculations  and  combinations,  to  use  measures  of  severity 
against  the  prophet  from  which  he  would  have  shrunk  at  a 
former  period  of  his  reign.  All  the  more  requisite  might  these 
appear,  since  his  unwelcome  monitor  evidently  commanded  the 
sympathies  of  an  influential  part  of  the  community.  But  it 
was  an  unheard-of  proceeding,  which  happily  found  imitation 
only  in  the  worst  times  of  Israel  (i  Kings  xxii.  26-29 ;  J^^* 
XX.  2;  xxix.  26;  Acts  xvi.  24),  to  put  the  prophet  of  the 
Lord  "in  the  house  of  stocks"^  on  account  of  his  faith- 
fulness, and  by  a  series  of  persecutions  to  oppress,  and,  if 
possible,  crush  2  those  who  sympathised  with  him. 

Nor  was  this  all.  The  fatal  tendency  which  had  showed 
itself  in  the  Syrian  alliance,  and  still  more  in  the  measures 

^  Two  terms  are  used  in  Hebrew  for  '*  the  stocks."  That  here  employed 
combined  the  pillory  for  the  body  with  the  stocks  for  the  legs.  It  was,  in 
fact,  an  instrument  of  torture,  the  neck  and  arms  being  confined,  and  the 
body  in  a  bent  position. 

^  The  verb  really  means  "to  crush."  It  is  generally  used  in  connection 
with  cruel  oppression,  as  in  Deut.  xxviii.  33  ;  i  Sam.  xii.  3,  etc. 


1/2      Asa  seeks  not  Jehovah  but  in  the  Physicians. 

against  Hanani  and  his  sympathisers,  continued  and  increased 
with  the  lapse  of  years.  Two  years  before  his  death,  Asa  was 
attacked  by  some  disease^  in  his  feet.  In  this  "also"^  "he 
sought  not  Jehovah  but  in  (by)  the  physicians."^  It  is  not 
necessary  to  explain  the  blame  which  Holy  Scripture  evidently 
attaches  to  this,  on  the  ground  that  these  physicians  were 
so  called  "medicine-men"  (as  among  the  heathen),  nor  to 
suppose  that  they  used  idolatrous  or  even  superstitious  means. 
The  example  of  Hezekiah  (2  Kings  xx. ;  2  Chron.  xxxii.  24) 
sufficiently  shows,  how  one  who  fully  trusted  in  the  Lord 
would  have  felt  and  acted  in  these  circumstances.  On  the 
other  hand,  Asa  displayed  in  this  instance  the  same  want  of 
practical  religion  as  in  his  alliance  with  Syria — a  state  of  mind 
which  Bengel  rightly  characterises  as  theoretical  orthodoxy 
combined  with  practical  atheism.  And — as  formerly  the  pro- 
phet had  summed  up  what  Asa  had  no  doubt  regarded  as  the 
height  of  political  wisdom  in  the  curt,  if  somewhat  harsh, 
criticism  :  "  Thou  hast  acted  stupidly  over  this  "  (2  Chron.  xvi. 
9) — so  might  it  have  been  said  of  him  in  this  matter  also. 
He  had  not  sought  Jehovah,  but  had  sought  in  the  physicians 
— and  by  the  help  which  he  had  sought  he  must  abide.  He 
had  not  trusted  in  the  supernatural,  but  applied  to  the  natural : 
and  in  the  natural  course  of  events  his  disease  ended  in  death. 
It  was  not  wrong  to  employ  means,  indeed  such  were  used  in 
the  miraculous  cure  of  Hezekiah  (2  Kings  xx.  7),  just  as  in 
the  miraculous  rescue  of  St.  Paul's  companions  from  shipwreck 
(Acts  xxvii.  23,  24,  43,  44).  And,  if  one  lesson  more  than 
another  has  been  impressed  on  our  minds  in  the  course  of  this 
history,  it  is  that  of  the  use  of  natural  means,  in  the  ordinary 

1  According  to  the  Talmud  {Sotah  10  a)  it  was  the  gout. 

^  So  2  Chron.  xvi.  12  literally. 

^  It  deserves  to  be  noticed  that,  when  the  true  seeking  of  Jehovah  is  referred 
to,  the  original  uses  simply  the  accusative,  as  if  to  indicate  the  directness  of 
the  address  ;  while  in  all  spurious  enquiries  or  requests  the  preposition  in 
or  by  is  employed,  as  if,  while  marking  the  means  by  which  the  object  is 
sought,  at  the  same  time  to  indicate  that  any  result  still  comes  only  from  God. 
For,  the  Hebrew  may  be  designated  as  the  only  theologically  true  language. 


Elah,  King  of  Israel.  173 

and  rational  succession  of  events,  for  the  accomplishment  of 
supernatural  and  Divinely-announced  purposes.  But  the  error 
and  sin  of  Asa  consisted  in  seeking  an  object,  however  lawful 
and  even  desirable,  in,  by,  and  through  secondary  means,  with- 
out first  seeking  Jehovah.  Such  conduct  carried  with  it  its 
natural  result.  For,  what  a  man  soweth,  that — the  very  kind 
of  grain — shall  he  also  reap ;  just  as,  none  the  less,  that  we  work 
for  it  (or  perhaps  have  it  supplied  to  our  hands),  but  on  the 
contrary,  all  the  more  because  of  it,  we  first  pray :  "  Give  us 
this  day  our  daily  bread,"  and  then  receive  as  directly  from 
His  hand  the  consecrated  fruit  of  our  labour. 

There  was  the  same  sad  consistency  about  Asa's  death 
as  in  his  life.  He  seems  to  have  built  him  a  special  mauso- 
leum in  the  city  of  David ;  and  there  they  laid  him  in  almost 
Egyptian  pomp  on  a  bed  of  spices,  and  burnt  at  his  burying, 
whether  for  the  first  time  in  royal  funerals,  or  according  to 
a  more  ancient  practice, ^  a  large  quantity  of  costly  spices 
and  perfumes. 

But  in  following  the  narrative  of  Holy  Scripture,  we  have 
been  really  anticipating  the  course  of  this  history.  For,  as 
previously  stated,  Asa  not  only  outlived  Baasha,  but  altogether 
saw  eight  kings  on  the  throne  of  Israel.  Baasha  seems  to  have 
survived  his  defeat  little  more  than  a  year.  He  was  succeeded 
by  his  son  Elah,  in  the  twenty-sixth  year  of  King  Asa's  reign. 
The  rule  of  Elah  lasted  only  two  years,  or,  more  exactly,  part 
of  two  years.  Baasha  had  set  the  example  of  military  revo- 
lutions, in  which  the  favourite  of  the  soldiery  ascended  the 
throne  by  the  murder  of  his  predecessor,  and  the  extirpation 
of  all  who  might  have  rival  claims  to  the  crown.  The  pre- 
cedent was  a  dangerous  one;  and  henceforth  the  throne  of 
Israel  was  occupied  by  a  series  of  military  adventurers,  whose 

^  The  former  seems  to  me  the  most  probable.  It  need  scarcely  be  said 
that  the  heathen  practice  of  creriiatioti  was  unknown.  On  this  subject,  and 
on  the  burning  of  spices  at  such  funerals,  comp.  Geier,  De  Ebrczorum  Luctu^ 
pp.  104-119.  According  to  Rabbinical  writings,  Asa  was  one  of  the 
model-kings. 


1^4  Revolutions  in   Tirzah. 

line  did  not  extend  beyond  their  immediate  successors.  The 
son  of  Baasha  was  a  cowardly  debauchee,  who,  forgetful  even 
of  the  decorum  of  Eastern  princes,  indulged  in  orgies  in  the 
houses  of  his  favourites,  while  his  army  was  fighting  before 
Gibbethon.  He  fell  a  victim  to  a  court  conspiracy.  We  know 
only  two  of  the  actors  in  it :  Arza,  the  steward  of  the  king's 
palace  (or  rather,  his  major-domo)^  in  whose  house  Elah  was 
drinking  himself  drunk,  and  the  king's  murderer  and  successor 
Zimri,  who  filled  the  post  of  chief  over  half  his  "  chariots,"  or 
perhaps  his  cavalry.  The  reign  of  Zimri  lasted  only  seven 
days,  but  they  were  stained  by  even  more  than  the  bloodshed 
usual  on  such  occasions.  For  Zimri  destroyed  not  only  the 
family  of  his  predecessor,  but  killed  all  the  "  blood-avengers  " 
(relatives,  kinsfolk),  and  even  "  the  friends  "  of  the  late  king. 

Whether,  as  Josephus  explains  {Ant.  viii.  12,  4),  Zimri  had 
chosen  for  his  rebellion  the  moment  when  all  the  leading 
officers  were  in  camp,  or  Omri  himself  was  originally  in  the 
conspiracy,  certain  it  is  that  the  army  was  not  disposed  to 
acknowledge  the  new  usurper.  It  immediately  proclaimed 
their  general  Omri,  and  under  his  leadership  marched  back 
upon  Tirzah.  Zimri  held  out  till  the  city  was  taken,  when  he 
retired  into  '^the  citadel  of  the  king's  palace,"  ^  which  he 
set  on  fire,  perishing  in  its  flames.  But  Omri  had  not  at 
first  undisputed  possession  of  the  throne.  For  four  years  the 
people  were  divided  between  him  and  another  pretender  to  the 
crown,  Tibni,  the  son  of  Genath.  At  length  Omri  prevailed, 
and  "  Tibni  died  " — either  in  battle  or,  as  Josephus  seems  to 
imply  {Ant.  viii.  12,  5),  by  command  of  his  rival. 

Omri  occupied  the  throne  altogether  twelve  (or  part  of  twelve) 
years.  The  first  four  of  these  passed  in  contests  with  Tibni. 
During  the  next  two  years  he  resided  in  Tirzah.  After  that  he 
bought  from  Shemer  for  two  talents  of  silver  (about  £^^0)  the 
hill  of  Samaria.  On  this  commanding  position  he  built  the  new 
capital  of  Israel,  which,  according  to  the  sacred  text,  he  named 

^  This  is  the  correct  rendering  of  the  original. 


