PRINCETON, N. J. ^f ■ 1 i I Division. ..rk^..Zj.\X..] i Shelf Number I i — 1 . •^i^ Taj^ w^mm m THE KINGDOM OF ALL-ISRAEL ITS HISTORY, LITERATURE, AND WORSHIP, MORRISON ANUGIBU, l^^DINBURGH, KKINTKKS TO HKK MAJI'STY's STATIONERY OFFICE. THE KINGDOM OF ALL-ISRAEL ITS HISTORY, LITERATURE, AND WORSHIP. BY JAMES SIME, M.A. F. R. S. E. LONDON: JAMES NISBET & CO., 21 BERNERS STREET. 1863. PREFACE. In the following pages I have endeavoured to tell in our English tongue a story that was told well-nigh three thousand years ago in a language, which has long ceased to be a living language on the earth. It is the story of the kingdom of All-Israel, as the Hebrew empire was called in its most flourishing days. Small though that kingdom was, its annals have always been regarded as a heritage of mankind, fraught with w^elfare to the whole world. The w^ritings which contain this history are frequently described as not altogether worthy of credit. While they contain much that is undeniably ancient, they are also believed to contain much that is comparatively recent. The original books are said to have l^een curtailed of parts which are now lost beyond recovery ; and parts are alleged to have been added which can only be ascertained by skilful inquirers and the application of most delicate tests. Evidently, then, it is the duty of a historian either to vindicate the reality of the history, or to separate the wheat of truth from the chaff of romance. The proofs of authenticity are so numerous and so convincing, that I have accepted the history, as it is read in the Hebrew, notwithstanding undoubted difficulties in the narrative. Of the skill and industry shown by several authors, who, after careful inquiry into words and things, have undertaken to distinguish the true from the false in the history, no one can speak without respect. But the value of their researches is to be measured, less by the theories they liave proposed, than by the necessity, under which they have laid those wlio differ from them, of examining every difficulty that liad formerly been passed by or lightly esteemed. The rules of historical research, on which I have worked, are those which have been applied in verifying the literature of Greece and Eome. Two of them were first stated in a vi Preface. book written eighteen hundred years ago to vindicate the truth of the Hebrew records. Josephus, a learned Jewisli priest, was the author of that book ; and the position lie maintained was the necessity of public documents for an accurate history of any nation. This involved, first, a know- ledge of the art of waiting, and second, the drawing up and the safe keeping of state papers. He also claimed for his countrymen specially, and for the East generally, the honour of handing down from remotest antiquity documents which had been faithfully written and kept by national officials. On the value of his two tests of a true history there has long been universal agreement among men. But on the antiquity of writing and of state or family papers there was a wide divergence of opinion till, within the last half century, the revelations of science compelled the same general acquies- cence in the views first published by Josephus. Besides these two great principles, science recognises a third, which gives life and coherence to all literature. Every nation has a fountainhead of thought, from which a liviuff stream flows into the darkest corners of its history. Homer's poems are such a fountainhead ; Shakespeare is another ; the Pentateuch is a third. If, then, the Pentateuch be the chief source of Hebrew literature, living rills will be found running from it throughout the after history in words, in quotations, and in ideas. I have endeavoured to discover these streams and threads of life, and to trace them back to the one fountainhead. Fuerst's Concordance was an indispensable help in the work ; but the omissions in that book, few though they be, sometimes occur where the oversights, if undetected, would have weakened my argument. Another rule, which cannot be too strongly insisted on, is to use professional w^ords in the sense attached to them in the legal or historical books of a nation. Both Josephus and Philo recognised its importance for the literature of their people, by the care which they took to expound the twofold Preface. vii meaning of the legal word ' sacrifice.* Had modern writers attended to their teaching, much useless discussion might liave been avoided. No history or biography can be trusted, if the autlior dis- regards these four rules. And a book of annals, in which all four are observed, gives its readers the best guaranU?e (jf historical accuracy. Such a record is the book of Samuel. But an observance of these rules by a historian cann(jt re- move every bit of ruggedness from a reader's path. On tlie contrary, an ancient book in which unvarying smootlniess distinguishes the narrative, will always be regarded with sus- picion. A brief record of remote antiquity, which contains no difficulty in fact or in law, may be a record from which all difficulties have been skilfully and designedly removed : ' An English judge once remarked on hearing minutely cir- cumstantial evidence, that when a lock works too smoothly, there is reason to believe it has been oiled.' I have had recourse to footnotes only where they seemed necessary for elucidating the meaning or showing the agree- ment of the past with the present. I have also avoided using Hebrew and Greek words ; for an English reader, wlio wishes to master the deepest secrets of the history, can do so without difficulty in his own tongue. And I have generally adhered to our English translation, though sometimes changes had to l>e made on it, especially in passages, which a fuller study of the original has proved to have been erroneously rendered. The chronology of the history is still in a state of un- certainty. At present we can only be said to Ije groping after accuracy. Something similar is true of the length of the Hebrew cubit, and of Hebrew weights and measures generally. The Old Testament referred to, in estimating the number of pages in any of the books, is Hahn's (Van der Hooght) large type edition, containing 1392 pages. Edinburgh, Fclruary 1883. ^> CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. THE ELECTION OF A KINO Nature of Hebrew historical writing, Doubts regarding its trustworthiness, Supposed order of merit among the books, Unity of the Tribes ; their rejection of Jehovah, Introduction of Saul ; his ignorance of Samuel, The sacrifice— not a sacrifice proper, The anointing, and the 'signs,' * Is even Saul among the prophets ? ' Self-command of Saul, The choice by lot ; reasons for it, . Accuracy of the story. Proofs of indebtedness to older writings, PAGE 1 5 7 10 15 22 25 29 30 31 35 36 CHAPTER II. THE TESTING OF SAUL. Nahash at Jabesh ; his 'reproach ' on All-Israel, Saul's kingly spirit towards the messengers. Distinction between Israel and Judah, The feint of the messengers ; its success, . • Renewal of the kingdom ; sacrifices. Leave-taking of Samuel ; mixing up of first person and third, 41 44 45 47 49 CHAPTER III. THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. Blank in the chronology, . Prostration of Israel under the Philistines, Rising inaugurated by ' the burnt-olfering, 54 55 58 Contents. March of Philistines by Beth-horon, Saul's alarm, ami disobedience at Gilgal, . Position of Samuel and Saul : the two armies, Surprise by .lonathan and his armour-bearer, Saul's rash vow ; the pursuit, The curse ; the sin ; the altar ; the lots, . Shadow on Jonathan's life and on Saul's. . Triumphs of Saul : prolepsis, CHAPTER IV. FIXAL REJECTION OF SAUL. Order to destroy Amalek, . The Kenites, .... Saul's trimming policy, Message to Samuel ; his meeting with Saul, Obedience to ' the voice,' . Proofs of accuracy in the narrative, jMoralitv of the destruction of Amalek, CHAPTER V. LAW AND LEGISLATION AMONG THE HEBREWS. Laws not enacted or codified by kings, Origin of legislation — Moses, Earliest Code, Ex. xxi.-xxiii., may have been in force in Egypt, Laws taken into the desert sanctioned on Sinai, Not contradicted by later laws, High civilisation of earliest Code : Twelve Tables, etc. Renewal of the Covenant : objections. Legislation of Leviticus : Bleek's ' probables, Use of * Levite ' in legislation progressive, liook of Numbers — (1) The gap of thirty-eight years, (2) The Sabbath-breaker, (3) Beginning age of the Levites, (4) 'Southside southward,' . Quoting and borrowing by Ezekiel (5) The first-borns ; the priesthood, , CHAPTER VL ANOINTING AND ADVANCEMENT OF DAVID. Samuel at Bethlehem— rei)ctition of history, A sacrifice or a fei\st ? — Josephus's view, . 128 132 Cant cuts. XI Feeling of Samiiol towards David, Contrast between Saul and David — their meeting ]iTevente Positions and nature of the two armies, 'The j\Ian,' Goliath, reproaches All-Israel, His ' reproach ' stands unavenged, David arrives in the camp, First meeting with Saul : Saul's equal, He rolls away 'the reproach of Goliath,* . His first meeting with Jonathan, . The women's songs and Saul's madness, Saul attempts David's life. The great difficulty no difficulty, . 1 l»v border war, VKV,V, las 135 1:57 139 141 143 146 148 \:a If. 5 ir.7 159 CHAPTER VII. DAVID AN OUTLAW AND AN EXILE Betrothal of Michal : delay about dow-ry, Renewal of attempts on David's life, Flight to Samuel and Ramah, Flight to Bethlehem — Ezel or Argob, Flight to Gath — Ahimclech's fear, The debateable land, Saul, Doeg, and the priests, David's elegy on the ' Saints of the Lord, At Keilah and Ziph — 'the Courses,' Engedi — David's magnanimity, The story of Nabal — 'the sling,' . David's marriages and renewed persecution. References to the law-book, The struggle between Providence and Saul David at Gath and Ziklag ; his doings, 161 165 169 171 175 178 179 183 184 188 191 197 201 202 203 CHAPTER VIII. THE DEATH OF SAUL. David's Policy and its consequences. Invasion of Israel by the Philistines, Position of Saul — visit to Endor, . The witch ; her knowledge and skill. Her pretences and Saul's terror. Her prediction ; her vengeance, Discussion of the reality of the Vision, Aphek and Gilboa, Sack of Ziklag ; recovery of the booty. The Amalekite's story, Hebron — David's first public anointin< 206 207 208 212 215 217 218 2 J 2 2'J6 231 233 Xll Contents. CHAPTER IX. LlTEUATUllF, AND WOllSIIIP OF THE I'EOPLE. Rending ami writing common iu Israel, Lyric poetry : Hebrew and Greek, . Professional literature, Temple at Shiloh ; its doors and sanctuary, Its Sacrifices ; Dent, xviii. (Quoted in 1 Sam. Incense, and feasts, Golden Candlestick and Shewbread, The ark : professional terms and places, . Priests and temple servants, * The garments : ' the cphod and the me"il, Urim and Thummim, Law of vows — Hannah ; Elkanah ; Absalom, ii. 1 CHAPTER X. RECONSTRUCTION OF ALL- ISRAEL. Beginning of David's reign in Hebron, Abner and Joab ; the one battle ; its results, The king-maker, and his end. Captains of Ishbosheth ; their crime and fate, David king of All- Israil, . Jerusalem ; its capture and importance, . Alarm of the Philistines, . Zion becomes a national high place, The story of IMichal, A temple proposed ; preparations for it, . David's conquests : reasons for them ; prophecy, David's allies, ministers, and courtiers. War with Ammon ; orilers of Moses, David's goodness— story of Mephibosheth, David's wickedness — story of Bathsheba, . CHAPTER XI. THE AVENGER OF BLOOD. First stroke of the Avenger's * sword,' Reason of David's sudden composure, War at Rabbah, and in Philistia, . The Avenger's 'sword,' — Tamar ; Amnon, Disaffection in the kingdom ; Absalom's return, Plans and popularity of Absalom, Contents. xiu Increasing disaffection : three years' famine, Ahithophel's hand, Absalom's feast at Hebron, David's flight : ' grace and truth ; ' 'a seer,' Turning of the tide ; Hushai, Ziba, Shimei, The Avenger's 'sword :' Ahithoiihel and Hushai The spies ; Azmaveth's wife, Rebels and royalists ; the march ; the battle. Carelessness of Absalom — The Avenger's ' sword, The two runners, .... David's excessive grief ; reasons for it, Return of the king ; sullenness of Jndah, . David's treatment of traitors and friends, . Disaffection in ten parts of All-Israel, Murder of Amasa ; death of Sheba-ben-Bichri, pac;e 328 333 336 336 340 342 345 346 350 354 357 361 362 367 368 CHAPTER XII. THE CLOSE OF DAVID S REIGN. Numbering of the people, . Sin of king and people ; what was it ? The muster-rolls ; their lessons. The plague ; another Avenger's ' sword,' . ' The plague was stayed' — a quotation, Araunah — the two prices for Moriah, David's order of ' Mighties, ' His army ; his judges ; his people, Adonijah's imitations of Absalom, Nathan procures the coronation of Solomon, David's dying charge justifiable, . David's character as a man and a king, David as a poet and a prophet, 373 375 377 380 382 383 387 389 392 394 400 403 409 CHAPTER XII I. DEUTERONOMY — ANTIQUITY OF THE BOOK— INTERNAL EVIDENCE. Positions of the writer and editor of the book, Comparison with Thucydides, Book viii., .... Proof— (1) Changes in Israel ; Assyria, .... Theory of interpolations, ..... (2) There ought to be mention of Jerusalem, . (3) Remembrances of Egypt ; horses and chariots ; forbidden birds and beasts, ....••• (4) References to, and quotations from, the three ["receding books. 412 414 415 417 419 420 425 XIV Contents. Ditfioulties — ^1) 'On this side Jordan,' .... (2) 'The land of his possession,' (3) ' Passovers of the flock and the herd,' (4) Boiling the passovi-r, .... (5) Central altar law — quotations from it in later books, Examination of proofs alleged for its non-existence, Samuel's principle and procedure, Proofs of a dispensing power, (6) The law of the king, .... Traces of its existence in the time of the Judges, Applies to Gideon as well as to Solomon, Cannot have been borrowed from Solomon's court, 435 437 438 440 441 445 447 454 456 458 460 461 CHAPTER XIV. BKGINXING OF SOLOMON S FAME. Sources of the histor}' : their purity, Kenewed conspiracy, and its results, Solomon's dealings with Shimei, . The new high places — The vision, Solomon's wisdom in judgment, Pharaoh ; his daughter and his visit, Social comlitiou of Solomon's cities and people, 464 465 470 473 475 477 479 CHAPTER XV. THE TEMPLE AND PALACE OF SOLOMON. The temple enclosure, platform, and ramparts. Inscription ; and comparison with other temples, Historians : the builders, and their payment. Gold, silver, copper, and iron used, Castings for the temple ; the roads, Workers ; drains ; water-supply, . The temple ; its threshold and surroundings, The court ; its furniture and sacrificial system, The interior, fully described in the history, The gates and guards. The living forces ; their permanence. The dedication ; the prayer of Solomon, . Solomon's i)alace ; its courts and halls, j\Iillo : the tower of David, Fortifications of passes and trade routes, . Store cities ; chariot cities. 482 483 485 488 490 492 496 498 502 508 510 513 523 526 527 529 Conte7its. XV CHArTKlJ XVI. GREATNESS OF SOLOMON. Solomon's study of botany and natural history, . Transplanting trees ; his gardens and fountains, . Trading voyages to Ophir and Tarshish, . His throne ; his palancjuin ; his guards, . His cabinet council of ten, Purveyance ; tribute, .... Proverbs: 'tablet of thine heart,' ' A tree, a way, a fountain of life,' Historical origin of proverbs, Priests, Levites, temple, etc., not mentioned, Use of ' seven ' ; no coarseness, Ecclesiastes, a speculation not a repentance, Aramaic forms no argument against authorship by Solomon, Examination of Eccles. xii. 12, v. 6, ix. 14, 15, I'AC.K 531 533 534 540 542 543 545 548 549 549 550 552 554 556 CHAPTER XVII. FALL OF SOLOMON. Solomon's scruples of conscience, . His second vision — a warning, Eising in the North, Visit of the Queen of Sheba : the palace kitchen, Solomon's wives, .... Silence or helplessness of his counsellors, . Toleration of idolatry, * Hill of the Destroyer,' Change on the influence of women, Duty of the prophet, Edom and Damascus, Civil strife : rending of the kingdom, Lesson learned by Jeroboam in Egypt, Failure of Solomon's administration. Causes — (1) The price paid by Israel for his magnificence, (2) The monopolies of the king, . (3) Taxes in gold as well as in kind, (4) Disregard of the Divine law : the lifting of himself brethren ' — Apostasy, . . . • above hi 559 560 562 563 566 567 569 570 671 572 573 575 577 573 5S0 5S1 5S2 CHAPTER XVIII PRIESTS AND LEVITES. Denial of this distinction before the captivity, Graf's view of it in the Pentateuch examined, 585 587 XVI Contents, The Priests tlie Lcvites,' were tlie sons of Aaron — (1) Refusal of evidence, ....... (2) Witnesses accepted on all sides, Isa. Ixvi. 21 ; Ezek. xlviii. 11, 13 ; 1 Kings viii. 4, . Efforts made to rebut their evidence, (.3) Evidence from Deut. x. 8, . (4) Evidence from Dent, xviii. 1-8, . (a) Distinction between ' fire-otferings ' and ' priest's due (ft) Distinctions in the tribe of Levi, . (5) First contradiction in the Mosaic law of the priests — (a) Peace-offerings and the priest's due, {h) Twofold meaning of sacrifice, (c) Views of Josephus and Philo, . (6) Second contradiction — (a) A first tithe and a second tithe, (6) * The third year, the year of the tithe,' . (c) Female and twin (male) firstlings, (7) The concluding chapters of Ezekiel — (a) Prove the difference (1) between Jerusalem and Shiloh — (2) be tvveen Zadok's sons and Eli's, (ft) And distinguish between faithful priests and wandering or usurping Levites, .... 