Omriy  King  of  Israel.  175 

Shoi7ieron^  after  the  former  owner  of  the  site.  But  on  other 
grounds  it  deserved  to  be  called  "watch-mountain,"  as  the 
name  may  be  rendered.  Situated  about  the  centre  of  the  land, 
six  miles  north-west  of  Shechem,  it  occupied  a  commanding 
hill,  rising  from  a  broad  valley,  and  surrounded  on  all  sides  by 
mountains,  through  which  there  was  only  a  narrow  entrance 
from  the  west.  The  approach  to  the  plateau  on  which  Samaria 
stood  is  steep  on  all  sides.  Thus  the  site  of  the  new  capital, 
which  was  also  distinguished  by  great  beauty,  was  singularly 
adapted  both  for  observation  and  defence.  The  country  around 
was  very  rich,  and  the  place  well  supplied  with  water.  A  more 
suitable  spot  could  not  have  been  chosen  by  monarch  or 
general.  This  accounts  for  the  continued  importance  of 
Samaria  through  all  the  varying  fortunes  of  the  country  and  its 
people.  The  modern  miserable  village  of  Sebustiyeh  (the 
ancient  Sebaste),  inhabited  by  less  than  one  thousand  people, 
which  occupies  the  site  of  the  once  splendid  city,  where  Omri, 
Ahab,  and  their  successors  held  high  court,  contains  but  few 
remains  of  its  ancient  grandeur.  But  these  are  sufficiently 
remarkable.  2  The  ancient  Acropolis,  or  temple,  palace,  and 
citadel,  seems  to  have  stood  on  the  western  brow  of  the  hill, 
and  its  site  is  still  marked  by  the  ruins  of  a  most  magnificent 
colonnade  composed  of  graceful  monoliths.  The  approach  to 
the  castle  must  have  been  by  ascending  terraces,  which,  no 
doubt,  were  covered  with  houses  and  palaces.  Of  these  not  a 
trace  is  left.  Only  on  the  topmost  height — from  which,  west- 
wards, the  Mediterranean,  and  eastwards,  across  swelling 
mountains,  a  landscape  of  unrivalled  beauty  and  fertility 
were  full  in  view — a  few  broken  and  upturned  pillars  mark 
the   site   of  the  royal   castle.      The   dynasties   that  reigned 

^  It  is  remarkable  that  in  the  older  Assyrian  monuments  the  city  is  still 
denominated  as  that  of  Omri,  its  later  name  appearing  only  in  the  time  of 
Tiglath-pileser,  nearly  two  hundred  years  after  its  building  by  Omri.  This 
is  a  noteworthy  confirmation  of  the  Scriptural  narrative.  According  to 
tradition,  John  the  Baptist  was  buried  in  Samaria. 

2  See  the  very  full  description  by  M.  Gu^rin  {La  Samarief  vol.  ii. 
pages  188-210). 


176  Ahahy  King  of  Israel. 

there  have  long  been  swept  away ;  the  people  over  whom  they 
ruled  carried  into  a  captivity  over  which  the  veil  of  impenetrable 
mystery  lies.  Only  the  word  of  the  Lord  has  stood  firm  and 
immovable.  Of  Nadab,  of  Baasha,  of  Elah,  of  Zimri,  and  of 
Omri,  Scripture  has  only  one  and  the  same  thing  to  say :  that 
they  walked  in  the  way  and  in  the  sin  of  Jeroboam,  the  son  of 
Nebat,  "  wherewith  he  made  Israel  to  sin,  to  provoke  Jehovah, 
the  God  of  Israel,  to  anger."  And  over  each  and  all  did  the 
same  judgment  sweep.  And  yet  there  were  more  grievous 
sins  to  follow,  and  more  terrible  judgments  to  come.^ 


CHAPTER    XIV. 

ASA  AND   JEHOSHAPHAT   {Zrd  and  ith)   KINGS  OF 
JUDAH— AHAB  (8/^)  KING  OF  ISRAEL. 


Accession  of  Ahab— Further  Religious  Decline  in  Israel— Political  Relations 
between  Israel  and  Judah— Accession  of  Jehoshaphat — Ahab's  marriage 
with  Jezebel— The  Worship  of  Baal  and  Astarte  established  in  Israel- 
Character  of  Ahab— Religious  Reforms  in  Judah— Jehoshaphat  joins 
affinity  with  Ahab— Marriage  of  Jehoram  with  Athaliah,  and  its  con- 
sequences. 

(i  Kings  xvi.  29-33 ;  xxii.  41-44 ;  2  Chron.  xvii.  ;  xviii.  i,  2.) 

OMRI  was  succeeded  on  the  throne  of  Israel  by  his  son  Ahab, 
in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  the  reign  of  Asa,  king  of  Judah 
With  the  accession  of  Ahab  a  new  period  may  be  said  to 
commence  in  the  history  of  Israel,  and  this  alike  religiously 
and  politically.  In  regard  to  the  former,  Omri  had  already 
prepared  the  way  for  further  terrible  progression  in  Israel's 

1  The  Talmud  {Sank.  102  b)  asks  whether  Omri  was  worthy   of  the 
kingdom — the  answer  being,  that  he  added  a  city  to  the  land  of  Israel. 


Extraordinary  Agency  in  an  Extraordinary  Age.    177 

apostasy.  In  the  language  of  Holy  Scripture  (i  Kings  xvi.  25)^ 
he  "  did  worse  than  all  that  were  before  him."  Whatever  the 
special  "  statutes "  or  ordinances  in  this  respect  which  he 
introduced,  they  marked  an  era  in  the  history  of  Israel's, 
religious  decline  (Micah  vi.  16).  But  Ahab  far  out-distanced 
even  his  father's  wickedness,  first  by  entering  into  a  matrimonial 
alliance  with  the  vile  dynasty  of  Ethbaal,  and  then  by  formally 
making  the  worship  of  Baal  the  established  religion  of  Israel,, 
with  all  of  vileness  and  of  persecution  which  this  implied.  In 
these  circumstances,  surely,  we  may  look  for  extraordinary 
interposition  on  the  part  of  Jehovah.  For,  with  such  a  king^ 
and  queen,  and  with  a  people,  not  only  deprived  of  the 
Temple-services  and  the  Levitical  priesthood,  but  among  whom 
the  infamous  rites  of  Baal  and  Astarte  had  become  the  estab- 
lished worship,  ordinary  means  would  manifestly  have  been  in 
vain.  Again  and  again  had  messengers  sent  from  God  spoken 
His  Word  and  announced  His  judgments,  without  producing 
even  a  passing  effect.  It  needed  more  than  this,  if  the 
worship  of  Baal  was  to  be  effectually  checked.  Accordingly, 
this  period  of  Israel's  history  is  also  marked  by  a  great  exten- 
sion of  the  Prophetic  order  and  mission.  It  was  theirs  to 
keep  alive  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah  in  the  land;  theirs 
also  to  meet  the  gross  and  daring  idolatry  of  king  and  people 
by  a  display  oi  power  which  could  neither  be  resisted  nor 
gainsaid.  Hence  the  unparalleled  frequency  of  miracles,  mostly 
intended  to  prove  the  vainness  of  idols  as  against  the  power 
of  the  Living  God,  the  reality  of  the  prophets'  mission,  and  of 
the  authority  which  the  Lord  had  delegated  to  His  mes- 
sengers. Only  thus  could  any  effect  be  produced.  It  was  an 
extraordinary  period — and  God  raised  up  in  it  an  extraordinary 
agency.  We  have  already  indicated  that,  in  general,  consider- 
ing the  notions  and  expectations  of  the  times,  miracles  might 
almost  be  said  to  have  been  God's  ordinary  mode  of  teaching 
the  men  of  that  age.  This  holds  specially  true  of  the  period 
now  under  consideration.  Hence  the  unusual  accumulation 
of  the  miraculous — and  that  chiefly  in  its  aspect  of  power — as 

N 


178  Ahaby  King  of  Israel. 

displayed  by  an  Elijah  and  an  Elisha,  so  far  from  seeming 
strange  or  unaccountable,  appears  eminently  called  for. 

Politically  speaking  also,  this  was  a  period  of  great  change. 
For,  whereas  hitherto  the  two  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah  had 
been  in  a  state  of  constant  warfare,  an  alHance  between  them 
was  now  formed.  At  first,  indeed,  it  seemed  otherwise.  As 
Ahab  ascended  the  throne  of  Israel  during  the  lifetime  of  Asa, 
the  relations  between  the  two  kingdoms  continued  as  before. 
And  when,  in  the  fourth  year  of  King  Ahab's  reign,  Jehoshaphat 
succeeded  his  father  Asa  (i  Kings  xxii.  41),  it  appeared  as  if 
the  prospect  of  an  alliance  between  the  sister-countries  were 
more  remote  than  ever.  Jehoshaphat  began  his  reign  by 
strengthening  the  defences  of  his  country  against  Israel  (2 
Chron.  xvii.  i,  2).  His  religious  measures  were  in  the  opposite 
direction  from  those  of  Ahab.  Himself  earnestly  and  decidedly 
pious,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  he  walked  "  not  after  the 
doings  of  Israel."  On  the  other  hand,  Ahab  entered,  probably 
at  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  into  an  alliance  with  the  most 
wicked  dynasty  then  in  power,  by  marrying  Jezebel,^  the  daughter 
of  Ethbaal  (or  Ithobalus,  "Baal  is  with  him").  Josephus 
has  preserved  to  us  the  history  of  this  royal  family  {Against 
Ap.  i.  18).  It  appears  that  Ethbaal  was  originally  the 
High-priest  of  the  great  temple  of  Astarte  in  Tyre ;  that  he 
murdered  his  king,  and  usurped  the  throne,  which  he  occupied 
for  thirty-two  years ;  and  that  his  dynasty  continued  for  at  least 
sixty-two  years  after  his  death.  These  notices  will  sufficiently 
explain  the  upbringing  of  Jezebel.  A  clever,  strong,  bold,  and 
unscrupulous  woman,  she  was  by  conviction  a  devotee  to  the 
most  base  and  revolting  idolatry  which  the  world  has  ever 
known,  combining  with  this  the  reckless  contempt  of  the  rights 
and  consciences  of  others,  and  the  utter  indifference  as  to  the 
means  employed,  which  characterise  the  worst  aspect  of  Eastern 
despotism.     That  she  would  hate  the  religion  of  Jehovah,  and 

^  The  classical  student  will  be  interested  to  know  that  Jezebel  was  the 
grand-aunt  of  Dido,  the  founder  of  Carthage.  The  notices  in  Josephus  are 
taken  from  Menander. 


Baal-  and  Astarte-ivorship  in  Israel,  179 

seek  utterly  to  destroy  it — and,  indeed,  whatever  would  not  bend 
to  her  imperious  will ;  that  she  would  prove  the  implacable  foe 
of  all  that  was  pious  or  even  free  in  Israel ;  and  that  she  would 
not  shrink  from  the  wholesale  murder  of  those  who  resisted  or 
opposed  her,  follows  almost  as  a  matter  of  course.  Yet,  strange 
as  it  may  sound,  there  is  something  grand  about  this  strong, 
determined,  bold  woman,  which  appears  all  the  more  strikingly 
from  its  contrast  with  her  husband.  Jezebel  was  every  inch  a 
Queen — though  of  the  type  of  the  Phoenician  Priest-King  who 
had  usurped  the  throne  by  murder. 

The  immediate  consequence  of  this  ill-fated  union  was,  that 
the  religion  of  Jezebel  became  the  worship  of  the  land  of  Israel. 
Ahab  built  in  Samaria  a  temple  to  "  the  Baal "  ^ — the  Sun-god 
(the  producing  principle  in  Nature) — in  which  he  erected  not 
only  an  altar,  but,  as  we  gather  from  2  Kings  iii.  2 ;  x.  27,  also 
one  of  those  pillars  which  were  distinctive  of  its  vile  services. 
As  usual,  where  these  rites  were  fully  carried  out,  he  also  "  made 
the  Asherah  "  ^ — Astarte,  the  Moon-goddess  (the  receptive  prin- 
ciple in  Nature) — so  that  the  Phoenician  worship  was  now 
established  in  its  entirety.  As  we  infer  from  later  notices,  there 
was  a  *'  vestry  "  attached  to  these  temples,  where  special  festive 
garments,  worn  on  great  occasions,  were  kept  (2  Kings  x.  22). 
Ahab — or  perhaps  rather  Jezebel — appointed  not  less  than  450 
priests  of  Baal  and  400  of  Asherah,  who  were  supported  by  the 
bounty  of  the  queen  (i  Kings  xviii.  19;  xxii.  6).  The  forced 
introduction  of  this  new  worship  led  to  a  systematic  perse- 
cution of  the  prophets,  and  even  of  the  openly  professed  wor- 
shippers of  Jehovah,  which  had  their  complete  extermination 
for  its  object  (i  Kings   xviii.   13;    xix.  10;    2  Kings  ix.  7). 