592 593 596 599 600 601 603 606 608 609 612 614 616 619 CHAPTEE I. THE ELECTIOX OF A KING. (1 Sam, viii. 1-x. 27, xii.) The history and tlie legislation of the Hebrew race are of an unusual character. They are not like any other history or any other legislation. From the beginning the national records, regarded as pieces of literature only, bear a stamp of their own. In the great conflict with the Egyptian king, at the outset of the history, only two actors can be said to appear upon the stage. But there are, besides, an overseer and a chorus. The overseer is one who, to use the words of the greatest of Greek poets, ' sees and hears all things from above/ The chorus is a trembling nation, cowering beneath the task- master's rod, and sending up its bitter cry to the umpire in heaven. Never were the ancient rules of Greek tragedy more singularly observed ; they were followed ages before that tragedy was born. There are two actors, and two only. Never are more than two speakers introduced on the world's stage. But the chorus, that is, the whole Hebrew people, pass tlieir remarks on what is said and done ; feel the weight of decisions come to ; and, while they are the prize of war, they enjoy as victors and suffer as vanquished in the drama. Two men, and two only, stand out before a wondering world, each armed with immense power. One of them wields the might of the empire of Egypt, with its vast resources in men and material of war ; the other is an aged sage, without armies at his back, A 2 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, without outward show, saving the support of a brother more aged than himself; but he is gifted with unequalled powers of word and thought, and utters a name which all nature obeys. The majesty of man, in its grandest form, meets in conflict with the majesty of heaven, embodied in two feeble old men. The text of the great story is the ultimate triumph of right over wrong. A down-trodden nation is the spoil of battle between the opposing forces. It is not usual to write history on these principles and in this way. With all truth it may be said never to have been done save in this one instance, and by authors of the same race, who followed the example thus set. Were it not a record of facts, it would be called a tragedy on the model of the great dramas written in Athens a thousand years later. It is not a history like the work of Livy or Tacitus, like the books of Herodotus or Thucydides. These writers delight to de- scribe the crossincT and recrossingr of the threads of human life, the play of intrigue amongst men, the working of human passions, the march of movements in a state. But the triumph of right over wrong, gradually reached by a long course of events in which wrong has often the better in the conflict, was not before these authors' minds as the great theme of their writing. When the march of events hurled a sinner from his pride of place, and brought a good man to well-earned honour, they were surprised by the results ; but the tracing of these results in human life was not their first and their chief aim. With them the actors are ever shifting, the scenes are always changing, the stage is full of living things, which distract the eye even while they impress the imagination. In the Hebrew story the plot is managed differently. From the outset the triumph of right is kept steadily in view. Although the actors are but two in number, the interest never fiao^s, the living things on the stage are nameless but active, speechless but full of language. This is history of a different kind from any other which the world knows of. Each of the two The Election of a King, 3 speakers is surrounded with servants waiting on his w^ord ; hut not a name is given to draw a bystander's eye off the chief figures on the stage. Motives are analyzed with marvellous power ; hut no one can say that imputations are undeservedly thrown on king or people, or unworthiness attributed without reason. To keep firm hold of what he has unjustly seized is the principle acted on by the king of Egypt, It is a common failins: with men in all aojes and in all ranks. But this fail- ing is lifted up to its loftiest height in the history. A whole nation is the prize won by the king ; cities built, temples beautified, strongholds fortified, canals dug, without cost to him or labour to his own people, are the gains he has made and is determined to increase. The greatness of an empire, the easing of his own subjects, are the wish and purpose of the king. Injustice and violence seem gilded over with the brightest hues of nobleness when he puts forward as pleas for them, as he may be supposed to have done, the refuge his country has been to those fugitives, and the welfare of his own warlike subjects. If wrong could ever be turned into right, a case could have been made out for it in this plea. But the great Overseer above looks down on the violence that is done. He is not deceived by fair seeming. He hears the cry of the enslaved. And in one man's breast He plants the resolve to break their fetters, to lead them forth from bondage, to make them the central figure for all time in the history of men. A tragedy so grand, ending as it does in so fearful an overthrow of armed power, leaves no room for fiction. The very plainness of the facts surpasses imagination. To describe the tragedy as a kernel of fact, overgrown with brilliant products of human fancy, is to attribute to man's mind a power of invention which it has never possessed, and has never approached since. Xor can the conception and working out of scenes the most impressive known in history be attributed to two thinkers, living in different an-es and writing independently of each other. One mind is 4 Tiic Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. seen at work in the thinking, one hand in the writing out of the narrative. Only once again is a similar tragedy enacted. And again the speakers are few in number, the motives clear, and the doom terrible. It is the story of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, with the vindication of Aaron's appointment to the priesthood. Although it reads less like a Greek tragedy than the story of the exodus, and more like a piece of ordinary historical writ- ing, it is different in conception and expression from the historical }vorks of other men. If it is not a plain statement of facts, it is useless to call it a fiction in whole or in part. Wishing to be thought a recorder of facts, the writer of it is discovered recounting falsehoods more glaring than a story- teller would dream of inserting in a romance. The solemnity of the matter, the weight of majesty in the few words spoken, and the awfulness of the end, lift it out of the region of fancy, and leave us no choice but to class it with fact or with false- hood. The story is expressly referred to in the book of Deuteronomy, it is hinted at in Samuel ; the sin of the men in claiming and exercising the special right of priests to burn incense to Jehovah, is carefully avoided by that prophet all through his actions, and is repeatedly condemned in the books of the Kings as the source of national ruin. The aspirations of these wilderness rebels give an unmistakeable colour to the subsequent history. That colour was imparted by the story of their doom, as a source colours the stream to which it gives birth. The history in the book of Samuel is written on the same plan as that of the exodus from Egypt. Whoever wrote the former (about 980 B.C.) must have breathed in the spirit of the latter, till he thought as it thought, and regarded the world as it did. Two actors or speakers, and a suffering or a rejoicing chorus, appear on earth ; an umpire looks down from heaven, awarding praise or blame, reward or punishment. Although the scenes are continually shifting, the general plan remains The Election of a King. 5 the same tlirougliout. Israel is the chorus, which passes its comments on the deeds done, which suffers or rejoices as events fall out. Jehovah is the unseen umpire, whose goings it is sometimes hard to follow in the darkness, hut whose doings always reveal a power making for righteousness among men. At the opening of the history Eli and Samuel are tlie speakers named. As the action proceeds, Samuel and Saul stand forth before the world. When the scene next changes, David is the upholder of the right ; Saul is the doer of the wrong. While one befriends, the other troubles the people. But ao-ain the scene is chancfed. David is the troubler and wrong-doer ; Absalom, himself most unworthy, is the avenger of the wrong. The story in Samuel ends without punishment befalling the guilty captain, who had heaped up unrighteous- ness acjainst himself for a sjeneration, the Gjreat soldier, Joab. But the same plan of writing history pervades the first eleven chapters in the book of the Kings. Solomon at first main- tains and represents the cause of right ; Joab meets his doom by Solomon's command. A history, so singularly written, carries proof of unity of authorship on its face. While it differs largely from the history and the legislation in the Pen- tateuch, the plan leaves no doubt of the writer's indebtedness to that book. His words and ideas echo its words and ideas with unmistakeable clearness. While he has a way of his own in thinking and writing, he is seen borrowing from an older master with the teachableness of a loving disciple. He is always thinking of one who has gone before him in the historical field ; whose pattern he follows, whose words lie treasures, and to whose master hand he gives himself up for guidance in the tangled ways of life. That the history and the legislation have experienced the fate of all other books in doubts and darkness gathering round them, as men became farther removed from the age that gave them birth, is quite true. When the little things of life, the hinges, as it were, on which events often turn, 6 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. are forgotten by failure of narrators or lapse of time, the events of any history may seem to a later age as if they were out of keeping with what else is known ; and some one might even deny their reality altogether. Or an author, in revising a large work, might alter a word or two in one part, without observing or without thinking it necessary to observe that, in so doino:, he was leaviuGj a few words elsewdiere hanf^imr like loose threads. A critic, seeing the bad joining, might pounce upon it as a proof of a different hand having tried to improve what a master worker had left unfinished. But true criticism is most unwillinsj to resort to these shifts of the weak. A slight change in the way of looking at historical events may cause as much confusion to the mind, as the throwing of a telescope out of focus causes to the eye. The point from which we regard an arrangement of affairs made many centuries ago, may be quite different from the point occupied by the people who were the actors. An apparent rent in the armour of any author may thus arise froi)^ other causes than bad workmanship. We know, for example, that ancient writers sold their works with erasures made by them- selves. These erasures were held to be proof of genuineness.^ But from them various readings were certain to result, wdien copyists came to think the author's first thought better than his second. A book once written was also sometimes revised and continued by the author, who might not trouble himself to remove from the early part of the w^ork matter which makes it look to us as if it were out of joint with the middle or the conclusion. This was done by Thucydides, the grandest of Greek historians. Even in that most careful writer, notwith- standing the editing his book received, it is sometimes impos- sible to determine his exact meaning, clear though that may have been to himself and his contemporaries. In one place it was debated whether he means the north or the south side of a narrow sea.^ But men dispute in these cases without ^ Martial, vii. 17. 2 Grote, iv. 330. The Election of a King, 7 losing temper or sense. They want to know the meaning of the author ; they never think of denying that he wrote the book. A different atmosphere is breathed as soon as we pass from classical to sacred criticism. An editor's work, how- ever slight, is magnified into proof that the original author never wrote the book, perhaps never had a being ; a diffi- culty about the meaning of a single word, whether it denotes the cast or loest of Jordan, has become a reason for denying the antiquity and authorship of a whole treatise. A line of argument so narrow does not deserve to be dignified with the name of science. At least, it is ad- visable to bear in mind that classical criticism preceded sacred, and that the former discovered the rules which the latter has followed. Had the same narrowness of view which disfigures sacred criticism, which delights in breaking whole books into miserable fragments, and which exalts every little peculiarity of an author into a ground for denying his authorship, continued to prevail in classical criticism as it once did, the history of mankind would now be in a state of incredible confusion. But the way of doubting everything in Latin and Greek spent itself, with the result of leaving things much as it found them. The upshot of the sifting to which Hebrew literature has been subjected will be the same. According to those recent writers who handle the Hebrew writings with perhaps more freedom than would be allowed them in discussing any other documents, there is an order of merit among the historical books which requires to be care- fully observed in criticism. While they assign the first place for reliableness and antiquity to the books of Judges and Samuel (980 B.C.), they regard with somewhat less respect the two books of the Kings, compiled about 560 B.C. There are traces, clear and manifold, of an influence in the latter which they believe to be largely wanting in the former. The influence discovered running through these books is usually the law code known to 8 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, ns as the book of Deuteronomy. The writer of the Kings had that law-book in his hands, referred to it, and allowed it to tinge his liistory of the past. By many critics the real writer or compiler of Samuel is believed not to have known of its existence, to have paid no respect to its enactments, and to have given proof that the book could not then have been in writing. But the Prophet Samuel and his contemporaries, not less than the writers who followed them, knew this book, quoted from it, and regarded it as all generations have regarded it — an heirloom of the Hebrew race handed down to them from remotest antiquity. The history in Samuel is unintelligible, if the book of Deuteronomy was not from the first a household book in Hebrew homes. Several recent critics among ourselves, following the leading of the most advanced section of Continental scholars, have adopted these views of the historical books of Samuel and the Kings. They have gone farther in their dealings with the two books of Chronicles. Their view of that work is copied, like almost every rule they apply in criticism, from their predecessors in the field of classical inquiry. There is no originality in their method or their ideas. So true is this that we shall give their judgment on the books of Chronicles in the words of an English writer, describing the kind of history which became popular in Eome in the first century of our era: 'The historian of the Flavian era (80 a.d.) is no longer a chronicler or a romancer. He may seek, perhaps, to mould the truth to his own prejudices ; but he is not a mere artist indifferent to truth altogether. He is a philosopher, and recognises a mission. He has his own theories of society and politics ; the events of the period before him group themselves in his mind in certain natural combinations, according to the leading idea to which they are subordinated. If he is a man of imagination, he paints the world from the type impressed on his own organs of vision. Whether or not the facts be correctly represented, they are at least true to him. The Election of a Kii\ \ He describes what lie sees, or really fancies that he sees. Works that bear this stamp of imagination are immortal. Their details may be inexact ; the genius by which they are produced may be uncritical ; but their general effect is strong and vivid, and they leave a mark behind them which cannot be effaced.'^ These words of Merivale describe the view now frequently taken of the Hebrew books of Chronicles. He is writing about Latin works composed four or five centuries later ; but his words bring before a reader the judgment passed by critics on the books of Chronicles, with a vividness which nothing in their writings can be said to approach. Justice requires us ever to bear in mind that so-called sacred criticism is, frequently, only a pale reflection of the brilliant results of classical inquiry. But in denying its originality, we must not be supposed thereby to deny its worth, or the truth of its legitimate results. Person's rule holds good : in criticism as in war nothing should be despised. To the books of Chronicles, then, it is said, the lowest place among Hebrew historical writings must be assigned. Using Merivale's words, we may call the author a man of imagination, who paints the Hebrew world, previous to his time, as if it had been always the same as he found it in his own day. The facts depicted were true to him — that is, he believed them to be true, but they were not correctly represented. He had one ' leading idea ' — the distinction between priests and Levites ; and to that idea everything in history was made subordinate. We may call him an artist, if we like, or an unconscious romancer, but he is not a recorder of facts. Such, then, is the view taken of his history. As he gives the critic great trouble, he must be put out of the way. To brand him as a forger would grate on a reader's feelings ; he may be more safely set aside as a simpleton and a romancer, a man whose attempts at historical writing may cause a smile, but who is on no account to be trusted. But before this 1 Merivale, The Romans under the Empire, viii. S3. lo The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. can be allowed, proof must be furnished, and no satisfactory proof is forthcoming. There is a marked difference between the object regarded by the author of the Kings in writing his history, and that regarded by the Chronicler. While the latter is a writer of church history, the former is a politician, recording the fortunes of the people generally. Great as is the difference between these kinds of historians among ourselves, it was as great among the Hebrews. Whoever puts the books of Kings and the Maccabees on one side, with Chronicles on the other, will feel, on passing from the former to the latter, the same change of atmosphere which we feel on passing from the civil to the church history of a country. Everything wears another look, because we are regarding the world from a new point of view and through a different medium. Events, which seemed fully detailed in the civil history of a country, appear only half recorded when we turn to its church history. From the nature of things it cannot be otherwise. But this change of handling is a change which many writers forget to recognise as imparting a justifiably different colour to the story of Israel in the pages of the Chronicler, when we compare his book with that of the Kings. Twelve generations of Hebrews had lived and died since their fathers overran the Promised Land. Battles had been gained and lost by them ; sieges had been undertaken and borne ; kings had trampled their nation in the dust, and had themselves been hurled from the highest seats. But when a balance of gains and losses is struck, it is unquestionable that tlie Hebrew race had sunk below the heights of freedom and greatness which it reached under Moses and Joshua. During these twelve generations of war and peace, — war from which they won no lasting good, peace which they allowed to slip away unimproved, — they were held together as one people by bonds so loose that their princes and chiefs came to regard the existing constitution of the country as a failure. A common The Election of a King. 1 1 faith did not seem to tliem a strong enough bond of union for the twelve cantons. In times of o-reat excitement it midit, and it often did weld the scattered tribes into a stron!]j, an almost irresistible whole. But it lost its power the moment that excitement began to cool. Petty quarrels and local jeal- ousies repeatedly snapped this bond of union. The high priest, though the head of the nation's faith, was not the head of its political life, and could not control the coldness or dis- putes wdiich weakened the tribes, and exposed them an easy prey to less powerful neighbours. A common high priest, a common sanctuary, a common faith, and common yearly festivals, admirably adapted as they were to bind the separate cantons of Israel firmly together, failed in their object. The people lost faith in God as their king ; they also lost faith in themselves as His subjects. On loss of faith followed loss of unity and freedom. This loss of faith, with