^  With  the  article  —  the  supreme  Phcenician  and  Assyrian  deity, 
worshipped  under  different  designations  throughout  that  part  of  Asia.  The 
critical  study  of  the  mythology  of  these  countries  has  yielded  many  interest- 
ing results,  and  shown,  with  striking  similarities  in  designation  of  the  deity, 
the  most  absolute  contrast  to  the  religion  of  Jehovah  as  regards  doctrine  and 
life,  so  as  to  bring  the  heavenly  origin  of  the  latter  into  marked  prominence. 

2  Not  as  in  the  Authorised  Version  (i  Kings  xvi.  33)  :  "And  Ahab 
made  a  grove." 


l8o  Jehoshaphat,  King  of  Judah. 

These  measures  were  wholly  due  to  the  absolute  power  which 
Jezebel  exercised  over  her  husband.  Left  to  himself,  Ahab 
might  have  yielded  to  better  influences  (comp.  i  Kings  xviii. 
39-46;  XX.  13,  etc.;  xxi.  27-29).  Altogether  Ahab  presents  a 
strange,  though  by  no  means  uncommon  mixture  of  the  good 
and  the  evil,  the  noble  and  the  mean,  issuing  finally  not  in 
decision  for  God  and  what  was  right  and  true,  but  in  the  triumph 
of  evil,  to  his  own  destruction  and  that  of  his  race.  For 
he  possessed  qualities  which,  if  directed  by  the  fear  of  God, 
might  have  made  him  even  a  great  king.  He  was  at  times 
brave,  even  chivalrous  (comp.  for  example  i  Kings  xx.  11,  and 
even  verse  32);  royal  in  his  tastes  and  undertakings  (i  Kings 
xxii.  39;  2  Chron.  xviii.  2);  and  ready,  under  temporary 
emotion,  to  yield  to  the  voice  of  conscience.  But  all  this  was 
marred  by  fatal  weakness,  selfishness,  uncontrolled  self-indul- 
gence, an  utter  want  of  religion,  and  especially  the  influence  of 
his  wife,  so  that  in  the  language  of  Holy  Scripture  he  "  sold 
himself  to  work  wickedness  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,"  incited 
thereto  by  his  wife  Jezebel  (i  Kings  xxi.  25).-- 

While  these  influences  were  at  work  in  Israel,  Jehoshaphat, 
encouraged  by  the  blessing  which  rested  on  his  kingdom,  once 
more  vigorously  resumed  the  work  of  religious  reformation  in 
Judah  (2  Chron.  xvii.  6-9).  Not  only  did  he  take  away  the 
"  high  places  and  groves,"  but,  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign,^ 
he  sent  five  of  his  princes,  accompanied  by  nine  of  the  principal 
Levites  and  two  priests,  throughout  the  towns  of  Judah  to  teach 
the  people  the  Law — no  doubt  the  Pentateuch,^  of  which  they 
took  with  them  an  authorised  copy.  The  actual  instruction 
would  unquestionably  be  committed  to  the  priestly  members  of 
this  commission  (comp.  Lev.  x.  1 1 ;  Deut.  xvii.  8,  9),  whilst 
the  presence  of  the  princes  would  not  only  secure  the  authority 
of  the  teachers  and  the  efficiency  of  their  work,  but  also  be 

^  It  has  been  ingeniously  suggested  (by  Hitzig),  that  this  was  a  Year  of 
Jubilee,  viz.  912  B.C. 

^  Thus  the  Pentateuch  in  its  present  form  circulated  ten  centuries  before 
the  time  of  our  Lord. 


Jehoshaphat  joins  Alliance  with  A  hub.         i8i 

requisite  for  civil  purposes,  since  the  Law  of  Moses  affected 
many  of  the  social  relations  of  life,  and  accordingly  required 
for  its  enforcement  the  authority  of  the  magistrates.  Once  more 
signal  marks  of  the  Divine  approbation  followed.  Some  of 
the  Philistine  chiefs  rendered  voluntary  homage  to  Jehoshaphat ; 
the  Arab  tribes,  whom  Asa  had  subdued  during  his  pursuit  of 
Zerah,  the  Ethiopian,  again  paid  their  tribute ;  new  castles  for 
the  defence  of  the  country  were  built,  "store-cities"  provided, 
and  the  various  towns  provisioned ;  ^  while  a  large  army  was 
ready  prepared,-  of  which  the  five  chiefs  resided  in  Jerusalem, 
to  be  under  the  personal  orders  of  the  king.^ 

It  was  in  circumstances  of  such  marked  prosperity  that 
Jehoshaphat  "joined  affinity  with  Ahab."  The  sacred  text 
specially  notes  this  (2  Chron.  xviii.  i),  partly  to  show  that 
Jehoshaphat  had  not  even  an  excuse  for  such  a  step,  and 
partly,  as  we  think,  to  indicate  that  this  alliance  must,  in  the 
first  place,  have  been  sought  by  Ahab.  The  motives  which 
would  influence  the  King  of  Israel  are  not  difficult  to  under- 
stand. The  power  of  the  country  had  been  greatly  weakened 
by  Syria  during  the  reign  of  Omri.  Not  only  had  Ben-Hadad 
possessed  himself  of  a  number  of  cities,  both  east  (Ramoth- 
Gilead,  for  example)  and  west  of  the  Jordan,  but  the  country 
had  become  virtually  subject  to  him,  since  he  claimed  even  in 
the  capital,  Samaria,  the  right  of  having  "  streets,"  or  rather 
"  squares,"  that  is,  Syrian  quarters  of  the  town,  which  owned  his 
dominion  (comp.  i  Kings  xx.  34).  And  now  Ben-Hadad  had 
been  succeeded  by  a  son  of  the  same  name,  equally  warlike 

^  This  seems  the  real  meaning  of  the  Hebrew,  and  not  "much  business," 
as  in  the  Authorised  Version  of  2  Chron.  xvii.  13. 

2  A  very  ingenious  defence  of  the  accuracy  of  the ,  numbers  of  this  army 
has  been  lately  attempted.  But  to  us  these  numerals  seem  corrupt,  though 
it  is  impossible  in  this  place  to  furnish  proof  for  the  assertion.  Probably 
they  were  illegible  or  blotted  out,  and  the  copyist  seems  to  have  supplied 
the  two  first  from  chap.  ;xiv.  8,  while  the  other  three  were  fonned  by 
deducting  100,000  from  each  of  them.  The  sum  total  is  double  that  of 
chapter  xiv.  8. 

^  This  seems  to  be  the  true  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  text. 


1 82  Jehoshaphat,  King  of  JtidaJi, 

and  ambitious.  In  these  circumstances  it  was  of  the  utmost 
importance  to  Ahab  to  secure  permanent  peace  on  his  southern 
or  Judaean  frontier,  and,  if  possible,  to  engage  as  an  active 
ally  so  powerful  and  wealthy  a  monarch  as  Jehoshaphat.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  not  so  easy  to  perceive  the  reasons  which 
influenced  the  King  of  Judah.  Of  course  he  could  not  have 
wished  to  see  the  power  of  Syria  paramount  so  close  to  his 
borders.  Did  he,  besides,  desire  to  have  the  long-standing 
(seventy  years')  breach  between  Judah  and  Israel  healed  ?  Had 
he  a  dim  hope  that,  by  the  marriage  of  his  son  with  the  daughter 
of  Ahab,  the  two  realms  might  again  be  joined,  and  an  undivided 
kingdom  once  more  established  in  the  house  of  David?  Or 
did  he  only  allow  himself  to  be  carried  along  by  events,  too 
weak  to  resist,  and  too  confident  to  dread  evil  ?  We  can  only 
make  these  suggestions,  since  the  sacred  text  affords  no  clue 
to  this  political  riddle. 

It  was,  as  we  reckon,  about  the  eighth  year  of  Jehoshaphat's 
reign,  and  consequently  about  the  twelfth  of  that  of  Ahab,  that 
Jehoram,  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat — then  a  lad  of  about  fifteen  or 
sixteen  years — was  married  to  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab 
and  Jezebel  (2  Chron.  xxi.  6).^    Jehoshaphat  lived  to  see  some 

^  We  arrive  at  this  conclusion  as  follows  :  When  eight  or  nine  years 
later  —  that  is,  in  the  seventeenth  year  of  Jehoshaphat,  the  latter  paid 
his  memorable  visit  to  Ahab  (i  Kings  xxii.  2),  Ahaziah,  the  son  of  Jehoram, 
must  have  been  already  about  eight  or  nine  years  old,  since  he  ascended 
the  throne  about  thirteen  years  later,  after  the  death  of  his  grandfather 
and  his  father,  at  the  age  of  twenty- two  (2  Kings  viii.  26).  But  it  must  be 
admitted  that  the  chronology  of  these  reigns  is  involved  and  somewhat 
difficult.  Indeed,  a  perfect  agreement  is  impossible.  For  the  dates  are 
given  not  according  to  any  fixed  standard  (such  as  the  Creation,  or  the 
Birth  of  Christ),  but  according  to  the  reigns  of  the  various  kings.  But, 
according  to  Jewish  practice,  a  year  of  a  king's  reign  is  counted  ixovciNisan 
(April)  to  Nisan,  so  that  any  time  before  or  after  Nisan  would  be  counted 
as  an  integral  year.  Thus  a  prince  who  ascended  the  throne  in  Adar 
(March)  of  one  year  and  died  in  Ijar  (May)  of  the  next,  although  only 
reigning  fourteen  months,  would  be  said  to  have  reigned  three  years.  This 
difference,  when  applied  to  the  reigns  of  the  various  kings,  or  to  a  comparison 
between  the  dates  of  the  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah,  constitutes  one  of  the 
main  practical  difficulties  in  establishing  a  perfect  agreement. 


TJte  Marriage  of  Jehoram  with  Athaliah.      183 

of  the  bitter  fruits  of  the  rash  and  unholy  alliance  which  he 
had  sanctioned.  Eight  or  nine  years  later,  he  went  on  that 
visit  to  Ahab  which  led  to  the  disastrous  war  with  Syria,  in 
which  Ahab  himself  perished  (2  Chron.  xviii.).  Then  followed 
the  joint  maritime  expedition  of  Jehoshaphat  and  the  son  of 
Ahab,  which  ended  in  loss.  But  the  worst  was  to  come  after 
the  death  of  Jehoshaphat.  His  son  and  successor,  the  husband 
of  Athaliah,  introduced  in  Judah  the  idolatry  of  his  wife,  and 
brought  shame  and  loss  upon  his  people.  The  next  occupant 
of  the  throne — the  son  of  Athaliah — followed  the  example  of 
his  father,  and  perished  by  command  of  Jehu.  Lastly  came 
the  terrible  tragedy  of  the  wholesale  murder  of  the  royal  princes 
by  Athaliah,  then  her  reign,  and  finally  her  tragic  death. 

It  was  not  by  means  such  as  those  which  Jehoshaphat 
employed  that  good  could  come  to  Judah,  the  breach  be  healed 
between  the  severed  tribes,  the  kingdom  of  David  restored,  or 
even  peace  and  righteousness  return  to  Israel.  But  already 
God  had  been  preparing  a  new  instrumentality  to  accomplish 
His  own  purposes.  A  Voice  would  be  raised  loud  enough  to 
make  itself  heard  to  the  ends  of  the  land ;  a  Hand,  strong 
enough  not  only  to  resist  the  power  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  but  to 
break  that  of  Baal  in  the  land.  And  all  this  not  by  worldly 
might  or  craftiness,  but  by  the  manifestation  of  the  power  of 
Jehovah  as  the  Living  God.^ 

1  A  few  Talmudic  notices  about  Ahab  may  here  find  a  place.  They 
are  chiefly  derived  from  the  Tractate  Sanhedrin  (102  b — 103  b).  His  out- 
ward prosperity,  and  enjoyment  of  the  pleasures  of  this  world  in  contrast 
with  those  of  the  next,  are  emphatically  dwelt  upon.  He  is  characterised 
as  naturally  cold  and  weak — his  sinfulness  being  chiefly  ascribed  to  his  wife  ; 
hence  this  proverb  :  He  who  walks  in  the  counsel  of  his  wife  will  fall  into 
Gehenna  {Baba  Mez.  59).  The  heaviest  sins  of  Jeroboam  had  only  been 
like  the  lightest  of  Ahab ;  in  fact,  he  was  guilty  of  all  kinds  of  idolatry, 
and  even  inscribed  on  the  gates  of  Samaria :  Ahab  denies  the  God  of  Israel ! 
Nevertheless  he  was  allowed  to  reign  twenty-two  years  because  he  had 
shown  respect  to  the  Law  (as  in  the  embassy  of  Ben-Hadad  to  him,  in  his 
temporary  repentance,  etc. ),  the  Law  being  written  with  twenty-two  letters 
(which  constitute  the  Hebrew  alphabet).  Ahab  was  one  of  those  who  were 
supposed  to  have  no  part  in  the  world  to  come.  To  dream  of  King  Ahab 
was  an  evil  omen  {Bcr.  57  b). 


184  Ahah,  King  of  Israel, 


CHAPTER  XV. 


AHAB,   (8M)   KING  OF   ISRAEL. 


Jiebuilding  of  Jericho— The  Mission  of  Elijah— His  Character  and  Life^ 
Eiijah's  First  Appearance— Paralieiism  with  Noah,  Moses,  and  John 
the  Baptist— Elijah's  Message  to  King  Ahab— Sojourn  by  the  Brook 
Cherith—Eiijah  with  the  Widow  of  Sarepta—The  Barrel  of  Meal  wastes 
not,  nor  does  the  Cruse  of  Oil  fail— Lessons  of  his  Sojourn— Sicl(ness 
and  Death  of  the  Widow's  Son— He  is  miraculously  restored  to  life. 

(i  Kings  xvi.  34-xvii.) 

WITH  the  enthronement  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  the  estabhsh- 
ment  of  the  worship  of  Baal  as  the  state-religion,  and 
the  attempted  extermination  of  the  prophets  and  followers  of 
the  Lord,  the  apostasy  of  Israel  had  reached  its  high  point. 
As  if  to  mark  alike  the  general  disregard  in  Israel  of  the 
threatened  judgments  of  God,  and  the  coming  vindication 
of  Jehovah's  Kingship,  Holy  Scripture  here  inserts  a  notice 
of  the  daring  rebuilding  of  the  walls  of  Jericho,  and  of  the 
literal  fulfilment  of  Joshua's  curse  upon  its  builder  ^  (i  Kings 
xvi.  34;  comp.  Josh.  vi.  26).  Indeed,  the  land  was  now  ripe 
for  the  sickle  of  judgment.  Yet  as  the  long-suffering  of  God 
had  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  so  in  those  of  Ahab ;  and  as 
then  the  preacher  of  righteousness  had  raised  the  voice  of 
warning,  while  giving  evidence  of  the  coming  destruction,  so 
was  Elijah  now  commissioned  to  present  to  the  men  of  his 
age  in  symbolic  deed  the  alternative  of  serving  Jehovah  or  Baal, 
with  all  that  the  choice  implied.     The  difference  between  Noah 

^  Jericho  seems  to  have  belonged  to  Ahab,  On  its  rebuildinor  see  Vol. 
III.  of  this  History,  p.  66.  The  remarks  of  the  Tahiiud  on  the  subject 
{San/i.  113  a)  are,  to  say  the  least,  very  far-fetched. 


The  Mission  of  Elijah.  185 

and  Elijah  was  only  that  of  times  and  circumstances ;  the  one 
was  before,  the  other  after  the  giving  of  the  Law;  the  one 
was  sent  into  an  apostate  world,  the  other  to  an  apostatising 
covenant-people.  But  there  is  also  another  aspect  of  the 
matter.  On  the  one  side  were  arrayed  Ahab,  Jezebel,  Baal, 
and  Israel — on  the  other  stood  Jehovah.  It  was  a  question  of 
reality  and  of  power :  and  Elijah  was  to  be,  so  to  speak,  the 
embodiment  of  the  Divine  Power,  the  Minister  of  the  Living 
and  True  God.  The  contest  between  them  could  not  be 
decided  by  words,  but  by  deeds.  The  Divine  would  become 
manifest  in  its  reality  and  irresistible  greatness,  and  whoever 
or  whatever  came  in  contact  with  it  would,  for  good  or  for  evil, 
experience  its  Presence.  We  might  almost  say,  that  in  his 
prophetic  capacity  Elijah  w^as  an  impersonal  being — the  mere 
medium  of  the  Divine.  Throughout  his  history  other  prophets 
also  were  employed  on  various  occasions  :  he  only  to  do  what 
none  other  had  ever  done  or  could  do.  His  path  was  alone, 
such  as  none  other  had  trodden  nor  could  tread.  He  was  the 
impersonation  of  the  Old  Testament  in  one  of  its  aspects : 
that  of  grandeur  and  judgment — the  living  realisation  of  the 
topmost  height  of  the  mount,  which  burned  with  fire,  around 
which  lightnings  played  and  thunder  rolled,  and  from  out  of 
whose  terrible  glory  spake  the  Voice  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
Israel.  We  have  the  highest  authority  for  saying  that  he  was 
the  type  of  John  the  Baptist.  But  chiefly  in  this  respect,  that 
he  lifted  the  axe  to  the  root  of  the  tree,  yet,  ere  it  fell,  called 
for  fruits  meet  for  repentance.  He  was  not  the  forerunner 
of  the  Lord,  save  in  judgment ;  he  was  the  forerunner  of  the 
King,  not  of  the  Kingdom ;  and  the  destruction  of  the  state 
and  people  of  Israel,  not  the  salvation  of  the  world,  followed 
upon  his  announcement. 

A  grander  figure  never  stood  out  even  against  the  Old 
Testament  sky  than  that  of  Elijah.  As  Israel's  apostasy  had 
reached  its  highest  point  in  the  time  of  Ahab,  so  the  Old 
Testament  antagonism  to  it  in  the  person  and  mission  of 
Elijah.     The  analogy  and  parallelism  between  his  history  and 


1 86  Ahah,  King  of  Israel. 

that  of  Moses,  even  to  minute  details,  is  obvious  on  comparison 
of  the  two ;  ^  and  accordingly  we  find  him,  significantly,  along 
with  Moses  on  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration.  Yet  much  as 
Scripture  tells  of  him,  we  feel  that  we  have  only  dim  outlines 
of  his  prophetic  greatness  before  us.  By  his  side  other  men, 
even  an  Elisha,  seem  small.  As  we  view  him  as  Jehovah's 
representative,  almost  plenipotentiary,  we  recall  his  unswerving 
faithfulness  to,  and  absolutely  fearless  discharge  of  his  trust. 
And  yet  this  strong  man  had  his  hours  of  felt  weakness  and 
loneliness,  as  when  he  fled  before  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  and  would 
fain  have  laid  him  down  to  die  in  the  wilderness.  As  we  recall 
his  almost  unlimited  power,  we  remember  that  its  spring  was 
in  constant  prayer.  As  we  think  of  his  unbending  sternness, 
of  his  sharp  irony  on  Mount  Carmel,  of  his  impassioned  zeal, 
and  of  his  unfaltering  severity,  we  also  remember  that  deep  in 
his  heart  soft  and  warm  feelings  glowed,  as  when  he  made 
himself  the  guest  of  the  poor  widow,  and  by  agonising  prayer 
brought  back  her  son  to  life.  Such  as  this  must  have  been 
intended  by  God,  in  His  mercy,  as  an  outlet  and  precious 
relief  to  his  feelings,  showing  him  that  all  his  work  and  mission 
were  not  of  sorrow  and  judgment,  but  that  the  joy  of  Divine 
comfort  was  his  also.  And  truly  human,  full  of  intense  pathos, 
are  those  days  of  wilderness-journey,  and  those  hours  on 
Mount  Horeb,  when  in  deepest  sadness  of  soul  the  strong 
man,  who  but  yesterday  had  defiantly  met  Ahab  and  achieved 
on  Mount  Carmel  such  triumph  as  none  other,  bent  and  was 
shaken,  like  the  reed  in  the  storm.  A  life  this  full  of  con- 
trasts— of  fierce  light  and  deep  shadows — not  a  happy,  joyous, 
prosperous  life ;  not  one  even  streaked  with  peace  or  gladness, 
but  wholly  devoted  to  God :  a  bush  on  the  wilderness-mount, 
burning  yet  not  consumed.     A  life  full  of  the  miraculous  it  is 

^  Jewish  tradition  extols  him  almost  to  blasphemy,  to  show  how  abso- 
lutely God  had  delegated  to  Elijah  His  power — or,  as  the  Rabbis  express 
it :  His  three  keys — those  of  rain,  of  children,  and  of  raising  to  life.  With 
special  application  of  Hos.  xii.  13  to  Moses  and  Elijah,  Jewish  tradition 
traces  a  very  minute  and  instructive  parallelism  between  the  various  in- 
cidents in  the  lives  of  Moses  and  Elijah  {Yalktd  vol.  ii.  p.  32.  d). 


The  Early  History  of  Elijah.  187 

and  must  be,  from  the  character  of  his  mission — and  yet  himself' 
one  of  the  greatest  wonders  in  it,  and  the  success  of  his  mission 
the  best  attestation  of,  because  the  greatest  of  the  miracles  of 
his  history.  For,  alone  and  unaided,  save  of  God,  he  did 
conquer  in  the  contest,  and  he  did  break  the  power  of  Baal 
in  Israel. 