the idolatry that followed, was their rejection of Jehovah. A political head seemed as necessary as a common faith to give thorough unity to the life and work of the nation. But this the Hebrews could not be said to possess. A regular succession of judges, as the presidents or chiefs of the country were called, was unknown to the political constitution of Palestine. When danger threatened the tribes, or when a foreign power had planted its foot on the prostrate common- wealth, a bold and active leader, inspired by Heaven or by the fire of his own paitriotism, vindicated the freedom of his country. But this fitful leadership did not meet the wants of the Hebrews. No sooner had the skilful steersman, who piloted the ship of tlie state through its perils, quitted the helm, than the billows again swept her head towards the rocks. For generations the country had been drifting nearer to reefs and shoals, pilot who succeeded pilot doing gradually less to gain for it the safety of a harbour. The work of Othniel, the first judge, in delivering his countrymen from bondage, was far easier than that of Samuel, the last ; the task of saving the 12 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. state from sliipwreck in tlie former case was not difficult ; in the latter it had become a desperate effort to avert an almost inevitable disaster. So impressed were the chiefs of the twelve tribes with their nearness to ruin in the days of Samuel, that, after discussing amoncf themselves the danojers of the commonwealth, they nrged him as their only hope of safety to set a king over the land. They had some reason to turn to this way of escape. So far as we are aware, the judge had neither the right nor the means to enforce authority ; the people followed him because the welfare of every man among them required obedience to be rendered, not because they dared not disobey his commands. Approaching dangers brought them round the judge, just as the presence of beasts of prey makes sheep gather in under the eye of the shepherd and his dogs. But as soon as the danger passed, the judge seems to have been abandoned by his followers. His work was finished ; the people could guide themselves. This temporary banding together of the Hebrews did not satisfy the chiefs. With some justice they considered it one cause of the nation's weak- ness. When they asked a king from Samuel, they asked him to make a great change in the constitution of the country. The free will of the people evidently required to be regulated by the authority of a head, for only a resolute chief could compel the members of the nation to united action. !N"ot unnaturally the old man felt the putting forward of this plan to be a dis- guised censure on his own administration. In vain did they assure him of their respect and esteem. He regarded their prayer as a personal affront ; in reality it was the clutching of a drowning nation at a plank of safety left untried. Samuel resisted, entreated, warned, reproached in turns ; but in vain. There was a cloud gathering beyond Jordan, which threatened to sweep the Hebrews from the lands their fathers conquered. Princes of tribes, elders of cities, all saw it coming. It was spreading its gloom over their councils, and compelling them to action. That cloud was a horde of eastern plunderers The Election of a King. 13 led by Xaliasli, king of Amnion. A storm of war equally black was lowering on the land from the west. The brave and well-armed Cherethites, the Philistines or wanderers, were threatening the freedom of the southern tribes, if, indeed, they had not planted their iron heel on the Hebrews' necks. Their garrisons held strongholds in the most mountainous districts ; and the roads throughout Palestine, in the neighbourhood of these fortresses, were not safe. Between the dead pressure of the triumphant Philistine and the threatening attitude of the Ammonite, the Hebrew^ commonwealth was breaking up into fragments, whose only chance of continuing knit together seemed to lie in acknowledging the authority of a common visible head. The chief men, reading the signs of the times, united in demanding a king from the great prophet of the nation. Samuel condemned the movement, but the voice of the people was against him, and the voice of Heaven com- manded him to yield to their wishes. When the arrangements for the worship and government of the Hebrews were completed in the wilderness three or four centuries before the age of Samuel, the distinction between the political and the spiritual chief of the nation w^as clearly drawn. And before they crossed the Jordan to conquer Western Palestine, the unity of the nation, the necessity of maintaining it at all hazards, and the appointment of a suc- cessor to their aged political head, were insisted on, and fully provided for by divine revelation. Moses regarded the wish of Pieuben and Gad to settle on the east of Jordan as an attempt to break up the unity of the nation. Xor did he grant their request till satisfied that it was reasonable, and till full guar- antees were given for the discharge of their obligations to the rest of the tribes. Feeling the approach of death, he arranged also for a leader to take his place, who might be expected to complete the work he had begun. What ]\Ioses had been as king of the nation, Joshua in a great measure became after his death. Steps were thus taken at the very outset of the 14 The Kingdom of A 11- Israel : its History, history to maintain the unity of the Hebrew people, and to give effect to it by concentrating authority in the person of one political head. But the law of the land provided still further for strengthening these bonds of union. A man so far-seeing as Moses, and so well acquainted with the science of croverninGf, knew that twelve tribes, located each in its own district and held together by no political ties, might soon become twelve commonwealths, forming alliances and waging wars with one another. He therefore left them directions to choose a king for themselves, without determining whom they should choose, or when the choice should be made. This, then, was the oldest political constitution of the Hebrews, national unity under one visible head. It was gradually departed from after Joshua's death. For centuries another constitution, largely a growth of circumstances, or rather of an unhappy letting things alone, had taken its place. Men of the highest ability, like Samuel, had come to believe that this secondary growth was the best constitution for the land. Ptepeated disasters had failed to show them their mistake. And when men of less ability discovered it, and demanded what was really the Mosaic arrangement, they were regarded as un- wisely meddling with what Heaven had sanctioned. Samuel and his friends were no more justified in their view of affairs than those who insisted on a chanoje. Amonsj the Hebrews a secondary political growth was regarded as the oldest consti- tution of things. This need not cause surprise. It has fre- quently taken place among the most enlightened nations of Europe. With them, as with Israel, the cry has oftener than once been raised, Eeturn to the orio-inal constitution of the nation. At the same time the chief men, wishing to be like their neighbours, were guilty of rejecting Jehovah as the safest centre for political unity as well as national faith. There was at that time residing in the land of Gibeah, one of the districts of Benjamin, a man named Kish. That he was a person of wealth and standing is not said ; but he may have The Election of a King, i ^ been both, for he had several servants or shaves. His son Saul is described as 'a choice young man and a goodly, and there was not a man of the sons of Israel goodlier than he ; from his shoulder and upward he was higher than any of the people.' But this tall and goodly youth did not bear among his friends and neighbours a character equal to the beauty of his personal appearance. The incident which introduces Saul to notice was one of common occurrence in a country where boundary stones formed the marches of estates, and the fields were all unfenced. His father's asses, straying in a body from their pastures, could not be found in the neighbourhood. They were she- asses, animals far too valuable to be lost without a thorough search being made for them. They were as highly esteemed by ancient Hebrews as is the horse by modern Arabs. In the hilly and rugged regions of Palestine, sureness of foot and docility rendered them of the highest valae for riding on, and for the carriage of grain and goods. These hardy animals were also so easily kept as to be invaluable to Hebrew yeomen. Saul, accompanied by one of the servants, was despatched in search of the lost asses. Taking three days' provisions in their scrips, they journeyed first into Mount Ephraim ; then they passed through the districts known as Shalisha or ' Thirds,' and Shaalim or ' Foxes,' which was probably in the Danite country of Shaalbim, inquiring for the asses at the people they met on the road. Turning southward and eastward they next came to the Land of Zuph, a district which took its name from Zuph, a Levite and an ancestor of Samuel. The chief town of this district was not in the land of Benjamin (1 Sam. ix. 16). It was situated on two heights. Probably the houses clustered on the top of one of them, while the other and loftier was reserved as a high place for the worship of God, and a college for training sons or disciples of the pro- phets. ISTaioth, 'Dwellings,' or Xaioth-on-Ptamah, 'Dwellings on a Height,' may have been the name of the formur ; 1 6 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. Bamali, or ' High Place,' the name of the latter. An altar for priestly sacrifice is not mentioned in the story, but a dining-room, in which was held the feast that usually followed a sacrifice, whether priestly or popular, crowned the crest of the Bamah. On approaching the town, which, from its position, would be visible at a considerable distance, Saul proposed to his servant to return home, although only three days had elapsed since they set out. The country seems to have been unsettled and the roads dangerous. Kish, as his son appre- hended, had become more alarmed for the youth's safety than he was grieved for the loss of the asses. But the servant, who had got some hints from the people they met on the road, proposed to enter the town before them, and ask counsel of a man of God, who happened to be then dwelling there. * Behold now, there is in this city a man of God, and he is an honourable man ; all that he saith cometh surely to pass : now let us go thither ; peradventure he can show us our way that we should go.'^ It is evident that the servant had an in- different knowledge of this honoured ' man of God.' However, Saul was not unwilling to go. But he drew back at first, because they had not with them a present for the prophet. ' What shall we take to the man ? ' he asked : ' The bread is spent in our vessels, and there is no present to take to the man of God.' But the servant showed by his looks that Saul was mistaken. Scarcely were these words uttered than, sud- denly changing his tone, Saul asked, on seeing the servant's look, ' What have we ? ' A silver quarter-shekel was all the money he had : this he proposed to give to the man of God ^ This ignorance of Saul and his servant is easily illustrated from history. Take, as a well-known example, the fight at Cramond Bridge, near Edinburgh, between James v. , king of Scotland, and the masterful beggars, whose cudgels nearly got the better of the king's sword. James's helper at the crisis of the tight, though an intelligent farmer, living not five miles from Holyrood Palace, appears to liave been entirely ignorant of his person. Even when the man he helped on Cramond Bridge met him in the presence-chamber at Holyrood, he could only conclude, from both of them keeping their hats on, that either that man or himself was the king of Scotland. The Election of a King, 1 7 to declare to them Avhat they should do. The respect due to one so highly lifted above the common rank as a prophet of God, called for this acknowledgment. In its origin and in the right use of it among the Hebrews, the giving of presents to prophets w^as a praiseworthy custom. But it may be doubted whether the servant regarded the quarter- shekel as only a mark of respect. It looks more like the price whicli an ignorant man would think of paying for divining. When every allowance is made for the vast difference between Eastern and Western ways, the tone and words of the servant are those of a man wdio expected to bring the search to a successful close by means of a fortune-teller. ' A man of God,' who resided in Naioth, was unlike others who usurped that name ; ' he was honoured,' the servant said, ' all that he saith cometh surely to pass.' In those days the word of God came to few. ' There was no open,' that is frequent, ' vision.' Prophets did not abound among the Hebrews. But in their place had risen up a host of men and women, who pretended to a knowledge of the unseen and the unknown. In the cities and villages were luitches and wizards, as these claimants to the prophetic office were then styled by the followers of Jehovah, or seers, as they called themselves, by whose tricks the simple people were deceived. They sold their services for silver and gold. They were mere fortune- tellers, who, by superior address and cunning, brought their neighbours to believe in them as servants of the true God. There is reason to fear, that the prophet they sought was regarded by the servant of Saul as but a superior member of this craft. Other members of Saul's family were more enlightened. His uncle, as is evident from the narrative, was as well acquainted with the greg-tness of Samuel as any reader of the sacred books. And the ignorance which the two tra- vellers show before the meeting with the prophet, stands out in strono- contrast with the knowledge they show after it. The if^norance cannot, therefore, have been without a cause. AVhen they returned home, and were asked by Saul's uncle, ' Whither 1 8 The Ki7igdom of A II- Israel : its History, Avent ye ? ' their plain answer makes their previous ignorance almost inexplicable : ' To seek the asses ; and when we saw that they were nowhere, we came to Samuel.' As the word for * present ' occurs nowhere in Scripture but in this passage, it is impossible to infer from the use of it the sentiments of Saul's servant. But at a much later period it is applied by Jewish interpreters in a way which gives rise to suspicion. When they are translating the Chaldee for gift in the promises of reward made by Nebu- chadnezzar to the Babylonian soothsayers (Dan. ii. 6, v. 17), they express the king's meaning by using the Hebrew word, which they found in this story of Saul and his servant. That Saul was young, and that he was seldom absent from home, are inferences fairly deducible from the narrative. That neither he nor his family were considered likely to have any dealings with Samuel and his friends is equally certain. Saul might therefore have been in the neighbourhood of this town, without recognising in it the city of the judge and prophet Samuel. If, moreover, the servant was a slave, and if, besides, he was a stranger brought among the Hebrews by war or trade, his ignorance of the home and greatness of Samuel is not a matter for surprise. Men were little given to travel in those times ; but a journey such as that for the lost asses might, in a few days, impart more knowledge than young travellers had gathered all their lives before. It may possibly seem strange that a youth of Saul's age and tribe should not have had many opportunities of, at least, seeing Samuel and knowing somewhat about him at the three great festivals of the Hebrew people. Even a single visit to the tabernacle, during one of the feasts, ought to have im- parted all the knowledge that was needed. But there was in both him and his servant an ignorance most profound of Samuel's person, office, and power. An easy way of cutting the knot of this difficulty is to regard the great feasts of the Hebrews as the growth of a later age : the feasts of Passover, The Election of a King. 1 9 Pentecost, and Tabernacles thus become tlie coinacfe of Solomon or Josiah's age, and have been falsely attributed to Moses. This is a cutting, not an unravelling, of the knot ; but history has often to decline what criticism is prone to accept. Shiloh, the meeting-place of the tribes, had been desolated by the storms of war under circumstances so dread- ful that, though not handed down to us in writing, they were printed on the nation's heart for five centuries afterwards. No meeting-place of the people existed in Saul's time, at least no place sanctioned by the command of God. But this scat- tering of the tribes from their central altar did not come alone. It was accompanied by conquest and slavery. The anxiety of Kish for his son shows the danger of travellinf^j : * the hicfh- ways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways.' Great gatherings of the tribes could not be held. The conqueror w^ould not tolerate them. The people would shrink from meeting? in their full strencrth, lest a sudden attack by armed foes on a peaceful gathering might be the result. The destruction of Shiloh and the conquest of the land explain the obscurity into which Samuel had fallen, at least among the youth of the Hebrews. The Levitical system was then in a state of paralysis. As the two travellers were climbing the hill on which the tow^n w^as built, they met a number of maidens coming down for water, perhaps to the well Sechu, or Prospect, of which mention is made at a later stage of the history. The young men asked if the seer were in the town. The water- bearers willingly entered into conversation with the tall and goodly youth who thus accosted them. A long conversation seems to have taken place, but only the heads of it are recorded. It is easy, however, to see in them the eagerness of the young women to communicate to the stranger all tliey knew about the man of God. Prom them Saul learned that a sacri- fice was to take place that day, and that the seer had shortly before arrived in the town. The maidens urged him not 20 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, to waste time. Their words even assured liim of as kindly a reception from the seer as he had got from them. Perhaps they thought of him as one of the guests invited to that sacrificial feast. The tall and goodly youth had touched the maidens' hearts. On approaching the gate, Saul and his servant nriet the pro- cession of citizens on its way to the high place. They stood aside in the open space fronting the gate to let the crowd pass. Musicians, playing on flutes and drums, on tabrets and harps, or singing some song of praise, led the way. The bullock destined for sacrifice followed, unless it had been already slain and dressed for the feast. Samuel, attended by about thirty invited guests, came behind. Ilis eye that day was never satisfied with seeing; on whomsoever it fell, it looked him through and through. The keenness of intelligence in Samuel was sharpened by the restlessness of curiosity and doubt. While on the road to the town the day before, it was announced to him that, in or near the city, he should meet the man chosen to be king over the land. Even the hour for the meetiug was named : ' About