His  first  appearance — alike  in  the  manner  and  suddenness 
of  it — ^was  emblematic  of  all  that  was  to  follow.  Of  his  birth 
and  early  circumstances,  we  know  next  to  nothing.  Josephus 
assumes  {Ant.  viii.  13,  2)  that  the  Tishbah  which  gave  him  his 
name  (i  Kings  xvii.  i)  lay  on  the  eastern  side  of  Jordan,  in 
the  land  of  Gilead ;  and  some  modern  writers  have  found  the 
name  in  the  village  of  Tisieh^  to  the  south  of  Busrah.  But 
this  view  has  been  shown  (by  Keil)  to  be  untenable.  Even 
more  fanciful  is  the  suggestion,  that  the  Hebrew  expression 
means  that  he  was  "a  stranger  among  the  strangers  of  Gilead" 
— possibly  a  Gentile  by  birth.  Most  likelihood  attaches  to  the 
generally  received  view,  that  his  birthplace  was  the  Tishbi  in 
Upper  Galilee  (within  the  territory  of  Naphtali),  known  to 
us  from  apocryphal  story  (Tobit  i,  2,  lxx)  —  and  that,  for 
some  unascertained  reason,  he  had  migrated  into  Gilead,  with- 
out, however,  becoming  one  of  its  citizens.  This  the  sacred 
text  conveys  by  the  expression,  •'  Elijah  the  Tishbite  from 
among  the  dwellers  (strangers  dwelling)  in  Gilead."  Another 
inference  as  to  his  character  may  be  drawn  from  his  name 
Elijah :  My  God  Jehovah  !  though  it  is  scarcely  necessary 
to  say  that  he  did  not  assume  it  himself^ 

With  the  same,  or  perhaps  with  even  more  startling  unex- 
pectedness and  strangeness  than  that  which  characterised  the 
appearance  of  John  the  Baptist — and  with  precisely  the  same 
object  in  it — Elijah  suddenly  presented  himself  in  Samaria  and 

^  Later  Jewish  tradition  has  represented  him  as  of  priestly  descent,  pre- 
sumably on  account  of  his  sacrifice  on  Mount  Carmel.  But  even  so  the 
illegality  of  a  sacrifice  outside  Jerusalem  would  require  special  vindication. 
Even  Jewish  legalism,  however,  admits  the  plea  of  exceptional  necessity 
in  this  instance.  Tradition  represents  Elijah  as  a  disciple  of  Ahijah,  the 
Shilonite. 


1 88  Ahah,  King  of  Israel. 

before  Ahab.  It  was,  and  intended  to  be — to  adapt  the  figure 
of  the  Son  of  Sirach  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  i ) — Hke  a  fire  that  kindled 
suddenly,  like  a  torch  that  blazed  up  in  the  still  darkness  of 
the  night.  There  was,  indeed,  sufficient  here  to  rouse  the 
dullest  mind.  We  can  imagine  the  stern  figure  of  the  Tishbite, 
arrayed  in  an  upper  garment  of  black  camel's  hair^ — which 
henceforth  seems  to  have  become  the  distinctive  garb  of  the 
prophets  (Zechar.  xiii.  4) — girt  about  his  loins  with  a  leathern 
girdle.  The  dress  betokened  poverty,  renunciation  of  the 
world,  mourning,  almost  stern  judgment,  while  the  girdle, 
which,  as  the  badge  of  office,  was  always  the  richest  part  of 
the  dress,  was  such  as  only  the  poorest  of  the  land  wore.  It 
was  an  unwonted  sight,  and,  as  he  made  his  way  up  through  the 
terraced  streets  of  rich  luxurious  Samaria,  its  inhabitants  would 
whisper  with  awe  that  this  was  a  new  prophet  come  from  the 
wilds  of  Gilead,  and  follow  him.  What  a  contrast  between 
those  Baal-debauched  Samaritans  and  this  man ;  what  a  greater 
contrast  still  between  the  effeminate  decrepit  priests  of  Baal, 
in  their  white  linen  garments  and  high-pointed  bonnets,^  and 
this  stern  prophet  of  Jehovah  !  And  now  he  had  reached  the 
height  where  palace  and  castle  stand,  and  met  Ahab  himself, 
perhaps  at  the  magnificent  entrance  to  that  splendid  colonnade 
which  overlooked  such  a  scene  of  beauty  and  fertility.  His 
message  to  the  king  was  abrupt  and  curt,  as  became  the  cir- 
cumstances 2 — after  all,  only  a  repetition  of  Jehovah's  denun- 
ciation of  judgment  upon  an  apostate  people  (Lev.  xxvi.  19, 

^  The  rendering,  2  Kings  i.  8,  "a  hairy  man"  is  incorrect.  The  ex- 
pression means  a  man  arrayed  in  a  hairy  garment — as  we  gather,  of  black 
camel's  hair. 

2  This  was  the  official  dress  of  the  priests  of  Baal. 

2  The  Talmud  {Sank.  113.  a)  mars  the  whole  subject  by  a  discussion,  at 
the  close  of  which  Elijah's  words  are  introduced.  Both  he  and  King  Ahab 
are  supposed  to  have  come  on  a  visit  of  condolence  to  Hie),  after  the  death 
of  his  children  (i  Kings  xvi.  34).  Elijah  explains  that  this  terrible  calamity 
was  the  consequence  of  the  neglect  of  Joshua's  warning,  to  which  Ahab 
objects  that  it  was  incredible  the  disciple's  word  should  become  true,  if 
the  master's  were  not.  But  since  the  threatening  of  Moses  in  regard  to 
idolatry  had  not  been  fulfilled,  he  could  not  believe  in  the  warning  of 
Joshua.     Upon  this  Elijah  bursts  into  the  words  mentioned  in  the  text. 


Elijah's  Message  to  AJiah.  189 

etc.;  Deut.  xi.  16,  etc.;  xxviii.  23,  etc.;  comp.  i  Kings  viii. 
35;  Amos  iv.  7);  but  with  this  addition,  that  the  cessation 
of  dew  and  rain  should  last  these  years — whether  many  or  few 
— "  except "  by  his  word.  This  latter  perhaps  was  intended 
to  emphasize  the  impotence  of  Ahab's  prophets  and  priests 
as  against  Jehovah. 

It  was  all  most  startling:  the  sudden,  strange,  wild  appa- 
rition; the  bold  confronting  of  king  and  people  there  in 
Samaria ;  the  announcement  apparently  so  incredible  in  itself, 
and  in  such  contrast  to  the  scene  of  wealth  and  fruitfulness  all 
around;  the  unexpected  pronunciation  of  the  name  Jehovah 
in  such  a  place;  the  authority  which  he  pleaded  and  the 
power  which  he  claimed — in  general,  even  the  terms  of  his 
message :  "  Lives  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  which  I  stand 
before  His  Face  !  If  there  be  these  years  dew  or  rain,  except 
by  the  mouth  (the  spoken  means)  of  my  word!"i  What 
answer  Ahab  made,  what  impression  it  produced  on  him  or  his 
people.  Holy  Scripture,  in  its  Divine  self-consciousness  and 
sublime  indifference  to  what  may  be  called  "  effect,"  does  not 
condescend  even  to  notice.  Nay,  here  also  silence  is  best — 
and  the  prophet  himself  must  withdraw  as  suddenly  as  he  had 
come,  hide  himself  from  human  ken,  not  be  within  reach  of 
question  or  answer,  and  let  God  work,  alone  and  unseen.  An 
absolute  pause  with  that  thunder-cloud  overhead — unremoved 
and  apparently  unremovable — in  presence  of  which  man  and 
Baal  shall  be  absolutely  powerless :  such  was  the  fitting 
sequence  to  Elijah's  announcement. 

Elijah's  first  direction  was  to  the  Wady  Cherith — probably- 
east  of  the  Jordan  2 — one  of  those  many  wide  water-courses 
which  drain  into  the  river  of  Palestine.  In  this  wild  solitude, 
like  Moses,  nay,  like  our  Lord  Himself,  he  was  to  be  alone 
with  God — to  plead  for  Israel,  and  to  prepare  for  his  further 

^  So  in  strict  literality. 

"  This  appears  probable  from  the  Hebrew  expression  rendered  in  the 
Authorised  Version  ** before  Jordan,"  but  meaning  literally,  "in  face  of 
Jordan." 


190  Ahahy  King  of  Israel. 

work.  So  long  as  water  was  left  in  the  brook — for  there  is 
nothing  needlessly  miraculous,  even  in  the  story  of  Elijah — 
and  so  long  as  Jehovah  had  such  strange  provisioners  as  "  the 
ravens"^  to  act  as  His  messengers  —  for  there  is  nothing 
that  is  merely  natural  in  this  history,  and  the  miraculous 
always  appears  by  the  side  of  the  natural, — the  prophet  would 
not  want  needed  support.  In  this  also  there  were  lessons 
of  deepest  significance  to  Elijah  (compare  as  to  God's  strange 
messengers,  job  xxxvii.  10;  Psa.  Ixxviii.  23;  Isa.  v.  6;  Amos 
ix.  3).  When  in  the  course  of  time  the  waters  of  Cherith 
failed,  owing  to  the  long  drought,  Elijah  was  directed  to  go  to 
Zarephath  {Sai'epta^  Luke  iv.  26  2),  where  God  had  "com- 
manded" for  him  even  a  more  strange  provisioner  than  the 
ravens  :  a  poor,  almost  famishing  widow,  and  she  a  Gentile  !^ 

Here  again  everything  is  significant.  Sarepta  was  not  only 
a  heathen  city,  outside  the  bounds  of  Israel,  midway  between 
Sidon  and  Tyre,  but  actually  within  the  domains  of  Jezebel's 
father.  The  prophet,  who  was  not  safe  from  Jezebel  in  Israel, 
would  be  safe  within  Jezebel's  own  country;  he  for  whom 
Ahab  had  so  earnestly  but  vainly  searched,  not  only  throughout 
his  own  land,  but  in  all  neighbouring  countries  (i  Kings  xviii. 

^  Surely,  it  is  one  of  the  strangest  freaks  of  criticism  (Jewish  and 
Christian)  to  make  of  these  "ravens"  either  "Arabs,"  or  "merchants," 
or  "Orebites,"  from  a  supposed  town  of  Oreb.  We  can  understand  the 
difficulty  of  the  Rabbis,  arising  from  the  circumstance  that  Elijah  should 
be  fed  by  ravens,  which  were  unclean  animals.  Those  of  them  who  take 
the  literal  translation  comfort  themselves  with  the  fact,  that  the  ravens 
at  least  brought  him  levitically  clean  food,  cither  from  one  of  the  7000  in 
Israel  who  had  not  bent  the  knee  to  Baal,  or  from  the  table  of  Ahab,  or 
from  that  of  Jehoshaphat.  But  these  Rabbinical  comments  are  so  far  evi- 
dential of  the  truth  of  this  narrative,  that  we  see  how  differently  a  later 
writer  would  have  constructed  this  history,  had  he  invented  a  Jewish 
legend.  Hess  adduces  parallel  instances  of  the  support  of  people  by  wild 
beasts  ;  but  they  are  of  little  interest,  since  the  provision  for  Elijah  was 
manifestly  miraculous. 

^  Corresponding  to  the  modern  village  of  Snrafcnd,  though  the  latter 
seems  farther  from  the  sea  than  the  ancient  Sarepta. 

^  The  Rabbis  represent  her  as  a  Jewess,  and  make  her  the  mother  of 
Jonah. 


Elijah  is  sent  to  Sarepta.  191 

10),  would  be  securely  concealed  in  the  land  most  hostile 
to  Elijah's  mission,  and  most  friendly  to  Ahab's  purposes.  But 
there  are  even  deeper  lessons.  It  is  only  one  of  these,  that, 
cast  out  of  his  own  country  and  by  his  own  people,  God  can 
find  a  safe  refuge  for  His  servant  in  most  unlikely  circum- 
stances; and  that,  when  faith  seems  to  fail,  where  most  we 
might  have  expected  it,  God  will  show  that  He  has  His  own 
where  least  we  would  look  for  them.  Again,  the  reference 
of  our  Lord  to  this  history  (Luke  iv.  25),  shows  these 
three  things  :  that  the  entertainment  of  Elijah  was  a  distin- 
guishing honour  conferred  on  the  widow  of  Sarepta ;  that  it 
proved  of  real  spiritual  benefit  to  her  (as  will  be  shown  in 
the  course  of  this  history) ;  and  that  it  implied,  that  God 
had  purposes  of  grace  beyond  the  narrow  bounds  of  Israel, 
unbelieving  as  it  was — in  the  language  of  St.  Paul,  that  He 
was  not  the  God  of  the  Jews  only,  but  also  of  the  Gentiles 
(Rom.  iii.  29).  May  we  not  go  a  step  farther,  and  see  in 
this  mission  of  Elijah  to,  and  entertainment  by  a  heathen 
widow,  an  anticipation  at  least  of  the  announcement  of  that 
"  Kingdom  of  God "  in  its  world-wide  bearing,  which  formed 
part  of  the  message  of  his  antitype,  John  the  Baptist  ? 

Once  more  the  support  of  Elijah,  though  miraculous, 
was  to  be  secured  in  the  course  of  natural  and  easily  intel- 
ligible events.  Yet  withal,  as  it  had  been  Jehovah  Who  "  com- 
manded "^  the  ravens,  so  it  was  He  also  Who  "commanded" 
the  widow  of  Sarepta,  all  unconscious  as  she  was  of  it,  to 
sustain  Elijah.  But  how  should  the  prophet  recognise  her? 
He  must  go,  trusting  to  God's  direction,  and,  watching  such 
natural  indications  as  would  appear,  be  guided  to  whither  he 
was  supernaturally  sent.  Arrived  at  the  gate  of  Sarepta,  he 
saw  a  widow,  whose  poverty  was  evidenced  by  her  searching 
for  a  little  brushwood.  Was  she  the  woman  who  would 
sustain  him?  There  was  a  preliminary  test  ready  to  hand. 
She  must  have   recognised  the   stranger  by  his   dress  as  a 

^  The  Rabbis  note,  that,  when  God  is  said  to  have  "  commanded  "  the 
ravens,  He  put  it  in  their  heart — a  gloss  this  of  manifold  application. 


I02  Ahaby  King  of  Israel. 

prophet  of  Jehovah.  Would  she,  the  heathen,  be  willing  to 
hold  friendly  communication  with  him?  So  he  handed  her 
the  drinking-vessel  which  he  had  brought,  with  the  request  to 
interrupt  her  weary  work  in  order  to  fetch  him  some  water. 
Even  this  first  test  proved  that  God  had,  as  of  old  (Gen.  xxiv. 
1 2-21),  and  as  afterwards  (Luke  xix.  30-34;  xxii.  9-12),  by 
anticipation  provided  for  His  servant.  And,  assuredly,  as 
ever,  "  the  cup  of  cold  water  "  given  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
was  soon  to  receive  rich  reward. 

But  there  was  yet  another  and  a  sharper  test  by  which  to 
ascertain  whether  she  were  the  widow  to  whom  Elijah  was 
Divinely  sent.  If  she  would  hold  communion  with  a  servant 
of  Jehovah — did  she  truly  believe  in  Jehovah  Himself;  and  if 
so,  was  her  faith  such  that  she  would  venture  her  last  means 
of  support  upon  her  trust  in  Him  and  in  His  word  ?  To  put  it 
in  another  manner :  heathen  as  she  was,  though  thus  far  pre- 
pared, was  there,  if  not  activeness,  yet  receptiveness  of  faith 
in  her,  of  sufficient  capacity  for  such  spiritual  provision  as  that 
which  was  afterwards  miraculously  supplied  for  her  temporal 
wants?  This  would  be  the  last  and  decisive  test.  As  she 
was  going  to  fetch  the  water,  without  hesitating  or  murmuring 
at  the  interruption  of  the  old,  or  at  the  imposition  of  the  new 
task,  Elijah  arrested  her  with  a  request  yet  stranger  and  far 
harder  than  the  first.  She  was  evidently  a  poor  widow,  and 
we  know  from  profane  history  ^  that  the  famine,  consequent 
on  the  want  of  rain  in  Israel,  had  also  extended  to  Tyre.  But 
when  Elijah  addressed  to  her  what,  even  in  these  circumstances, 
would  have  seemed  the  modest  request  for  *'  a  morsel  of  the 
bread  "  in  her  hand — that  is,  in  her  possession  2 — he  could 

^  Menander  in  Josephus'  Ant.  viii.  13,  2.  According  to  Menander  the 
actual  famine  in  Tyre  lasted  one  whole  year.  We  may  here  remark,  that 
if  any  one  wishes  to  be  impressed  with  the  sublimcness  of  the  Scriptural 
account  of  this  event  he  can  do  no  better  than  compare  it  with  the 
wretched  rationalistic  prose  of  Josephus'  version  of  it. 

^  The  words  "in  thine  hand"  do  not  refer  to  the  verb  "bring,"  but  ta 
"bread,"  and  mean  that  Elijah  spoke  as  if  she  had  some  bread  at  home. 
So  the  Lxx  render  it. 


ElijaUs  meeting  zvith  the  Widow  of  Sarepta.      193 

not  have  been  aware  of  the  terrible  straits  to  which  his 
future  hostess  was  reduced.  It  was  not  unwillingness  to  give 
even  to  a  complete  stranger  part  of  her  scanty  provision, 
but  that  she  had  absolutely  none  left.  Despair  breaks 
down  the  barriers  of  reserve — at  least  to  fellow-sufferers,  and, 
as  in  this  case,  to  fellow-believers.  With  the  adjuration : 
"  Lives  Jehovah,  thy  God,"  which  attested  alike  her  knowledge 
of  Elijah's  profession  and  her  own  faith,  she  told  how  nothing 
but  a  handful  of  meal  was  left  in  the  small  Cad  ^  that  held  her 
provisions,  and  a  little  oil  in  her  cruse.  She  had  now  come 
to  gather  by  the  highway  a  few  sticks,  with  which  to  cook  a 
last  meal  for  herself  and  her  child.  After  that  they  must  He 
down  and  die. 

It  is  difficult  to  know  which  most  to  wonder  at :  Elijah's 
calmness,  consistency,  and  readiness  of  faith,  or  the  widow's 
almost  incredible  simplicity  of  trustfulness.  Elijah  was  not 
taken  aback;  he  did  not  hesitate  to  go  on  with  the  trial  of 
his  hostess  to  the  end ;  least  of  all,  was  he  afraid  of  the 
possible  consequences.  As  in  every  real  trial  of  our  trust, 
there  was  first  a  general  promise,  and,  on  the  ground  of  it, 
a  specific  demand,  followed  by  an  assurance  to  conquering  faith 
("  the  cad  of  meal  shall  not  come  to  an  end,  nor  the  cruse  of 
oil  fail").  But,  if  it  was  as  he  told  her,  why  this  demand 
in  its  sharply  trying  severity :  firsts  to  use  for  Elijah  part  of  the 
very  little  she  had,  and  to  bring  it  to  him,  and  only  after  that 
to  go  back  2  and  prepare  for  herself  and  her  son  ?  Needless, 
indeed,  the  trial  would  seem,  except  as  a  test  of  her  faith ;  yet 
not  a  mere  test,  since  if  she  stood  it  and  inherited  the  promise, 
it  would  be  such  confirmation  of  it,  such  help  and  blessing  to 
her — alike  spiritually  and  temporally — as  to  constitute  the 
beginning  of  a  new  life.     And  so  it  ever  is;   and  therefore 

1  The  Cad  was  a  small— probably  the  smallest — barrel.  The  word  has 
passed  into  the  Latin,  the  Greek,  and  the  Sanscrit.  Curiously  enough, 
our  English  representative  of  it  is  the  word  "Caddy." 

2  This  is  clearly  implied  in  the  original,  and  must  have  been  a  much 
greater  trial  of  her  faith  than  if  Elijah  had  at  once  returned  with  her,  and 
the  miracle  begun  then  and  there. 

O 


J 94  Ahah,  King  of  Israel. 

does  every  specific  demand  upon  our  faith  stand  between  a 
general  promise  and  a  special  assurance,  that,  resting  upon  the 
one,  we  may  climb  the  other ;  and  thus  every  specific  trial — 
and  every  trial  is  also  one  of  our  faith — may  become  a  fresh 
starting-point  in  the  spiritual  life. 

And  the  widow  of  Sarepta  obeyed.  It  requires  no  exercise 
of  imagination  to  realise  what  her  difficulties  in  so  doing  must 
have  been.  Did  Elijah  go  back  with  her  after  she  had  brought 
him  the  cake,  almost  the  last  provision  for  herself  and  her 
child, — to  watch  as,  with  wonderment  and  awe,  she  prepared 
the  first  meal  from  her  new  store;  or  did  he  allow  her  to 
return  home  alone,  perhaps  wondering  as  she  went  whether 
it  would  be  as  the  prophet  had  said,  or  whether  perhaps  she 
would  never  again  see  the  Israelite  stranger  ?  One  thing  at 
least  is  clear :  that  this  heathen  woman,  whose  knowledge 
of  Jehovah  could  only  have  been  rudimentary  and  incipient, 
and  who  yet,  at  the  word  of  a  stranger,  could  give  up  her 
own  and  her  son's  last  meal,  because  a  prophet  had  bidden  it, 
and  promised  her  miraculous  supply  for  the  future,  must  have 
had  the  most  simple  childlike  trustfulness  in  the  God  of  Israel. 
What  a  lesson  this,  and  how  full  of  comfort,  to  Elijah  !  There 
was  faith  not  only  in  Israel,  but  wherever  He  had  planted  its  seed. 
Elijah  had  spread  the  wings  of  the  God  of  Israel's  promise 
(i  Kings  xvii.  14),  and  this  poor  heathen  had  sought  shelter 
under  them.  There,  almost  hourly  these  many  "  days,"  ^  the 
promise  proved  true,  and,  day  by  day,  as  when  Israel  gathered 
the  manna  in  the  wilderness,  did  an  unseen  Hand  provide — and 
that  not  only  for  herself  and  her  son,  but  for  all  "  her  house- 
hold." It  was  a  constant  miracle ;  but  then  we  need,  and  we 
have  a  God  Who  doeth  wonders  —  not  one  of  the  idols  of 
the  heathen,  nor  yet  a  mere  abstraction,  but  the  Living  and  the 
True  God.     And  we  need  in  our  Bible  such  a  history  as  this, 

1  The  word  "many"  in  i  Kings  xvii.  15  is  not  in  the  original  (as  in- 
dicated by  the  italics).  The  expression  marks  an  indefinite  period  of  time — 
yet,  as  it  seems  to  me,  with  the  peculiar  Old  Testament  idea  of  time,  as 
"day  by  day." 