this time to-morrow will I send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him for prince over my people Israel.' At that very hour Samuel came forth from tlie city with the procession going to the high place. Every step was bringing him nearer to the king and deliverer of the nation. As his eye fell on the handsome figure of Saul, rising above the heads of all others in the open space before the gate, he appears to have said within himself, ' Surely the Lord's anointed is before Him.' He was answered by the word of God : ' Behold the man whom I spake to thee of ; this same shall reign over my people.' There was something in the air and manner of Samuel which emboldened Saul to step forward and speak. Probably also a sign, with hand or look, may have been given to the young man of the seer's wish to enter into conversation. Saul, ignorant of the ^c^reatness of the man whom he was movinii The Election of a King. 2 1 forward to address, said, with the respect always paid to age by well-bred Hebrews, ' Tell me, I pray thee, v/here the seer's house is.' Samuel at once put his mind at rest. He speaks to him as to one whom he had known for years, wdiose errand he understood, and in whose welfare he took the deepest interest. ' I am the seer : go thou up before me unto the liigh place ; for ye shall eat with me to-daj^ and in the morning I will let thee go, and will tell thee all that is in thine heart. And as for the asses that were lost to thee three days ago, set not thy mind on them, for they are found. And on whom is all the desire of Israel ? Is it not on thee, and on all thy father's house?' Astonished at the honour thus done him, and unable to understand the reason of it, Saul replies with a modesty as natural as it was well founded: 'Am not I a Benjamite, of the smallest of the tribes of Israel, and my family the least of all the families of the tribe of Benjamin ? Wherefore, then, speakest thou so to me?' Probably ^vithin sight of both of them at that moment was the neighbourhood or the village of Bethlehem, which a later prophet, catching up the words as well as the idea of Saul, described as ' little among the thousands of Judah,' but out of it ' shall He come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel ; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting ' (Mic. v. 2). The conversation between the prophet and the future king, though begun in ' the midst of the gate,' w^as not carried on there. Some of the loiterers or onlookers might have over- heard enough to excite surprise, if not suspicion. In that case the secret w^ould soon have become public talk. But no one overheard the conversation, and Saul concealed it even from his nearest relatives. Though begun in the open space fronting the city gate, it was most likely carried on while they were w^alking alone in the rear of the procession, as it swept up- wards to the high place of the town. If Samuel, on the following day, took the precaution of sending the servant forward before he anointed Saul, he would be equally cautious 2 2 The Kingdom of All-Is7'acl : its History. to let no one standing by overhear tlie words lie was speaking in the gate. The sacrifice was followed by a feast, if, indeed, it was any- thing else than a feast. About thirty guests had been invited to meet the prophet. After the sacred services of the after- noon were brought to an end, they assembled in a dining-room built on the hill. The place of honour was reserved for Samuel ; the guests, seated on the floor, took their places on either side, according to rank. The stranger and his servant were seated near the prophet, perhaps beside him, in the chiefest place among them that were bidden. ISTor was that the only mark of honour shown to the future chief of the nation. Agreeably to Eastern custom, the cook received orders to set before him a choice portion, reserved on the previous day for that purpose. As he did so, the prophet informed Saul of the honour and the reason for it : ' Behold that which is reserved. Begin ; eat ; for unto this meeting hath it been kept for thee since I said, I have invited the people.' The custom of offering sacrifice on other high places than Shiloh or Moriah, though strictly forbidden in the Mosaic law and condemned under the monarchy, seems to be here sanc- tioned by Samuel, one of the greatest of all the prophets. A breach of law so glaring requires no words to make it more glaring. But before we regard Samuel as a breaker of the law, we ought to be sure of the accuracy of our position. Every word in a narrative so brief as this history, requires to be carefully weighed by a modern reader. A departure, how- ever slight, from the position of the ancient writer may involve almost inextricable confusion of thought. Words omitted from the text require to be examined not less than words admitted. Now, while a sacrifice is spoken of in the narrative, not a word is said about an altar. The former does not imply the latter, nor does the latter imply the former. ' Go thou up before me unto the high place,' said Samuel ; he did not say, * unto the altar' (1 Sam. vii. 17). A sacrifice according to the The Election of a King, 23 law did not always imply an altar, for the word was twofold in its meaning. It meant a priestly sacrifice, or a popular sacrifice. These were two different things, strictly defined in the law- book, and differently taxed for the priests. To confound the one with the other is to misread the history. A jyojiidav sacrifice was an animal slain for food in any part of the country. It was called a sacrifice because the law required the blood, that is, the life, to be thoroughly drained from the victim and poured upon the ground. A j)rudly sacrifice was a whole burnt-offering, a peace-offering, a sin-offering, or a trespass-offering. It implied an altar, especially the brazen altar of the tabernacle ; a priest's portion different from tlie priest's portion of a popular sacrifice ; and the burning of tlie Avhole or part, 'a sweet- smelling savour' to God. The popular sacrifice was slain as food for man ; the priestly sacrifice was slain as atonement to Jehovah. The former is even called ' a sacrifice to Jehovah,' and tlie celebrants might be summoned to consecrate themselves for it. Had the Hebrew word for ' sacrifice ' been always so translated into English where it occurs in Hebrew, this distinction could not have been overlooked. Unfortunately, the meaning of the word has been completely obscured by the treatment it has received. But it is not necessary to go farther into the matter here. The dis- tinction is laid down with the utmost clearness in the chapter of Deuteronomy known as the law of the central altar, and will be fully discussed in a subsequent part of this work. The sacrifice which Samuel offered on the high place was not a peace-offering, that is, not a priestly or atoning sacrifice. A victim was slain for food, perhaps more than one victim, if we take thought of the number of guests. Its blood was poured out on the ground, and the whole of the fiesh was eaten by the assembled guests. The proof of this is as convincing as it is simple. Every peace-offering, presented at the altar, was returned to the offerer to be feasted on by him and his friends. A few choice pieces were reserved a.s 24 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, 'Jehovah's fire dues.' Of these, the shoulder went to the priest who happened to have charge of the altar.^ But in the sacrifice of Samuel, this priest's portion, for the word is the same, is set aside for a man known to belong to the tribe of Benjamin, and forbidden under severest penalties to eat of it. If Samuel offered an atoning sacrifice and reserved the priest's portion for Saul, he was guilty of sacrilege. But the priest's portion of an ordinary victim slain for food was dif- ferent. In that case there was no sacrilege in reserving the shoulder for Saul ; there was, as there was intended to be, the giving to him a royal honour. But these and other his- torical puzzles of the same kind will come up afterwards for fuller solution. On returning from the high place to the village, Saul became the guest of the prophet. They appear to have been highly pleased with one another during the few hours they were then together. The house-top was a secret place, where they communed alone, safe from the ears of the curious. Saul manifested a modesty of demeanour, and a willingness to obey, that confirmed Samuel in the high opinion he formed of the young man from his handsome looks. * The message of God' was reserved for the morning. As day dawned, the prophet liimself, desirous to do honour to the new king, summoned liim from his couch on the house-top, where he appears to have spent the night. It was a high honour paid to the youth when the seer discharged a duty that might otherwise have been the work of a menial. ' And Samuel called to the house-top to Saul, saying, Bise, and I will send thee away.' But the highest mark of respect, and the surest proof of the reality of what Saul might then have looked on as a dream, were given when the two strangers were leaving the city. * The words shoulder (leg), bring, portion (1 Sam. ix. 23, 24), are suggestive of sacred things found in the Levitical law (Lev. vii. 33, 34). Cook may be the correct rendering of the Hebrew word (comp. 1 Sam. viii. 13) ; but slayer is as likely, and may refer to an officiating priest or Levite. * The shoulder, and that upon it,' is another most puzzling phrase, pointing back to a law that would have been violated had Samuel been offering a priestly sacrifice (Lev. iii. 4, vii. 28-34). The Election of a King, 25 Samuel accompanied them part of the way. As soon as they passed the last of the houses on their way down the hill, Samuel requested Saul to stay behind, while the servant went forward. He told the youth that he had received for him a message from Heaven. They were alone on the hill-side, screened from the view of all except Him, whose eyes run to and fro through- out the earth. Suddenly Samuel drew forth from his girdle pocket a bottle of oil, wherewith to anoint the new king. He had been instructed by God to set Saul apart for his high office by this solemn rite. He seems to have taken the young man by surprise. Pouring the oil on his head before he was aware, Samuel replied to his looks, if not to his words of astonishment, * Is it not that Jehovah hath anointed thee for captain over His inheritance ? ' At the same time he gave the youth a kiss of friendship and respect, to show that nothing was farther from his thoughts than insincere homage to a humble stranger, who came seeking his help. But Saul's fears were not so easily allayed. Conscious of his own unworthiness, and knowing of nothing in himself or his family to entitle him to kingly honours, he seems to have shown by looks and words an unwillingness, not blameworthy, to believe the prophet. If, as is not unlikely, he sought counsel of Samuel, as he would have done of any of the pretended prophets who then filled the land, his doubts and reluctance were founded in reason. Be that as it may, his demeanour, if not his freely-expressed astonishment, demanded from the seer some proof of the right he claimed to speak in the name of Jehovah. ' Signs,' he had been taught in the law-book, were given by prophets to prove their commission. His early teaching may have now come to his help. Nor was a demand so reasonable refused. On the contrary, Samuel gave him overwhelming evidence of the truth of his commission, by foretelling to him several of the inci- dents of his day's journey. These signs must have removed from Saul's mind any lingering doubt or suspicion. The custom of anointing a king, enjoined at this time by 26 The Kingdom of A I I- Israel : its History. God, continued during the four centuries of the monarchy Avhich followed. But it was not the ancient way of setting apart a political chief for the nation. Moses was not thus installed in his high office ; nor was his successor, Joshua. A full account is given of the setting apart of the latter, but the principal features of the ceremony were the placing of Joshua before the high priest, the laying of Moses' hands on his head, and the giving of him a charge before all the people (Num. xxvii. 18). There is no trace of anointing in his case, or for any office then existing in the civil life of the Hebrews. Nor is it found in the law of the king delivered in the book of Deuteronomy. The phrases used there, as well as in Samuel, are ' to set a king over the nation' and ' to choose a king,' while other phrases common to Samuel and the later books are 'to anoint a king' and 'to make a king.' Manifestly the book of Samuel is, as it were, common ground ; while it retains the phrases of the early law in Deuteronomy, it introduces a new phrase, which became part of tlie popular speech in all time coming. But it gives its readers no idea of the source from which the phrase ' to anoint a king' originally came. Anointing, the laying on of hands, and the giving of a charge from the sacred books of the nation, were usual ceremonies at the coronation of a king in Egypt. Moses was acquainted with these customs. Far from imitating: them in the rules he laid down in the law-book, he appears rather to have expressly left them out in his regulations. There was no anointing pre- scribed, such as the priests of Egypt, and long afterwards the high priests and prophets of Israel, are known to have practised. Nor was the laying on of hands set down by Moses among the coronation ceremonies, such as may be seen on the monuments of Egypt, and as is known to have been practised at the instal- lation of Joshua. The giving of a charge, usual in Egypt, and delivered by Moses in Joshua's case, was not commanded for the kings of Israel. A more effectual plan was adopted to secure a king's respect for law. * He shall write him a copy of this law ; The Election of a King. 2 J and it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life/ Although, then, Deuteronomy was not the source from which the idea of anointing the king came, the propriety or necessity of the custom found a lodgment in Hebrew thought at an early period. Jotham, the son of Gideon, about two centuries after the conquest, and Hannah, the mother of Samuel, a century later still, are witnesses to the existence of the phrase in their day. It may have been a traditional saying, handed down among the Hebrews in anticipation of the time when the law of the king, embodied in the popular law- book, should be realized in the nation's history. That it is not found in the book of Deuteronomy is a clear indication of the great age of that book, compared with the parable of Jotham or the anointing of Saul. Saul had not advanced far on his journey before ' the signs,' given to him by Samuel, began to come to pass. At the tomb of Eachel, by the border of Benjamin and ' a little way ' from Bethlehem, he lighted on two men, who told him of the finding of the asses, and the grief of Kish at the prolonged absence of his son. This was the first sign promised. The second befell a little farther on, at the oak (plain) of Tabor. Meeting Saul, apparently at a cross-road, came three men, who, after a friendly greeting, told him they w^ere ' going up to God, to God's house.' One of them was bearing three kids, another three rounds of bread, and the third a skin of wine. Had the town of Bethel been their destination, the words ' to God' conveyed no meaning. 'To God's house' explained the first part of their statement, 'Going up to God.' The three kids were evidently firstlings, which, in terms of the law, they were conveying to the altar. They could not be tithes, for these the Levites themselves collected. Nob was evidently their destination. As the distance they had to go was not more than a mile or two, they readily furnished the travellers with two of the three rounds of bread for the longer journey to Gibeah, which they had still to make. Bethel was twice as 2 8 The Kiiigdom of A II- Israel : its Histojy, far off as Gibeali, and on the same road. Saul and the strangers did not require to part company, if Betliel was the destination of the latter; but the tabernacle at Nob — God's house — lay off Saul's road. The third sign befell them as they approached a well-known garrison of the Philistines. It is called Gibeah (or Hill) of God. It may have been the town of Gibeah, in or near which Saul dwelt. As he and his servant passed a rising-ground or Bamah, close to the place, a string of prophets, as the phrase ran, was seen coming down the slope. Players on lyre, drum, fife, and harp led the pro- cession, while the rest of the band accompanied the instruments with the voice. They were prophesying, or singing the sacred songs of Hebrew worship, at the hour of afternoon or evening sacrifice. Saul was warned beforehand that the Spirit of Jehovah would fall upon him as soon as they came in view, that he would join the singers, and become another man. He was urged also to offer no resistance to his feelings when these things happened. ' Do to thyself,' Samuel said, ' whatsoever thy hand shall find ; for God is with thee.' The young man did not forget these words. As he listened to the pleasant strains of harp and drum, of lyre and fife, swelled by a chorus of fifty or a hundred voices, there awoke in his bosom feelings to which he had hitherto been a stranger. In after years music charmed the spirit of madness out of his heart. But, in these fresh hours of opening manhood, it stirred within him a desire to spend his life in following the counsels of a teacher like Samuel. Joining himself to the band of prophets, he at once took part with them in singing their songs of praise. He returned with the procession to the high place from which it set out, and to which it went back to conclude the after- noon worship of the day. The onlookers, of whom tliere would usually be a considerable crowd, especially in the after- noon when the day's work was mostly done, were surprised. Saul's home was not far from this Hill of God. Some of them must therefore have known the young Benjamite who thus The Election of a King, 29 drew the eyes of strangers. But then, even as it happens now, they could not see or understand in Saul a change whicli they did not feel in themselves. Instead of returning thanks for another name enrolled among the witnesses to Jehovah's greatness in troublous times, they scoff at the sight of a youth, well known to be a stranger to religious feeling, making this sudden show of piety in a public place and before a wondering crowd. 'AVhat has come over the son of Kish?' they ask, with a smile at the absurdity of the thing ; ' Is even Saul among the prophets?' But there were others present equally ready to turn this scorning of scorners on themselves. ' Who is their father V was the question put by some pious man among the crowd. ' You call him son of Kish ; whose sons are these prophets ? Samuel's ? Then son of Kish no longer, son of Samuel now.' Such was the idea conveyed in the few words, 'Who is their father?' The scoffers might be right in regarding Saul, the son of Kish, as an unworthy member of the prophetic college ; but the prophets believed Saul, the son or follower of Samuel, to have been made worthy of a place in their company. On reaching home, Saul was met by his uncle, ISTer, who had heard of his absence without knowing the cause. Probably the meeting took place on the evening of the day he left Samuel's house. On asking Saul whither he and the servant had gone, Ner was informed of the loss of the asses, and of the visit to the prophet. The mention of Samuel's name awakened a new train of thought in the mind of Ner. ' Tell me, I pray thee, what Samuel said unto you,' was a request prompted by other feelings than mere curiosity. At that time the prophet was besieged by the nation with demands for a king to lead them in war. In every town and vilLage one question stirred all hearts, high and low. Samuel had assured them their request would be granted. He did not tell tliem on whom the choice of Heaven had fallen. But every Hebrew knew that the appointment was in his hands, and would be 30 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its History. made known through him. If a stranger visited the prophet, or was seen in earnest conversation with him during those days of waiting, there were pr}ing eyes quick enough to note the fact, and ready tongues as quick to spread it far and wide. In this state of the public mind, in this tossing betwixt hope and fear, it seems a fair inference, from the request made by Saul's uncle, to imagine hope or suspicion flashing across his mind regarding his nephew's visit to Samuel. If the hand- some figure of the youth made the same impression on him as on Samuel, it was pardonable to reason thus : ' My nephew is the most handsome and kingly youth in the land : he has been visiting Samuel, with whom the selection of a king rests ; can he be the man chosen for the throne ?' If these thoughts occurred to -Saul's uncle, it is easy to understand the half- coaxing, half-respectful tone in the inquiry : ' Tell me, I pray thee, what said Samuel unto you.' But the question was awkwardly worded : * What Samuel said unto the two of you.' Xer had no idea of the prophet having said and done to Saul things of which the servant was ignorant. Saul appears to have seen this, and answered accordingly. He was in a difficult position. Nor do the words that are recorded bring the scene fully before our minds. Saul carried a strange and romantic secret in his bosom. It alone might well have made him another man, and wrought changes in him too marked to escape the eyes of a friend. When face to face with his uncle, could the youth have had such command over his eyes and voice, as to banish every trace of that honourable secret from his tones and looks and manner ? We cannot imagine him to have been so practised in concealing secrets. The anointing took place in the morning ; the day had been full of stirring events in Saul's history. One scene of excitement had followed another from morning to noon, from noon to night. The question of Ner was asked in the evening, a question sufficient to put to the severest trial a stronger nature than Saul's. Probably the uncle expected to hear something startling when he asked his The Election of a King. 31 nephew what Samuel said. But tlie answer of Saul lulled all suspicion : ' He told us plainly that the asses were found.' Whatever Ner may have thought, or however closely he questioned his nephew, lie failed to draw^ from him the slightest reference to the romantic adventure of which he was the hero. * Of the matter of the kingdom he told him not.' Before the choice of Jehovah was made known to the Hebrews, there appears to have been a private meeting between Samuel and Saul, at wdiich the rights and duties of the kingly office were explained by the prophet. Under the guise of offering a solemn sacrifice to God, Samuel repaired to Gilgal, a favourite meeting-place of the Hebrews, situated on the banks of the Jordan, near Jericho. Saul, perhaps according to agreement made, descended from Gibeah to the same place seven days before, and waited the arrival of the prophet. What the reason may have been for allowing Saul to remain at Gilgal a week before Samuel made his appearance, we shall be better able to understand when we come to a repetition of the same command several years afterwards. But one thing is worthy of being borne in mind. The season of the year was early spring, as we reckon it, or nearly barley harvest in Palestine. When the requisite arrangements w^ere thus made for discovering to the Hebrew^s the chosen king, Samuel sum- moned an assembly of the people to Mizpeh, a city in the highlands of Benjamin, and a favourite meeting-place of the tribes. It was not heads of cantons and families only whom the business to be settled at that gathering concerned. Every man above twenty years of age had a right to be present. So far as human eyes could see or human understandings judge, every man had a chance of being chosen for the kingly seat. Nor did the Philistines, by whose garrisons several of the tribes w^ere kept in check, prevent this meeting of the Hebrews. Before the tidings could reach Gath or Ekron, the assembly would be held, a king appointed, and the people 32 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, have returned to their homes; even if the attention of the' Philistines was not then engaged with the warlike movements; of Egypt or Assyria in their own plains. The plan chosen for ascertaining the will of God at this meeting, was the same that the Hebrews followed at all turning points in their history. In the country round the' camp, and before many thousands of eager onlookers, the names of the tribes, graven on stones or written on slips of parchment or paper such as was used at the time in. Egypt, were placed in the sacred bag of the high priest's breastplate, in presence of the princes and elders. Then the high priest seems to have thrust in his hand and drawn one forth. At this great meeting the stone or slip first drawn forth was marked ' Benjamin.' From that tribe should come the king of the land. The heads of families in the canton were next arranged in order before Samuel. Each threw a lot for his family in the sacred bag. Again the high priest thrust in his hand : he brought forth the lot of Matri.-^ The men of that family then came forward. The circle of choice was thus gradually narrowing. Most of the men of Benjamin had lost their personal interest in the matter, when the second drawing narrowed still further the area from which a king should be taken. The hopes and interest of the few within this charmed circle became greater, as their chance of success grew better. But the third drawing stilled all hopes save one man's ; it swept away chance in the certainty of a known result : the name drawn was that of the man who had been anointed a week or two before, that handsome and goodly youth, Saul, the son of Kish. It may seem strange that the plan of ascertaining the wdll of God by lot should have been chosen, when Samuel knew beforehand on whom the lot should fall. Would it not have 1 Those wlio hunt after inconsistencies in the story should compare with this family name Saul's lineage, given a page or two before—' Saul, Kish, Abiel, Zeror, Beehorath, Aphiah a Benjamite' (1 Sam. ix. 1). Matri is nowhere mentioned. The Election of a King, 33 been simpler and more straightforward, had the prophet at once told the assembled tribes the name of the man chosen by God, and already anointed to the kingly office ? In answering this question, we have to bear in mind several things, whicli must have had great weight with the prophet. A number of the leading men appear to have entertained hopes of securing the throne for themselves. And had Samuel merely informed them of the message he received, requiring him to anoint Saul, they would not have scrupled to decry the choice as a trick on the part of the prophet. ' He wishes to keep the reins of power in his own hands,' they would have said ; ' the best way to manage this is by placing at the head of affairs a nobody, to be guided as he pleases.' But the lot silenced all these cavils. The Hebrew nobles might murmur at the elevation of an unknown youth to the throne ; but every one must have felt in his heart, whatever he uttered with his lips, that, when the lot was cast into the lap at Mizpeh, the ordering thereof was of the Lord. It is further plain from the story, that the chiefs of the people no longer reposed confidence in the Judge of Israel. What- ever the reason may have been, they were ripe for revolt against his authority, they were suspicious of his actings, and they distrusted all his arrangements. Had he, in these circumstances, announced the choice of Saul as king, the discontented and the seditious would have had ground for complaining of unfairness. The lot left them no loophole. Samuel could exercise no control over the names in the bag of the high priest's breastplate. Beyond doubt, the choice of Saul w^as the work of Jehovah. The drawing of the lots occupied a considerable time. But the third drawing was more tedious than the other two, for the names of perhaps one or two hundred men had to be handed to the high priest. While his countrymen and kin- dred were thus engaged, Saul, with becoming modesty, with- drew to the camp. As soon as the result of the drawing was 34 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. made known to the people, there arose a general demand for tlie new king. But he could nowhere be found. His friends and relatives knew of his presence among them an hour or two before. Some of tliem, perhaps, observing him leave the ranks, had inferred that he had gone home. The high priest, inquiring at the sacred oracle, ' Will he come hither again ? ' was told in reply, ' He hath hid himself among the baggage.' Saul Avas soon brought forth from his hiding-place to receive the homage of the people. When Samuel presented him to the vast assemblage wdth the short speech of introductory recommendation, ' See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen, that there is none like him among all the people,' from every part of the host came the joyful shout, ' God save the king ! ' Before the assembly broke up, Samuel read to them an important book or state paper, which is called in our trans- lation, 'The manner of the kingdom.' In it he may have embodied part of the address wdiich he delivered some time before, when endeavouring to bring home to the people their sin in asking a king. Both prince and people accepted the charter thus drawn out, and Samuel, by laying it among the national records preserved in the tabernacle, placed it under the protection of Jehovah. On the one hand, the king knew his duties and his prerogative ; on the other hand, the people were made aware of their rights. The choice of a king was soon found to have broken the bonds of union in the assembly. Three parties were at once evident. Of these the largest, numbering in its ranks the great body of the people, had neither good nor bad to say re- garding the new king. They delayed making up their minds. They w^ere waiting to see him show his fitness or unfitness for ruling the land. But the views of the other two parties were more decided. One of them, known as ' the band wdiose hearts God had touched,' hailing the election of Saul with unbounded joy, at once enrolled themselves as his followers and body- guard. The other, known as ' sons of Belial,' disappointed, The Election of a King, 3 5 perhaps, in their hopes of gaining the kingly dignity them- selves, and scorning to submit to an unknown youth, refused to pay him tribute or homage, and insultingly asked those who did, ' How shall this fellow save iis ? ' Their rebellious speeches were carried to the ears of Saul. With a prudence that gave ]oroof of his worthiness to fill the throne of a king- dom, he held his peace till he should have an opportunity of showinoj his ri^ht to reifrn. The story of the choice of a king by Samuel has, within the past few years, become a battle-ground between the advo- cates of tw^o different theories. All thinkers are agreed in allowing a close relationship between the words and thoughts in that story, and the words and thoughts of the book of Deuteronomy. Not long ago this relationship was neither seen nor suspected. But it is now admitted. At first the relationship was believed to be slight, then it was found to be intimate, at last it was discovered to be so close that out of 100 verses in the story as told in Samuel, nearly one-half borrow the words and thoughts of Deuteronomy. On another point there is agreement among scholars. No doubt what- ever is entertained of the indebtedness of the writer in Samuel to the writer of Deuteronomy. The latter was the source from which the former borrowed. But the point of disagree- ment now comes to the surface. Were the words and phrases, borrowed from Deuteronomy, borrowed by the man who wrote the first edition of the book of Samuel, about 980 B.C., or were they inserted by a reviser, who published a new edition of the ancient work about 600 B.C. ? One school pronounces the borrowing to be the work of the original writer in tlie iirst edition; another school pronounces it additions in a second and revised edition of the book four centuries after. The former believes the whole story to be a true narrative of facts ; the latter regards it as a piece of manufactured goods, which, to say the least, is stamped with a forged trade-mark, and is made out of spurious stuff. The theory of a true \6 I he Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, history and of allowable borrowing rests on assuming tlie existence of Deuteronomy in the days of Samuel ; the theory of manufactured goods assumes the fabrication of that book three or four centuries afterwards. Let us look first at the theory of a true history and allow- able borrowing. If Deuteronomy was written by Moses about 1450 B.C., it could have been quoted by Samuel in 1100 B.C. On this point there is no difficulty. But one of the most important parts of Deuteronomy is the twelfth chapter, which lays ^oww, first, the law of a central altar for the nation, on which alone acceptable sacrifice could be offered ; and, second, the broad distinction, already mentioned, between priestly or atoning sacrifice, allowed at that altar only, and popular or festive sacrifice, allowed in any corner of the land. The history in Samuel contains frequent references to this chapter of Deuteronomy. Two of them may be presented here, because they occur in Samuel's speech shortly after Saul's election : 1 Sam. xii. 23 (20). * I will teach you the good and the right way. Only fear the Lord and serve Him in truth with all your heart' Deut. xii. 28, x. 12. (1) ' Observe and hear all these words which I command thee, that it may go well with thee . . . when thou doest the good and the right in the sight of the Lord thy God.' (2) 'To fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all His ways, . . . and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul. ' Samuel's leave-taking of the people brought to mind the leave-taking of Moses. Each of them was handing over the reins of power to a younger man. But each of them had the same warning to utter, the same advice to give, and the same entreaty to make. Most naturally, therefore, does Samuel repeat the words and thoughts of the lawgiver. With all the dignity of age and office, he speaks words which his hearers may have often read in the popular law-book for themselves. But this parallel does not prove the indebtedness of the prophet to the lawgiver. It shows the likelihood of the debt. The Election of a King. 37 A quotation from Deuteronomy in tlie leave-taking speech of Samuel makes this likelihood of borrowing more likely : 1 Sam. xii. 11. Deut. xii. 10. ' He delivered you out of the hands '"When He giveth you rest from all of your enemies on every side, and ye your enemies round about, so that ye dwelled safe. ' dioell in safety. ' xii. 14. xiii. 4 (5). ' If ye will fear the Lord, and serve ' Ye shall walk after the Lord your Him, and obey His voice, and not rebel God, and fear Him, and keep His coui- against the commandment (mouth) of mandments, and obey His voice, and the Lord.' ye shall serve Him.' The words, ' your enemies on every side, and ye dwelled safe,' are the same in the Hebrew of both books. And the adverb safe, occurring in no other part of Samuel, stamps the passage as borrowed. The quotations in the second passage are equally clear. And it is as fair a piece of criticism to say that the Prophet Samuel copied from the law-book, as to say that a later writer put words from the law-book into the prophet's lips. How, then, is the point in dispute to be settled ? There is one way of doing this, to which no objec- tion can be taken on either side. It is the safest and the most satisfactory path out of the difficulty. Let a quotation from Deuteronomy, similar to ' your enemies round about, so that ye dwell in safety,' and essential to the life of the con- text, be produced from a part of Samuel which is allowed to show no trace of a reviser's hand. Our argument will then be complete. ISTow the story of Eli's sons' abuse of their priestly rights (1 Sam. ii. 12-17) is confessed to be a part of Samuel which no reviser had touched. It is even regarded with favour as a proof that laws were then in force opposed to the laws of Moses.^ But in that story the book of Deuteronomy is quoted word for word, as shall be shown in its proper place (chap. ix.). There are, therefore, quotations starting up from most unexpected quarters, which prove tlie existence of Deuteronomy in Samuel's time. Both the prophet 1 Colenso, Tart vii. 117. 