The  Child  of  the   Widow  dies.  J95 

to  give  us  the  pledge  of  personal  assurance,  when  our  hearts 
well-nigh  sink  within  us  in  the  bitter  trials  of  life — something 
which  to  all  time  may  serve  as  evidence  that  Jehovah  reigneth, 
and  that  we  can  venture  our  all  upon  it.  And  yet  as  great  as 
this  miracle  of  daily  providing  seems  that  other  of  the  faith  of 
the  widow  of  Sarepta! 

It  was  soon  to  be  put  to  even  greater  trial — and,  as  before, 
not  only  she,  but  Elijah  also,  would  learn  precious  lessons  by 
it.  "  Days  "  (time)  had  passed  in  happy  quiet  since  God  had 
daily  spread  the  table  in  the  widow's  home,  when  her  son 
became  ill.  The  sickness  increased,  till,  in  the  language  of 
the  sacred  text,  "there  was  not  left  in  him  breath." ^  There 
is  something  in  the  immediate  contact  with  the  Divine,  which, 
from  its  contrast,  brings  sin  to  our  remembrance,  and  in  con- 
sequence makes  us  feel  as  if  it  were  impossible  to  stand 
unpunished  before  Him — until  our  thoughts  of  the  Divine 
Holiness,  which  in  this  view  seems  as  consuming  fire,  pass 
into  the  higher  realisation  of  the  infinite  love  of  God,  which 
seeks  and  saves  that  which  is  lost  (comp.  Luke  v.  8 ;  also  Isa. 
vi.  5).  It  was  certainly  not  the  wish  that  the  prophet  should 
be  gone  from  her  home,  nor  yet  regret  that  he  had  ever  come 
to  it,  which  wrung  from  the  agonised  woman,  as  she  carried  to 
him  her  dead  child  in  her  bosom,  these  wild  words,  in  which 
despair  mingled  with  the  consciousness  of  sin  and  the  searching 
.after  the  higher  and  better:  "What  have  I  to  do  with  thee 
(what  to  [between]  me  and  thee  2),  man  of  the  Elohim  ?  Come 
art  thou  to  me  to  bring  to  remembrance  my  sin,  and  (thus)  to 
cause  the  death  of  my  son  !"  The  Divine,  as  represented 
by  Elijah,  having  no  commonality  with  her;  its  fierce  light 

^  Since  the  same  or  at  least  a  very  similar  expression  in  Dan.  x.  17  does 
not  imply  actual  death,  it  would  be  rash  to  assert  that  the  child  was 
really  dead.  This  is  well  pointed  out  by  Kimchi.  Similarly,  Josephus 
has  it  that  the  child  only  seemed  dead  (was  "as  one  dead,"  in  New 
Testament  language).  The  circumstance  that  his  mother  still  carried  him 
in  her  bosom  seems  to  imply  the  same. 

=*  Comp.  Judg.  xi.  12 ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  lo ;  2  Ivings  iii.  13 ;  Matt.  viii.  29 ; 
John  ii.  4. 


196  Ahab,  Ki7ig  of  Israel, 

bringing  out  her  sin,  and  her  sin  bringing  down  condign 
punishment — such  were  the  only  clearly  conscious  thoughts 
of  this  incipient  believer — though  with  much  of  the  higher 
and  better,  as  yet  unconsciously,  in  the  background. 

Elijah  made  no  other  answer  than  to  ask  for  her  son.  He 
took  him  from  her  bosom,  carried  him  to  the  Alijah  (upper 
chamber)  where  he  dwelt,  and  there  laid  him  on  his  own  bed. 
In  truth,  it  was  not  a  time  for  teaching  by  words,  but  by  deeds. 
And  Elijah  himself  was  deeply  moved.  These  "  many  days  " 
had  been  a  happy,  quiet,  resting  time  to  him — perhaps  the 
only  quiet  happy  season  in  all  his  life.  And  as  day  by  day  he 
had  been  the  dispenser  of  God's  goodness  to  the  widow  and  her 
household,  and  had  watched  the  unfolding  of  her  faith,  it  must 
have  been  a  time  of  strengthening  and  of  joy  to  his  heart.  As 
St.  Chrysostom  has  it :  Elijah  had  to  learn  compassion  in  the 
house  of  the  widow  of  Sarepta,  before  he  was  sent  to  preach  to 
his  own  people.  He  learned  more  than  this  in  that  heathen  home. 
Already  he  had  learned  that  experience  of  faith,  which,  as  St.  Paul 
tells  us,  worketh  a  hope  that  maketh  not  ashamed  (Rom.  v.  4, 
5).  But  now  it  seemed  as  if  it  were  all  otherwise ;  as  if  he  were 
only  a  messenger  of  judgment ;  as  if  his  appearance  had  not 
only  boded  misery  to  his  own  people  Israel,  but  brought  it 
even  upon  the  poor  widow  who  had  given  him  shelter.  But 
it  could  not  be  so — and  in  the  agony  of  prayer  he  cast  this 
burden  upon  his  God.  Three  times — as  when  the  Name  of 
Jehovah  is  laid  in  blessing  on  His  people  (Numb.  vi.  24,  etc.), and 
as  when  the  Seraphim  raise  their  voice  of  praise  (Isa.  vi.  3) — 
he  stretched  himself  in  symbolic  action  upon  the  child,  calling 
upon  Jehovah  as  his  God  :  laying  the  living  upon  the  dead, 
pouring  his  life,  as  it  were,  into  the  child,  with  the  agony  of 
believing  prayer.  But  it  was  Jehovah  Who  restored  the  child 
to  life,  hearkening  to  the  voice  of  His  servant. 

They  are  truly  human  traits,  full  of  intense  pathos,  which 
follow — though  also  fraught  with  deep  spiritual  lessons.  We 
can  almost  see  Elijah  as  he  takes  down  the  child  to  his  mother 
in  that  darkened  room,  and  says  to  her  only  these  words  of 


Life  out  of  Death.  197 

deep  emotion,  not  unmingled  with  loving  reproof:  ''See,  thy 
son  Hveth ! "  Words  these,  which  our  blessed  Lord  has  said 
to  many  a  weeping  mother  when  holding  her  child,  whether 
in  life  or  in  death.  And  thus  we  can  understand  the  words 
of  the  mother  of  Sarepta,  and  those  of  many  a  mother  in  like 
circumstances  :  "  Now — thus — I  know  that  a  Man  of  Elohim 
thou,  and  that  the  Word  of  Jehovah  in  thy  mouth  is  truth  !"  wShe 
had  learned  it  when  first  she  received  him ;  she  had  seen  it 
day  by  day  at  her  table;  she  had  known  it  when  God  had 
answeied  her  unspoken  thought,  her  unuttered  prayer,  by 
showing  that  mercy  and  not  judgment,  love  and  forgiveness, 
not  punishment  and  vengeance,  were  the  highest  meaning  of 
His  dealings. 

The  Rabbis  see  in  this  story  an  anticipation  of  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead.  We  perceive  this  and  more  in  it — an 
emblem  also  of  the  resurrection  from  spiritual  death  :  a  mani- 
festation to  Elijah  and  to  us  all,  that  "He  quickeneth  the 
dead,  and  calleth  those  things  which  be  not  as  though  they 
were"  (Rom.  iv.  17). 


END  OF  VOLUME  V. 


•noisjaA 

in      ooicifM          0C30              oo-*<          coo 

(NO 

t^        UO  lO  ir^  lO               CO  «»  Ol                     r-l  ^               O  C5 

i 

p3suoq'>n-v 

O        O  C3  C5  Ci              OC:Ci                    CiC3              cooo 

00  00 

ooom-*          ooo              oo          oo 

^^ 

•^o:^TITXO 

O  CO 

O        OCioO              oS?§                    So              M  CO 

00  00 

OOOOMrH               i~00                     Clt-              l^O 

coo 

s" 

^ 

•ppBAia 

CO        OOOO               COCOCO                     T-'i-H               CiCi 

Soo 

A 

Ca        OC5005               0005                     030.               0000 

oot^o^co          oooco'^eo      oo -*      t-i—o 

•  oo 

w 

M 

•jaTTi^ 

r-t-OOOO               COtNC-l-MC^         rHi-H         05CRC3 

3 

ClOOOlOOi             OJOOlOCi       050       cooooo 

> 

w 

►«; 

y-<a>^ 

■ws. 

i^r.icooo'Tt.cococ-JOJG-ic^      r-1,-1      ooo 

O  COOO 

^ 

oo  oo  OOOOOOOO  O        oo        000000 

cooooo 

-S 

g 

f^ 

:^ 

o 

p4 

fl 

1            1 

^ 

s. 

■§ 

g 

to                       Si 

V 

LU 

-J 

8 

1 

gypt 

usalem 

an 
Syria 

ria 

Tyre  and 

Syria 
■gilead 

d  Judah  a 

< 

H 

-J 

O 

o 

Shishak  King  of  E 
Shishak  enters  Jer 

Zerah  the  Ethiopi 
Ben-Hadad  i.  of  ! 

Building  of  Sama 
Ethbaal,  King  of 

Ben-Hadad  ii.  of 
Battle  of  Ramoth- 

War  of  Israel  an 

(Moabite  Stone) 

Hazael,  King  of  I 
Second  Battle  of 

< 

o 

in 

1 

o 

•I8BJSI  JO  sStii:h: 

OH'J  JO   UOTS8303V 

rH        coo                                                                   tH 

o      w 

o 

-I 

s 

5 

Q-i\%  raoij  iv^x 

r-l  OJ 

'"' 

^S2 

o 

z 
o 

DC 

I 
o 

Q 

"S 

^S 

Q 

1 

1 

Kings  of  Isbael 
Keigned : 

Jeroboam,  22  year; 

Nadab,  2  years 
Baasha,  24  years 

Elah,  2  years 
ZiMRi,  7  days 
Omri  and  Tibni,  4 
Omri,  sole  king  8  y 

Ahab,  22  years 

Ahaziah,  2  years 
Jehokam,  12  years 

o 

•q^-pnp  JO  sSma: 

«            -o-o        -^-^^tJ        ^            ^-S 

C/5 

■S 

8ii;  JO  noissaaov 

<^'5^          ^S^'c:^^          ^              ^^ 

9q^  raojj  j'Bai 

„ 

■§  ^ 

^ 

b 

1^ 

en                                                                          V 

*j      «o 

W 

e       u 

w 

I    .                               a 

co-rege 

sole  rule 
1  year 

E 
H 

s 
^ 

°      1 

PlH 

g         M 

Rehoboaa 

Abijam,  3 
Asa,  41  ye 

Jehoshapi 

tiii 

O 

M 

Jehor, 

2  yea 

Jehor 

Ahazi 

•sOTopam-Ni  O/ttx 
eq^  JO  uon^jwlas 

-^    SS^S5       iS^^g       ^S       2?i 

§55 

gq^  raojj  at!3A 

CO  <M  !M 

1— r^i-- 


i 

00 

si 

§ 

i 

i 

1-HOO 

■^ 

i 

S 

in  Oi 

S§3 

s 

00 

1 

ggl 

S5g 

1 

i 

i 

00  00 

i 

i 

1 

i 

g 

i 

g 

00  00 

i 

i 

o 

CO 

OJiHrH 

lis 

•goo 

^5 


rt  Si  S 


J  ^  X)  *J 


^.S^ 


ShJ^P^ 


ms 


_3  ^  A  </i  I- 


Or:. 