2,S The Kingdom of All- Israel : its History. and the princes had read the book. The words of the former are too clear to leave a shadow of doubt on his acquaintance with it. We even seem to be able to look over his shoulder as he reads the ancient writing, and to pick out chapter and verse which made most impression on his mind. But if the Prophet Samuel had Deuteronomy in his hands, he may be charged with unwarrantably refusing to allow the people to exercise their legal right of choosing a king. As the story is briefly told, mistakes may be easily committed, unless its words are carefully considered. For Samuel did not refuse to grant the people's prayer. He was ' displeased ' with it ; he regarded it as a personal affront, but he never condemned it as unwarranted by the law of the land. And he was repri- manded by Jehovah for the selfish view he took of its bearing, as w^ell as ordered to gjive it effect. The words used throuo;h- o o out the narrative of Saul's election are the words and ideas which a reader of Deuteronomy would use, except in one point. That exception is the anointing of the king. And as the exception often proves a rule in other things, so the exception here proves the indebtedness of Samuel to the fifth book of the lawejiver. But let the other theory be looked at in its bearings on the history. A late reviser, reading the law of the central altar in the twelfth chapter of Deuteronomy, is believed to have added quotations from it to the original book of Samuel. He had a purpose in view. That purpose was to make the wor- ship of Samuel's time (1100 B.C.) seem to have been the same as the worship in his own time (600 B.C.) ; or to make Samuel and his contemporaries seem to have been acquainted with the book of Deuteronomy, although they were not. He would not do this with one part of the book of Samuel; he would do it with the whole, otherwise he would ex- pose himself to the charges of folly and forgery combined. But the writers who pretend to have discovered this reviser's hand, acknowledge the feebleness with which he carried out The Election of a King. 39 his intentions. He failed completely in liis purpose. His critics profess to trace what he has done in some parts of the book, by what he has left undone in others. He knew the law of the central altar ; he did not dare, they say, to change any parts of the history which show that that law was un- known in Samuel's day. According to them, therefore, he was both a forger in changing what he did change, and a fool in not changing far more to keep his other changes from being discovered. This theory does not hang together. A reviser, who undertook to meddle with an ancient writing for a specific purpose, ought to be credited with always, or at least generally, keeping that purpose in view. But he has scarcely kept it in view at all. More frequently has he left it out of account. A better solution of the difficulty is there- fore to treat the theory as the blunder of a puzzled, or baffled, criticism. The dishonesty of the forgery is made light of by the advocates of this theory. I^o right of property was then recognised in books, it is said. Every man could help himself to what he found written, could change it at his pleasure, and could publish it to the world as his own or as the original autlior's work. Great and serious changes on an ancient book by an unknown hand did not imply dishonesty or forgery. Such is the view taken in modern times of the sentiments entertained 3000 years ago regarding changes made on written documents. It is more to the purpose to discover what the men of those distant days thought and said on the point. Modern writers may be attributing to them sentiments which they would have repudiated. Half-a-dozen lines from a hand that has been cold for a score of centuries, are of more worth than whole libraries of modern thinking on the subject. And not to mention others, Sargon, the great king of Assyria (707 B.C.), has left a testimony which might make the advo- cates of this theory blush. The last words of the long annals of his reif^n are : ' Whoever shall alter my writings and my 40 The Kingdom of All-Isj^ael : its History, name may Assiir, the great god, throw down his sword ; may he exterminate in this land his name and his offspring, and may he never pardon him this sin.' Dishonesty and forgery in writings were esteemed as discreditable in Sargon's days as in ours — perhaps more so. CHAPTEE II. THE TESTING OF SAUL. (1 Sam. xi.) The fitness of Saul to rule was soon put to the test. For some time before his election, Nahash, king of Ammon, had been threatening the country on both sides of the Jordan. A century before, his predecessor on the throne was content to demand a peaceable return of the lands which were conquered by Moses on the east side of Jordan. Nahash is more aspiring. What his ancestors lost he means to recover ; but he will con- quer or destroy more. He chose the time of harvest for making the attempt (1 Sam. xii. 17). His armies had already overrun the rich fields of Gilead, and were advancing north- wards to the ford at Bethshean, where the Jordan, opening out to a considerable breadth, is easily crossed at that sultry season. The town of Jabesh Gilead, situated on a height overlooking a long valley that sloped down to the ford of the river, lay on his road. He could not with safety cross the Jordan, unless this fortress were wrested from the Hebrews. He could not reap the fertile fields of Western Palestine, or eat them up with his flocks and herds, until Jabesh was in liis hands. When he appeared before the town, he found it so strong that, though he might have reduced it by famine, he would, perhaps, have been unable to take it by assault. On the other hand, the citizens, believing the danger greater if they resisted his arms, were willing to become his vassals on lionourable terms of peace. But Nahash was not disposed to moderation. He was bent on reading the Hebrews a lesson that should make even their distant tribes unwilling to risk 42 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its History, further opposition to liis progress. Like many other con- querors, Avlio have made one terrible example pave an easy way to a score of bloodless triumphs, he resolved on giving terms to Jabesh which should spread the fear of his name to the utmost bounds of Israel The plan was simple and not uncommon : its success or failure depended entirely on the spirit that animated the Hebrews. When the citizens pro- fessed their willingness to submit, and requested Nahash to grant them an alliance, the Ammonite replied that the putting out of the right eye of every townsman was the first condition of peace. They and all who should hear of it were left to infer the fate in store for the next city which dared to close its gates in the face of his army. ' I will put a reproach on all Israel,' was the boastful addition made by Nahash to these hard terms of peace. Not content with punishing the few who defied his arms, he soars so high as to think, in these few, of aiming a blow at the honour of the nation and its God. But the Serpent of Ammon — for such is the meaning of his name — was not destined to crush out the life of Israel in his folds. In this pride of the enemy, the elders of the city found an opening for at least seeking relief. If the reproach is to be put on all Israel, not on us alone, they seem to have said, All Israel should know how far their honour is at stake. ' Give us seven days,' they said (a period of time which frequently occurs in the brief story of Saul) ; ' that we may send mes- sengers to every bound of the land, and if then there be none to save us we shall come forth to thee.' This appeal touched the pride of ISTahash. However long he might delay, he believed the Hebrews would not undertake to relieve the beleaguered city. By a week's delay, his defiance of the whole nation would be more thorough, and their fear of his arms more profound. If the king they had chosen did not band them together against him, his course after the capture of Jabesh would be but a march of triumph across the land. The Testing of Saitl. 43 There would be no siege to detain him, no army to offer him battle. With these views, the request of the citizens was granted as soon as it was made. It seems to have been late that summer afternoon when the terms of this treaty were settled. Next morning messengers were on their way to demand assistance from their country- men. Towards sunset they reached Gibeah, about iifty miles off. Many of the peasant and farmer citizens, set free from the labours of the day, were assembled at the gate to talk over public alfairs or to retail the gossip of the neighbourhood. Others were joining them every moment. The arrival of the messengers was a source of excitement to the waiting groups. Spent with a long and weary journey, covered with dust, they are soon the centre of an eager crowd, who hang upon their words. Their message concerns every man of Hebrew blood. It specially concerns these Benjamites of Gibeah, between whom and Jabesh there were ancient ties of kindred (Judg. xxi. 1 4). Unaccustomed to the ways of statesmen, they err in deliver- ing to a city crowd the message entrusted to them for the king. But neither he nor they nor the groups in the gate take the same views of kingly grandeur and kingly reserve, which modern critics may be surprised they should have forgotten. It was a message to the whole nation — a message, too, which their burstins^ hearts could not contain till it should be delivered to the nation's head. Many years before, the swift runner, who brouglit the first tidings to Shiloh of that fatal day when the ark of God was taken in battle, avoided Eli, the judge of the land, as he sat waiting and watching at the wayside. He told his tale of sorrow to the city crowd, in the same way as these messengers from Jabesh forgot their king and addressed themselves directly to their countrymen. A loud burst of sorrow from the group in the gate proclaims how deeply the iron has entered into their soul. All-Israel still thinks and feels as one people. Xahash may pride himself on his success : he has struck his enemy 44 ^^^^ Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, through the heart. Meanwhile, Saul is on his way townward from the fields, it may be from threshing barley ; he is driving oxen before himi. Though the king of a great and enlightened nation, he is not ashamed to till his father's fields or his own. He has not forgotten the law which forbade him to lift his heart ' above his brethren.' The messengers finish their story as he draws near ; a wild burst of grief rises from the crowd. As he hears their cry, the spirit of the ruler is stirred within him ; the heart of the king, the father of his people, is touched. ' What aileth the people that they are weeping ? ' he asks of those who come running to meet him, some perhaps of his chosen band. They bring him to the gate, where the messenojers recount — as if out of a written book — the ' case of the men of Jabesh.' Instantly a power from above fills the bosom of Saul. The hour has come to vindicate his title to the throne ; the tide that shall bear him on to undisputed empire has begun to flow. The soldier, the ruler, the king awaken within him, each to play its several part. He stands forth the only man equal to the time in that hour of alarm. A couple of the oxen belonging to Saul are slaughtered on the spot, and cut in pieces. ' Go to every bound of Israel,' he said to the men who had come from Jabesh, and who could best tell their own story, * proclaim that thus shall it be done to the oxen of every one who followeth not after Saul and Samuel.' He named the trysting-place and the day of meeting. A ring of triumph, like the ring of pure gold, sounded from his words and acts. ' Every bound of Israel ' was the borrowing of a phrase used by the elders of Jabesh when they spoke wdth Nahash. If, as the words in the Hebrew original imply, they sent a written message to Saul, there is here, as there is throughout the whole book of Samuel, an unquestionable quoting from previously existing documents. As the enemy had command of the whole of Gilead, the only tribes summoned to the war w^ere the nine and a half on the western side of Jordan. By this means the The Testing of Sattl. 45 Ammonite was kept in ignorance of what was passing among the Hebrews. To seize the fords and prevent spies or traitors from crossing would be the first step of Saul. The warlike movements of the tribes were thus kept a secret from Nahash; for the silver thread of the narrow river was a screen which he could not pierce to see what was passing on the other side. Besides, he was too conscious of his own strength to take the trouble. The messengers made good use of the respite. A burst of patriotic feeling, such as had not been known for many years, stirred the nation to its heart. The fear of Jehovah fell upon the tribes, the fear of evils He would bring down on them, if they allowed the reproach which Nahash had already cast on His name to pass unrebuked. Before the end of the week, Saul was at the head of 330,000 men. The rapidity with which that army was raised, shows a complete- ness of organization within each tribe that indicates the necessity felt for every man to be ready to seize his arms, to pack up his provisions, and to hasten to the meeting-place of his district. Israel was then standing prepared for war, its hand upon the sword. But the comparatively small force furnished by Judah, and the distinction drawn between it and Israel, as the other eight or nine tribes are called, have always been cause of surprise. Because Israel and Judah became separate kingdoms more than a century afterwards, the historian is here supposed to indicate the beginning of the jealousy which ultimately caused the split. But this explana- tion is too easy. It seems also unreasonable to preface a war for union among the tribes with a plain hint of their future disunion. This explanation assumes the author of the book to have flourished after Solomon's death, and of this there is not sufticient proof. It also ascribes the distinction to the author, not to the ancient records wliich he consulted. Another explanation must therefore be looked for. And here the small number of men furnished by Judah comes into play. According to the tribal rolls at the conquest 46 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, under Joshua, it ought to have furnished 50,000, not 30,000. But according to the rolls in the book of Samuel itself (2 Sam. xxiv. 9), Judah ought to have sent to the war more than 100,000 men. At a later period in Saul's reign, it sends 10,000 men to the army, while the other tribes send 200,000. It ought to have sent 30,000 or 80,000. Judah had evidently a right of exemption from service not enjoyed by other tribes. While their contingents were slumped together in the records of the nation, Judah's were entered separately. Nor is the reason far to seek. The tribe was strong in men, but weak in position. As soon as soldiers marched north from its towns and villages, Philistines, Edomites, and Amalekites might fall on the unprotected borders. Xo other tribe was in this position. Judah had to do police duty against evil-disposed neighbours for itself and for Hebrew kinsfolk. Hence a force sent abroad implied as great a force retained under arms at home. By giving the muster roll of Judah at the end of David's reign, the author of Samuel calls special attention to the small contingents it furnished for wars abroad. Acting on his usual principle of not assigning reasons when they lie on the surface, he assigns none here ; but he furnishes facts, from which a reader can discover the reason for himself. Writing a century later than the relief of Jabesh Gilead, he found the numbers entered as lie states them in the sources from which he borrowed. He made no change in the entry ; and he gave no reason for the distinction drawn. He is generally supposed to have made the distinction himself; but of this there is no proof whatever. The soldiers assembled near a place called Bezek, the site of which, though now unknown, cannot be far from the ford of Jordan below Bethshean. Samuel was with the army ; and to add solemnity to the occasion, the ark of God appears to have been brought from its resting-place at Kirjath. Nahash was lulled into security by a well-planned stratagem. On the The Testing of SauL 47 evening of the last day of respite the messengers were seen returning to Jabesh. They bring no help with them : there is no army at their back. We can easily imagine their down- cast looks, their justifiable dissimulation as they pass through the lines of the besiegers, everything proclaiming that the Hebrews beyond Jordan are afraid to move to their brethren's relief. But when the walls of Jabesh are between them and the Ammonite, they become other men. From mouth to mouth pass the cheering tidings of help close at hand. In an assembly of the citizens steps are at once taken to second the attack of their approaching countrymen. But since they must send an answer to the enemy's camp, it is also resolved to lull the Ammonites into security. A deputation from the elders of the city waits upon the captains of Nahash. Without saying so in as many words, they profess themselves willing to become his servants ; at least they give that impression : ' To-morrow,' they said, ' will we come out unto you, and ye shall do with us all that seemeth good unto you.' The phrase, ' to do according to all the good in thine eyes,' is common in the book of Samuel. Like other phrases in that history, it appears to be borrowed from the well-known law of the central altar in Deuteronomy (xii. 28). The words were such as people accustomed to read that law would use as a pro- verbial saying. The feint has succeeded. Nahash and his captains believe the deputation can have but one meaning. They are mistaken. While the Hebrews mean to come out in arms to do battle with the besiegers, Nahash imagines they mean to come forth from the fortress to have their right eyes put out. A feeling of security spreads through the camp. From the highest to the lowest among them, the invaders feel as safe as if camped in their own Amnion. JSTo enemies are near : no attack need be feared. To-morrow will see them masters of Jabesh : to-morrow in one hour will a reproach be rolled on Israel, which a hundred years may not suffice to roll away. When the besieged thus fenced with words, they won 48 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, an easy victory over simpletons, who could see only one meaning in ambiguous language. Imitating tlie tactics of great Hebrew soldiers in former days, Saul resolved to surprise the enemy by a night march and a night attack. Perhaps the moon was favourable for the attempt. But the people of the district through which he would have to pass were all bitterly opposed to Nahash, and would guide his march. Towards nightfall the Hebrew troops appear to have approached the ford of Jordan, where a strict watch would be kept against spies and traitors. Choosing the best of his soldiers as a forlorn hope for a desperate enterprise, Saul hastened with them towards Jabesh, twelve or fifteen miles distant. The rest of the army could follow at greater leisure. Dividing the chosen band into three brigades, a plan forced on him by the nature of the ground, or adopted in imitation of Gideon, he fell on the enemy shortly before day- break. The Hebrews were speedily in the midst of the careless and slumbering host. A fourth onset from the town added to the terror and confusion caused by Saul's threefold battle. A panic fell on the surprised and ill-disciplined invaders. Multitudes were trampled down by their fellows on the field and in the pursuit. Before nine o'clock, or about four hours after the first onset, the invading host had been thoroughly broken ; not two of them were left together. The Hebrews, who followed Saul's forlorn hope from the fords of Jordan, would come up in time to complete the victory, or to intercept the fugitive army. And thus in the course of that morning had All-Israel escaped a dreaded reproach by the energy of its sovereign. The ' reproach ' which Nahash proposed to put on his enemies in All-Israel was rolled away from them, and put upon himself. A king had vindicated his right to reign by saving his people from an intended disgrace. The same word turns up afterwards in the history of Saul, and in the same way. Another champion of the heathen appeared, as The Testing of Sate L 49 boastful as Nahasb, and like him enjoying for a few weeks the delight of apparent success. Goliath proposed to do Avhat Xahash failed in — put a reproach on All- Israel. Tor six weeks he enjoyed his boasting over Saul and the Hebrew army. But again, as in Saul's case, a new champion rolled the disgrace away, and vindicated his right to the throne. ' David spake to the men that stood by him, saying. What shall be done to the man that killeth this Philistine, and taketh away the reproach from Israel?' (1 Sam. xvii. 26). The triumph at Jabesli soon bore fruit. Filled Avith admiration of their leader, the soldiers demanded from Samuel the names of the men who had rejected the new king. A party in the state ridiculed his right and title. Samuel, to whom the leaders had probably expressed their sentiments, was