=^  b  3 


^^  <u  'S 


•S3 
>>:2 


•bs 


rt      'aJ 


?c^ 


«"         O   rt.S 

«3     .S  g    - 
-a     -a  o  G 


;r-i       -t; 


o  go 


1=      ^    -^s 


W   ID 
PMP-. 


^       ^ 


^  < 


pasiioq^nv 


! 

< 

•uo^jnito 

o 

<M 

1 

«5 

o 

•pn.'«-a 

g 

i 

O 

i 

•J3Ut.\i 

g 

1 

in  (M 

c1 

i 

S 

ii 

■u^-a. 

i 

i 

i 

i 

Si 

t3   G 
0)  <i 


-I        in 


0.9       , 

<         (■ 


3  C  rt  i^      ^ 


O   rt   «   cj       T^jJ 


i  >         "US 


^o<2 


Ui^-^ 


OT3    5 
bo  0.2 


O  0)   "  4;   !^ 


•I318JSI  JO  SSOT^ 

sv[%  JO  uoissaooy 


•r;  k1  1)  b 

a  2  w  t: 


K  O 


SR 


2  ^ 

U  O  J 

s  S  w 

PS  s  <J 


en, 


Q 


•qnpHf  JO  s3uix 

9q:).  JO  noissaooy 

nq^  nrojj  iva^ 


•B    'B 


i  i 

5      o 


•smop5?ni3  oa\x 

SH%  JO  TI0!:)1UT!cl8S 


t-  <M       >*< 


11 

i 

i 

§ 

00  1^ 

g 

i 

m 

i 

i 

ii 

1 

1 

i 

o 

oo 

i 

i 

i 

i 

1 

i 

."H  52  ^  !>  .S  -S  "o  .y 

^O  3    S    S    >    ^ 


>^  o  ^ 


2  -c 


1)  T3 


C    rt 


O    (U 


, -ai:' 


cuu>— > 
W      2 


>  o  to 


■£  j3  -y  rt  o  o 

CT3  5^  "^  ■" 
O  3-^^  .  ^ 
^^^  °^3 
3  H  .,  cr' 
a.    ..2—  g  C 

.2WM  ^2|l 


13  rt^  -^  i;  rt  " 


^o  o 


H  lo 


.s'S:^^.^>-W, 


■*  ^  rt  i,-  "^ 
rt 


rt   CI   -  m1  ^=§ 

u  aj  3  i„  J)  t^  X 
T3  TJ   rt   O  ' — 1  O   X 


W      I— )     NN 


-  ^ 


o  >. 


,g     6 


5< 

o  o 

s  s 


c3 


CO  to 
coco 


•rJ-Q  «J  bo 

■^262 

Ill's 

(u  o  j;  iH 
Q     O 


iiiJi 


Q     O     hJ 


1^ 


la 


"o" 


1)  'O 


SO)    I' 


-c  "^  S 


"    O    O    •"    c     "^ 

^"  >  rt  -e-.o  -5  ^  ^ 

c-S  3-2  ^.2  B<i 

■;;;  ^  "^ .°  -  2  "^  5 


I  <^ 


^.-a  S 


3   CO 

s  ^ 


'•5  ■"  TJ  ■"    rt 
5    rt    c 


'^  J^> 


:  '^  s  o 


c   o   S   " 


rt-fi  rt-^  2 
a' 


.-  ^  'S   o  4J  .5    e    c    u 
52J5.S«3gB?i 

Bt/iC«^0'^3rt 


.o      -5^^ 


'E 


-§02^    -°;-§  § 

.-  g-5  ^  r  s  rt  - 


THEOLOGICAL    WORKS 


PUBLISHED    BY   THE 


RELIGIOUS    TRACT    SOCIETY. 


WORKS  BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR. 
The  Temple ;  its  Ministry  and  Services  at  the  Time  of 

Jesus  Christ.     Imp.  i6mo.     55-.  cloth  boards,  gilt  edges. 

"  There  are  few  who  will  not  learn  from  a  volume  which  has  the  results,  with  little  of 
the  show  of  learning."  The  AthoicEutn. 

Sketches  of  Jezvish  Social  Life  in  the  Days  of  CJirist. 

Imp.  i6mo.     5^.  cloth  boards,  gilt  edges. 

"  Clergymen  will  find  many  facts,  illustrations,  and  details  of  real  value  to  them  in 
preparing  their  sermons  ;  while  to  parents  and  teachers  they  will  be  invaluable." 

The  Standard. 

The  Golden  Diary  of  Heart  Converse  zuith  Jesus  in  the 

Book  of  Psalms.     Arranged  for  every  Sunday  in  the  Year.     4^-.  cloth,  gilt  edges. 

"A  series  of  spiritual  studies  on  the  Psalms,  based  upon  a  profound  conviction  that 
they  treat  of  the  Person  and  Church  of  Christ.  We  trust  that  many  family  circles  will 
adopt  the  Golden  Diary  for  daily  reading."  The  Christian. 

Miriam   Rosenbaum :    a  Story   of  Jewish  Life.     Illus- 
trated.   Imp.  i6mo.    "zs.  6d.,  cloth  boards. 

What   is   Jier  Name?       Illustrated.       Imperial    i6mo. 

-zs.,  cloth  boards. 


a  Sketch  of  the  Evidences 

Crown 


G7'onnds  of  Christian  Hope: 

of  Christianity.     By  Stanley  Leathes,  M.A.,  Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's 
8vo.     4^.  6d.,  cloth  boards. 

The  Analogy  of  Religion  to  the  Constitution  a7td  Course 

of  Nature.  Also,  Fifteen  Sermons  on  Subjects  chiefly  Ethical.  By  Bishop  Butlek. 
With  Life  of  the  Author,  an  Analysis,  Notes,  and  Indexes.  By  Joseph  Angus,  D.D., 
i2mo.     3J.  6(af.,  cloth  boards  ;  6^.,  half-bound  ;  7^.,  calf. 


Publications  of  tlie  Religious  Tract  Society. 
The  Bible  and  Modem   Thought.       By  the  Rev.  T.  R. 

Bibkn,  M.A.,  Profe«isor  of  Moral  Philosophy,  Cambridge.  With  Appendix.  Octavo 
Edition,  with  additions;  ^s.,  cloth  boards;  \2S.,  calf.  Cheap  Edition:  4^^.,  cloth 
boards  ;  6r. ,  Italf-bound. 

The  Judgment  of  Jerusalem. — Predicted    in    Scripture, 

fulfilled  in  History-.  Hy  the  Rev.  Dr.  Patton,  of  New  York.  With  Plans  and 
Illustrations.     Cro^n  6vo.     2J.  Cui.,  cloth  boards. 

The  Exodus  of  Israel :  its  Difficulties  Examined,  and  its 

Truth  Confirmed:  with  a  Reply  to  Recent  Objections.  By  Rev.  T.  R.  Birks,  M.A  , 
Professor  of  Moral  Philosophy,  Cimbridge.     8vo.     7s.,  cloth  boards;  12^.,  calf. 

Christian    Revelation    and    Modern    Astronomy.       By 

Thos.  Chalmers,  D.D.     Fcap.  8vo.     is.  td.,  cloth  boards. 

TJu  Evidence  of  Prophecy.     By  Alexander  Keith, 

D.D.     Fcap.  8vo.     New  and  Revised  Edition,  xs.,  cloth  boards. 

The  Force  of  Truth.     By  Rev.  ThomaS  Scot-^,  Rector 

of  Ailon  Sandford.     a.d.  1798.     iSmo.     \s.,  cloth  boards;  45.  6</.,  morocco. 

God^s  Word  Written:  The  Doctrine  of  the  Inspiration 

of  the  Holy  Scripture  Explained  and  Enforced.  By  the  Rev.  Canon  Garbett, 
M.A.     Crown  8vo.     4J,  tii.,  cloth  boards. 

Modern  Materialism.     By  the  Rev.  W.  F.  WILKINSON, 

M.A.     Demy  8vo.     In  cover,  td. 

TJie  Progress  of  Divine  Re-uelation ;  or.  The  Unfolding 

Purpose  of  Scripture.     By  John  Stolghton,  D.D.     Cr.  8vo.     6j.  6(/.,  cloth  boards. 

The  Origin  of  Nations.     In  Two  Parts :    I.  On   Early 

(!ivili/ntion<.  II.  On  Ethnic  Affinities.  By  Canon  Rawunson.  M..\..  Camden 
I*rofeAVjr  of  Ancient  Histor)-,  Oxford.     With  Maps.     Cr.  8vo.     \s.  6</.,  cloth  boards. 

HorcB  Paulina:;  or,  the  Truth  of  the  Scripture  History 

of  St.  Paul  Evinced.  By  Wjlmam  Pai.kv,  D.D.  With  Notes,  and  a  Supple- 
mentary Treatise,  entitled  "  Hor.x  Apostolica:,"  by  the  Rev.  T.  R.  Bikks,  AI.A. 
laoio.     31.  clolh  boards  ;  s*-  M.,  half-bound. 

A  Vina  of  the  Evidences  0/ Christianity.     By  WiLLlAM 

Pai.kv,  D.D.  With  Introduction,  Notes,  .-ind  .Sunplcmcnt,  by  Rev.  T.  R.  Bikks, 
M.A.     lamo.     31.  cloth  b<.<.nrds  ;  5X.  6</.,  half-bound. 

Observations    on    the    Co  fivers  ion    and    Apostleship    of 

St.  I'attt.  Wy  L«Ki>  LvTTi.KTON.  With  an  Intro<luctory  Ess.iy  by  I'rofessor 
H.  Rupert.     New  Edition.     Crown  8vo.     zr.,  cloth  board. 

Saving  Faith?    What  is  it?     A  Scriptural  Inquiry  and 

A{ipcal.      iCmo.     I  J.,  cloth  Ixjards. 


Philosophy  of  the  Plan  of  Sanation.     By  an  American 

Citi/en.     Fine   Edition,     aj.,  cloth   boards.     Also  in   Monthly  Volime   Skkihs. 
lud.,  clolh  boards. 

The  Religious  Tract  Societv,  56,  Paternoster  Row.       ( 


^^^ 


'''■[■:m^p!-X^^^'^^^-^W0^ 


BS1197.E21V.5 

The  Bible  history  | 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library  '.