the only person who could give their names. Accordingly, the soldiers sent a deputation to the prophet to express their views. * Who was it that said, Shall Saul reign over us ? ' they asked : ' Give up the men that we may kill them.' Soldiers flushed with victory, full of patriotism, devoted to the king who had shown them how to win battles, such men meant what they said. But Saul, who was present at the time, or to whom the matter was referred, showed himself not less worthy of the throne in the cabinet than he had been in the field. ' There shall not a man die this day,' he said ; ' for to-day hath Jehovah wrought salvation in Israel.' Forgiveness, not of an injury, but of an open affront, so nobly given, revealed in Saul springs of a manly greatness. Had they welled forth in later days under different circumstances, his life, instead of being a barren w^aste, might have been a field fertile of noble deeds. With a wisdom befitting his years, Samuel took advantage of the triumph of the king and of the ardour of the soldiers to establisli the throne on a sure basis. While strengthening Saul in his resolution to put no Hebrew to death, he proposed to the army a march to Gilgal, and a renewal of the kingdom D 50 The Kingdom of A 11- Israel: its History. there. If any were lukewarm in the cause of Saul before, they might now show more fervour ; if any had ridiculed and rejected the anointed of God, events had convinced them of their mistake. This renewal of the kingdom was nothing else than giving the leading men of the land a chance of paying to Saul the homage which they had formerly refused. It was a well-planned means of bringing the chiefs cheerfully to acknowledge a power, against which many of them were disposed to rebel. And the plan succeeded. Accompanied by the ark of God, the whole army repaired to Gilgal. Peace- offerings were burnt on the altar at that place, or on the brazen altar brought from Nob, some distance off among the hills. And with such heartiness was Saul acknowledged kinsj by princes and people, that at no time during the remainder of his reign does there appear to have been a murmur against his right to rule. Discontented chiefs may afterwards have chosen to acknowledge Philistine supremacy instead of his authority. They appear, indeed, to have followed this course. But they made no open or recorded attempt to overturn his throne. This renewal of the kingdom is said to have been made * before the Lord in Gilgal.' And * before the Lord ' they at the same time ' sacrificed sacrifices of peace-offerings.' The words, ' before the Lord,' in these passages, as in many others, may and probably do mean ' before the ark of God.' With the ark went the priests, by whom, according to the law, the sacrifices would be offered. In this case the word 'peace- offerings' is expressly added after sacrifices. In other cases, therefore, when ' sacrifices ' stands alone, we are not at liberty, without evidence, to regard them as priestly or atoning offerings. The word may then be used in its popular meaning for festive victims. Although the offerings are said to have been sacrificed by the people, the duty was really discharged by the priests, as representing the nation. Sometimes kings are said to offer the sacrifices which they command the priests The Testing of Satd. 5 1 to offer ; but this is a manner of spealdng common to all languages and nations.^ And had regard been paid to the ordinary use of words, the history of these times would not have been deluged with a flood of assertions in our day, which threatens to sweep away all landmarks of the past. For several days the rejoicings of the triumphant army continued. It was the season of Pentecost, the time of wheat harvest, the beginning of the hot autumn of Palestine, when for weeks and months together the blue of the heavens is never spotted by a cloud to shield the earth from the sun's heat, or to refresh its fields with rain. The national joy at Gilgal was tempered by the religious awe of that festivah A nation was again breathing the breath of health after its deliverance from Ammon. It was beginning to know and to use its own strength. Before the assembly broke up, Samuel addressed the people. It was his leave-taking as their ruler and governor. Hence- forth the reins of power should be in the hands of the young king. From childhood, he said, he had walked before them and their fathers. Old age and grey hairs had come upon him. But long as his administration had been, he could hold up his hands before them, and appeal to them to bear out his words, when he denied that they had ever been stained by bribe or by violence. With one voice they bore witness to the purity of his government. It was hard to rule from youth to old age, and then to be told, we are weary with your government, and wish a better. Samuel felt this apparent unkindness. But he mistook the people's feelings. Dissatis- faction with him was not their reason for asking a king. A feeling of their own weakness, a distrust of their power to keep together as a nation without a visible head, were the real 1 David (1 Chron. xxi. 26, 28) and Solomon (2 Chron. i. 6, vii. 4-7) are said to have sacrificed ; Luc the meaning is, they commanded sacrifices to be offered, as we find distinctly stated in the case of Ilezekiah (2 Chrou. xxix. 21, 24). 52 The Ki7igdom of All-Israel: its History. grounds of their desire for a change of government. Samuel now felt the force of these reasons. Still the distrust was sinful, because it sprang from disbelief in Jehovah's presence among them. Accordingly the prophet warned them of the danger of this disbelief. It nearly brought the nation to ruin in past generations, when Gideon, and Bedan, and Jephthah, and Samuel were all raised up to free them from foreign oppression. The arm of the Almighty had shielded them on these occasions. When they heard of the preparations of Nahash, and saw his armies approaching, confidence in their heavenly King forsook them, and they demanded a visible head. To bring home to them their own and the inherited sins of many generations, the prophet, pointing to the cloudless lieavens overhead, reminded them of the season of the year, the time, as they all knew, when thunder and rain were unknown in Palestine — ' I will call unto the Lord,' he said, ' and He shall send thunder and rain.' In answer to his prayer as well as in proof of his truthfulness, a thunderstorm bursting over the camp of Israel terrified the people. They besought the prophet to pray for them that they might not die, and specially that their sin in asking a king might be forgiven. As the sun broke out from behind the storm clouds, so Samuel's favour was secured by this repentance of the Hebrews. ' I will teach you the good and the right way,' he said ; ' only fear the Lord, and serve Him in truth with all your heart. But if ye shall still do wickedly, ye shall be consumed, both ye and your king.' With this mingled encouragement and warning, the national gathering broke up. When Samuel in his leave-taking says, 'The Lord sent Jerubbaal, and Bedan, and Jephthah, and Samuel, and de- livered you out of the hand of your enemies,' the word Samuel is regarded with suspicion, as an indication of the unreality of the speech. Elsewhere in it he repeatedly uses /; why should he not folloAv the same usage here, and say, Bedan, and Jephthah, and mc'^ There is only one answer to that The Testing of Said. 53 question. He did not ask our advice. He took his own way. We may think or speak as we please about it ; but he was the best judge in his own cause. And there was a sufficient reason for him doing as he did. The speech he delivered is full of w^ords and thoughts from Deuteronomy. Witliout a dissentient voice, all writers agree in regarding it as entirely borrowed from, or as showings larcje indebtedness to, that book. But Deuteronomy exhibits Moses speaking, now in the third person, and again in the first. He changes from the one to the other without reason and without intimation. Samuel does the same thing in this short speech of leave-taking. If Moses thus spoke in a great speech, to which Samuel's brief leave-taking was indebted for words and thoughts, it may also be the source of Samuel's mixing up of the third and first persons. As Moses did not always say me, or / w^hen he spoke of himself, but Moses ; so, in like circumstances, Samuel, copying this grand model, said Samuel, where, to our way of thinking, it would have sounded better had he said me. Allow indebtedness to Deuteronomy, and many more difficulties besides this will be found blunders on our part, not difficulties in the history. CHAPTER III. THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. (1 Sam. xiii., xiv. — The Springtime, about 1075 b.c.) For many years after the overthrow of ISTahash, the history of Israel is almost a blank. Only two points have been touched on by the sacred writer, and these very briefly. The first of them is the selection by Saul of three thousand chosen men to form his bodyguard. Although these troops were raised in the second year of his reign, their prowess furnished the historian with no deeds worth recording till long after. They were stationed at Gibeah, ready to take the field when plundering bands broke across the frontier, or to become a centre round which the national militia might rally, should attempts be made by large armies to invade the country. Twice were the ' three thousand chosen men,' as we find them called, suddenly summoned to follow the king in pursuit of David. And once were they marched in greater haste to the w^estern border of Judah to beat back a raid of the Philistines. It is necessary to bear in mind these sudden calls on the services of ' the three thousand.' Even when the fact of a summons to repel invasion is not expressly mentioned, it may have to be supplied as a link in the chain of events. The reason for calling this bodyguard ' chosen men of Israel ' is briefly stated : ' When Saul saw any strong man or any valiant man, he took him unto him.' The chronology of this part of the history cannot even be groped after. Precise details are wanting. The nearest approach to precision is the verse which makes ' Ahiah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod's brother, the son of Phinehas, the son The War of Ifidependence. 55 of Eli, (who was) the Lord's priest in Shiloh,' Saul's companion during the campaign (1 Sam. xiv. 3). But, a few years after, the high priest is Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub (1 Sam. xxii. 9), whose son, Abiathar, since he exercised the priest's office, must have been over thirty years of age. Nothing can be inferred from these details regarding the other point on which the historian has touched — the conquest of Southern Palestine by the Philistines. When the body- guard of Saul is first mentioned, two thousand of them are stationed witli the king in Michmash and in Mount Bethel, while his son Jonathan holds the district of Gibeah with the remaining thousand. A deep and dangerous ravine, running east and west for many miles, lay between the two divisions. The rest of the Hebrew militia were sent home, ' every man to his tent.' Evidently the country was at peace, or was only expecting invasion, and taking measures to repel an enemy. But without a word of warning of any change having taken place, the next few lines in the history discover a Philistine garrison in possession of the district previously held by Hebrew troops, Saul's soldiers and people crushed and disarmed, and a great army of invaders on the march to the highlands of Benjamin. The Philistines were masters of the pass of Beth-horon, leading from the shores of the Medi- terranean to Bethel, and thence to the Jordan. They had garrisons also in Geba and Michmash, two strongholds which gave them complete command of the ravine. Besides holding this great pathway into the heart of Canaan, they were also able to enforce a general disarming of the Hebrew people. And so thoroughly was this done, that swords and spears became almost unknown in the land. Axes, spades, ox-goads, shares and coulters of ploughs, all of which were required by the peasantry, could only be sharpened or repaired in the villages of Philistia, for the forge and the art of the smith were forbidden to the Hebrew^s. Here and there, throughout the country, some had hidden away files, which served for 56 The Kingdom of All- 1 S7'ael: its History, sharpening the implements of the husbandmen. Even Saul's own bodyguard had been disarmed by the oppressors. The three thousand chosen men probably remained in attendance on the king during this time of national disgrace. But they were either unarmed altogether, or could find no better equip- ment than rude bows, strong clubs, and ox-goads. Saul and Jonathan alone could boast of a sword. Peace had evidently been purchased for Israel at a heavy price. The oppressor ruled in every village, blew out every forge, carried away every weapon of war, and plundered the people at his will. Freedom was dead in the Hebrew land. Never in all its history had the spirit of the nation been so crushed. No period of bondage during the time of the Judges w^as more galling — not even the days of Deborah, of which she sang : ' Then were the gates besieged : was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel ? ' A crushing of a whole nation, so complete as is implied in this state of dependence on the enemy, could not have been the result of subjection for a year or two. As in Deborah's time, it meant fifteen or twenty years of grinding bondage. Manifestly Saul was then but a tributary prince. The skill and daring which he displayed in rescuing Jabesh Gilead, at the beginning of his reign, made him a foe whom neighbouring nations could not despise. Apparently the Philistines, deter- mined to meet this new danger before it became too formidable, liad entered the country in force, and reduced it to subjection. Their conquest was most thorough. Nor was the disarming of the people the only proof of their success. Many of the Hebrews were serving in the armies of the conqueror. And when the war of independence broke out, a part of the invading force, sent to trample down the revolt by rapine and slaughter, was drawn from the Hebrews themselves. Judging by what has often happened in like circumstances elsewhere, we see a nation divided into two parties. One of them, believing all attempts to throw off the yoke useless, was disposed to turn The War of Independence. 5 7 compliance with the humours of their conquerors into a source of profit for themselves ; while the other, although submitting for a season, was only waiting for an opportunity to regain their freedom. But the spirit of the Hebrews generally was broken by years of oppression. There were pages of the history at that time which no true patriot could read or write without blushing. Like the history of similar periods of bondage in the book of Judges, they are, so to speak, torn out of the record ; while the story of the deliverance is written at full length, with a pen which seems to betray its joy in almost every word. The outbreak of national spirit, which led to the overthrow of Nahash, alarmed the Philistines, and prompted them to these strong measures. But a high-spirited king like Saul, proud of a triumph so complete as the defeat of Ammon, did not abandon his crown without a lengthened struggle. He was driven to the hills; his men were frightened and scattered; even his chosen bodyguard melted away to a fifth of its numbers. The armoury of warlike weapons, which the flight of Ammon left to be picked off the field of battle by the Hebrews, was wrested from them ; neither spear nor shield nor sword was seen in a soldier's or a captain's hand. This record of disgrace is not a record of one, or two, or five, but of many years' oppression. It covered pages in the history of the Hebrew race, so black with dishonour that a writer may well be excused if he has crowded the sorrows of twenty years into the compass of as many lines. By striking out this period of shame, the length of Saul's reign is reduced by modern authors from about forty years to fewer than twenty. As the weary season of bondage came to an end, wliispers of approaching deliverance arose in Israel. Whether it were that Saul had resolved to strike a blow for freedom, or that Samuel had received warning of the crisis which was at hand ; or, as recent discoveries give ground for believing, that the Philistines were entangled in other wars, tJiere was clearly an 58 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. unwonted stirring among the down-trodden Hebrews. The spring of the year was chosen for revolt. The people could then be gathered from all quarters — ' at an appointed season,' for so the words run in the history — without exciting the suspicions of their conquerors. The place of meeting was Gilgal, near Jericho, which was comparatively safe against attack. Sheltered from the Philistines by a screen of hills and of difficult passes, Hebrew patriots could gather there for consultation or war. Samuel had intimated his intention of being present, but he kept away from the meeting for seven days. The assembly may have been the annual feast of the passover, observed by stealth in a place made sacred by old associations. At Gilgal this festival was observed for the first time in Palestine, a few days after the crossing of the Jordan under Joshua. 'The children of Israel encamped in Gilgal, and kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month at even in the plains of Jericho ' (Josh. v. 10). Shiloh became the place of celebration after Joshua's time. When the curse of desolation fell on that city, no other was chosen for the central altar and the scene of national festivals. King and people may have fallen back on the recorded precedent of Gilgal as a place of celebration, but if such was the case, Samuel did not sanction it by his presence. Twice we find him delaying ' seven days ' before he went down to join the king at Gilgal. He then came to a meeting of the people for consultation in trying times. Another explanation of this waiting for seven days is possible. When Moses set his brother apart for the priesthood, he forbade him ' to go out of the door of the tabernacle of the congregation seven days' (Lev. viii. 33). The days of consecration were spent in keeping 'the charge of the Lord day and night.' Aaron w^aited precisely as Saul was told to do. What the first high priest did at his solemn setting apart by a prophet, Samuel, that prophet's successor, might well lay on the first king of the nation at two turning points in its history. It seems as if Samuel said to Saul, ' Wait, and meditate on your The War of Independence, 59 high charge for seven days, before you begin to act.' Be that as it may, the crisis had arisen in Israel's history ; great events were about to happen, and Samuel came with a definite purpose — to offer not a burnt-offering, as the English version puts it, but tlu burnt-offering. Mention is made of this sacrifice four times as 'the burnt-offering,' a special victim chosen for a special purpose (Num. xxviii. 19). Before the gathering took place at Gilgal, the signal for war was given by Jonathan, the son of Saul, then a young man apparently above twenty years of age. By means now unknown, and with a force which it would be rash to identify with the thousand men whom he is found commanding a line or two before, he surprised the Philistine garrison of Geba, a mountain fastness on the south side of the pass of Beth-horon. The strong- hold which he thus gained gave its occupants a view of all hostile movements on the north side of the pass, and was of inestimable value in the operations which soon followed. Tidings of the capture spread far and near. The trumpet was blown throughout the wdiole land, summoning the Hebrev/s to obey their rightful sovereign ; not the priestly trumpet of the wilderness, which we shall find reappearing at a later period, but the soldier's trumpet of battle. And the terms of the proclamation were the same as Israel had been accustomed to from their arrival at Sinai, after their escape from Egypt. 'Hear my voice,' was the command first uttered from Sinai; 'Let the Hebrew^s hear,' w^as the proclamation published throughout the land by Saul. 'To hear' had a well-understood meaning among the people from ancient times. It ran as a living nerve through their whole literature ; the string:, on which the events of history are threaded, is often of the thinness of gossamer, while it has the strength of steel But the loss of Geba also called the Philistines to arms. Nor did they scruple to utter threats of vengeance in the hearing of many Hebrews then in the country, peasants perhaps getting their implements of hus- 6o TJie Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Histo7y. bandry repaired, or traitors receiving orders from their masters. "Word was soon carried to the patriot camp that ' Israel was had in abomination of the Philistines.' The haughtiness of conquerors was arrayed against the despondency of an ill- equipped array of patriots, whose crushed hearts preferred flight to fifrhtingf. An immense host of Philistines and their allies speedily marched by the pass of Beth-horon to the rebellious uplands of Benjamin. Besides an uncounted body of foot soldiers, there were thirty thousand Eecheb and six thousand horse. By the Eecheb are commonly understood chariots.^ But that does not appear to be the meaning of the word, any more than thirty thousand artillery in a modern army would signify thirty thousand pieces of cannon. The men who formed the Eecheb, or chariot force, numbered thirty thousand, and were the flower of the army. But if the warrior and charioteer and the supports be all taken count of, the force of chariots may be reduced to four or five thousand at the most, a number sufficiently large for an army operating on a plain, but most dangerous when the field of war was among the hills. According to the Assyrian annals, it was a number which was sometimes exceeded by the petty princes of Syria, when banded together to fight for their freedom. The men of Israel assembled in Gilgal at the ' set time,' but it was soon seen that few of them were worthy to fight the battles of freedom. A more formidable foe than Midian had mastered the land of the Hebrews ; a smaller handful than even Gideon's three hundred was destined to humble the enemy's pride. Samuel was not present in the Hebrew camp during the seven days of the feast, as the assembly may reasonably be called. As day after day passed, and brought fuller tidings of the advance of the invaders, men slunk from following their king. Without shame they hid themselves in caves and thickets, or among the rocky wastes of mountains ' Those who take the word in this sense suspect a copyist's error in the number. The War of Independence, 6 1 which, in a former age, furnished a refuge to the spies, whom Eahab sent out of Jericho in safety. Others fled to the lofty- watch-towers, or found at once a dwelling and a safe retreat in the sepulchres hollowed out on the rock-faces of desolate valleys. But a greater danger threatened the Hebrew army. The soldiers lost heart. Many of them, despairing of their country, crossed the Jordan to the land of Gad and the more distant region of Gilead. Safety had been secured to these districts by the defeat of Nahash, from which Amnion had not yet recovered, while the Jordan was a barrier which the Philistines might not cross. Those who remained with Saul ' followed him, trembling ' for the future. A more mournful sight could not be witnessed than a great nation, divided into fugitives and tremblers in presence of a powerful enemy. Even Saul himself belonged to the tremblers. For seven days Saul waited at Gilgal, expecting Samuel to join him at the end of that time. ' A seven days,' or a week, is a form of words which occurs repeatedly in the Pentateuch, and in the books of Samuel. In the former, it is frequently used of the passover feast ; in the latter, it twice appears as a set or solemn time. Here it fell in the spring, ' at the time when kings go forth to battle.' The people assembled in great force. The burnt-offering and peace-offerings were to be sacrificed. The ark and the high priest, Ahiah, were present in the camp ; and as Saul's first altar was built some time afterwards, there was either an altar permanently at the place, or, what is more probable, the brazen altar of the wilderness had been brought to Gilgal from Nob by Ahiah and his attendant Levites. Everything points to the great feast of passover as the occasion seized by Saul for inspiring his people with warlike ardour. The place reminded them of some of the greatest deeds of ancient days : the coming from Egypt, the conquest of Canaan, the overthrow of Moab by Ehud. The cheering presence of the ark, which had often led Joshua to victory from tlie same spot, must not be overlooked. Because the Greek translator 62 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. bungled his work in a passage relating to the ark in this story, as he bungled it in many other passages, several writers refuse to allow the presence of the ark in the camp. Not observing the parenthetic clause in the Hebrew, and not knowing the usage of the language, he attempted to improve a clear narrative by altering ' ark ' into ' ephod.' The words, literally rendered, are, ' And Saul said unto Ahiah, Bring near the ark of God (for the ark of God was present in that day) and the children of Israel.' Two things vvere brought near to Saul — the ark and the people — a form of words precisely the same as Elijah used at his great sacrifice on Carmel two centuries later. 'Elijah said unto all the people. Come near unto me.' The presence of the ark, therefore, cannot be denied. In short, nothing was left undone which seemed fitted to inspire men with courage in desperate times. When Saul saw the people melting away, and heard from Geba of the enemy's approach, his feverish impatience drove him to usurp the place and office of Samuel. ' The burnt- offering,' which no one was to sacrifice till Samuel came, had been ready for some time. Saul believed there was virtue in the mere offering. Already had the invaders reached the summit of the pass at Michmash. If he delayed longer, they might descend on the few hundreds who still clung to their king, surprise them before the victim could be offered, and deprive him of the influence which he evidently thought the sacrifice could of itself procure for him with God. The fol- lowing day proved the correctness of this forecast of the enemy's plans. But, ignorant of the prophet's design in delaying, and urged on by rash views, he would wait no lonfrer for Samuel. ' Brincr near to me the burnt-offerinsr and o o o the peace-offerings,' he said to the attendants of the high priest. And he ordered Ahiah to proceed with the sacrifice. According to a form of words common in all tongues, he is said to have done himself what he gave orders for another to do. ' I forced myself and offered the burnt-offering,' are not The War of Independence, 63 -words wliicli necessarily imply a usurpation of the priest's office by Saul, but they imply a violation of the command laid on him to wait for Samuel. While the sacrifice was still in progress, messengers arrived with news of the prophet's approach. Saul went forth from the camp to meet him. But Samuel had seen the smoke of the burnt-offering as he descended the higher ground to the plains of Gilgal. And there came to him also a message from heaven, exactly as, at an earlier time, a message came to him on his journey to prepare him for his first meeting with Saul. But the second message was unlike the first. 'What art thou doing ? ' he asked. Saul is full of excuses, a feature of his character which comes out with equal prominence afterwards. The melting away of the people, the failure of the prophet to keep his appointment, the advance of the enemy are all mentioned. 'God's favour I have not pro- pitiated,' he said, ' the enemy will be upon me ; I did violence to my own feelings that I might offer the burnt- offering.' Every one was to blame but the king. He could not understand that, as the force of Gideon was weeded out till it numbered only three hundred men, so it was his duty to let the weeding out of his followers proceed till it pleased the prophet to come to his help. Gideon was a man of little faith, as any one would have been in similar circumstances. Saul had shown himself to be a man of no faith at all, but of high presumption. He was tried and found wanting. He was unfit to be the captain of the chosen people. * Thou hast done foolishly,' Samuel said, without regarding his excuses ; ' thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God, which He commanded thee : for now would the Lord have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever. But now thy kingdom shall not stand ; the Lord hath sought Him a man after His own heart, and the Lord hath commanded him to be captain over His people, because thou hast not kept that which the Lord commanded thee.' The words of Samuel breathe the 64 The Kingdom of All-Is7'ael: its History. spirit of tlie lawgiver in Deuteronomy. They do more. They echo, if they do not quote, tliese very words. So clear is this relation of the one to the other, that the only way of escape from the difficulties in which it involves the newest school of critics, is by resorting to the device of pronouncing these words an interpolation in an ancient narrative, made by an unknown reviser four or five centuries after Samuel was dead. AVe may well discard this idea as destructive, not of one part of the history, but of the whole. Saul received neither light nor guidance from Samuel. Both of them immediately withdrew from Gilgal to the strong- hold of Geba. The place was safer from attack than Gilgal, and gave a clear prospect of the movements of the enemy, whose forces were now filling the country beyond the ravine. Evidently Samuel had a plan in his mind when he delayed his visit to Gilgal, and when he removed from Gilgal to Geba. Another Gideon was destined to fight for Israel, but with help far inferior to the three hundred men he commanded. A great deliverance w^as at hand ; but a great opportunity was for ever lost by King Saul. The scene that lay spread out before the eyes of Saul's soldiers in Geba filled them with alarm. An outpost of the invaders had seized Michmash, right in their front. The pass below was thus in the enemy's power. Three bodies of spoilers were seen issuing from the camp. Their course could be traced by the smoke of burning home- steads or ripe barley crops. One body went westward, another north-east, and a third turned the way of the border which looketh on the valley of Zeboim toward the wilderness.' It was the third detachment which would have fallen on Saul or intercepted him, had he been much later in escaping to the high lands. Of these eight Hebrew words, four or five suggest words and things already well known in Hebrew history. ' The boundary ' refers us to the northern boundary of Benjamin described in the book of Joshua. And * the boundary which looketh on ' is the form of words, in The War of Independence, 65 which Balaam's position is twice described, *the top of Pisgah, which looketh on the face of Jeshimon.' The whole story in the book of Samuel is a reflection of words and things written long before by Hebrew pens, and read in Hebrew households. There was a movement among the Philistines who formed the garrison of Michmash which seems to have escaped the eyes of all but Jonathan. He was watching them closely. Evidently they were somewhat uneasy about the company of spoilers, who had gone down the ravine towards the wilderness of Jordan. ' They went out to the pass of Michmash ' to have a better view. Night fell upon the disheartened patriots, the spoilers, the garrison of Michmash, and the Philistine camp. Saul, with six hundred of his bodyguard, and Ahiah the high priest, had not trusted themselves in Geba. They were in the neighbourhood, prepared apparently for flight if the enemy forced their way across the pass. Saul himself was sheltered, at the extreme end of the region called Gibeah, ' under the pomegranate tree,' in a precipitous place called ' Migron.' The exactitude of the description proves the future fame of the spot. Samuel appears to have left the camp. But if we knew the whole story, we might be able to trace his hand in the brave deed which entirely altered the com- plexion of affairs on the following morning. Before daybreak Jonathan proposed to his armour-bearer to cross over from Geba to the garrison of Michmash, and challenge them to an equal combat. Had he revealed his plan to Saul, he would have been hampered by orders, or would have been forbidden to make the attempt. Without making known their design, the two young men slipped away from the Hebrew camp to undertake a deed of daring that has seldom been paralleled in the history of any nation. At the crossing-place of the ravine where the road, such as it was, ran from Geba to Michmash, were two rocks, rising like giant pillars, one on each side of the pass. The northern E 66 The Kingdom of All- Israel: its History, rock at Miclimasli was named Bozez (shining), from the bril- liance with which its smooth face reflected the rays of the southern sun. The rock on the Geba or southern side was called Seneh. At one time it was thought to have been so •named from its tooth -like shape. But that idea has been abandoned, as Seneh can only be got to mean a tooth by doinrr violence to the letters of the name. There is another and a better meaning of the word, which also helps to throw lioht on the events that followed. Seneh in Hebrew is a bush; it is especially used of the bush which Moses saw burning and not consumed. Apparently, the rock in front of Geba got its name from the bush with which it was partly covered. But the word suggested high thoughts to Jonathan during the stillness of that night of waiting. With irresistible force it reminded the prince of ' the goodwill of him that dwelt in Seneh, or the bush.' It recalled the marvellous work of one man in freeing the nation from bondage four centuries before. It suggested the hope of a like deliverance again. Seneh was on the Hebrews' side of the pass. And because of its peculiarly suggestive name, the two rocks are probably mentioned in the history (Deut. xxxiii. 16). ' There is no restraint to the -Lord,' said the prince to his armour-bearer, * to save by many or by few.' The proverb, as it apparently was, had seized hold of the prince's mind with a power that seemed to betoken a great fulfilment. He inspired the armour-bearer with the hopes he felt himself : ' Do all that is in thine heart ; turn thee ; behold, I am with thee according to thy heart.' They arranged their plans. If the enemy had the courage to come down the steep hill- face, with the view of forcing a passage, as Jonathan thought they intended, the two Hebrews were to abide their coming on the higher ground or in the bottom of the valley. But if they challenged the Hebrews to equal combat on their own side of the pass, Jonathan and his armour-bearer were then to climb the rock, and put their trust in God for the rest. The invita- The War of Independence, 67 tion to come up was to be ' the sign ' which should determine their course. Hebrews were taught in their popular law-book to look for ' signs ' to guide them in life. Samuel, it will be remembered, followed this teaching, and may have suggested it to Jonathan. It was also a feature of the prince's character thus to arrange for alternative courses of action. At a later period, the same way of looking at two possibilities will be seen in his dealings with David. The writer of the history in Samuel had a keen insight into such peculiarities of character. When the two Hebrews neared the bottom of the pass, they discovered themselves to the men of the garrison above. It was early morning ; their numbers could not be known. But as soon as they were seen, the guards above called to each other : ' Behold, Hebrews coming forth from holes in the rocks, where they hid themselves.' When challenged by the two youths, they replied by inviting them to come up : ' We shall make you know something,' they said. Accepting * the sign,' Jonathan climbed the rocky slope as best he could, ' on his hands and his feet.' His armour-bearer followed. It was fifteen or twenty minutes of hard work. A narrow ledge at the top, well known, it may be, to the prince, seems to have made the beginning of the fray more even for the wearied climbers than it could otherwise have been. At first it was single combat ; when a Philistine fell, the armour-bearer com- pleted with an ox-goad what Jonathan had commenced with the sword. Every fresh victory emboldened the young men, and struck terror into the enemy. Soon a score of Philistines lay dead on a narrow stretch of ground. The rest of the out- post took to flight. The spoilers, returning up the pass from the direction of Gilgal, appear to have heard the uproar or seen the flight of their comrades, and were themselves seized with terror. Their retreat was cut off. As the fugitives from the first slaughter burst into the Philistine camp, they spread alarming tidings of defeat at the hands of one Hebrew 68 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, cliampion. Another Samson had arisen to avenge his country ; a worse slaughter than any he caused might be looked for amid the rocky defiles of Beth-horon. An earthquake hap- pening at the same time alarmed them still more. The garrison was running away, the spoilers were running ; no one could get or give exact information. A sleeping host, plunged in careless security, was awaking to find its outposts defeated and death hastening to its tent-doors. Want of discij^line produced its usual fruits. The whole army of the invaders fled before two young men. Six thousand horses, thirty thousand Eecheb, an uncounted mass of foot were struggling with each other, and trampling one another down to get away in safety from two youths, wearied with a steep climb and a battle agaiust terrible odds. But when the flight once began there was no stopping of it. Imagination lent it wings : every friend became a foe. As the morning light grew stronger, the sentinels of Saul in Gibeah saw the disorder in the enemy's camp. Their eyes were sharpened by the noise of battle, which had already reached their ears. A scene of wildest confusion was passing before their view, to them inexplicable confusion. They saw no fighting with a foe, no pursuit by a victor ; the enemy was rapidly moving off the ground, one beating another down. Saul was informed of the confusion amoncj the invaders. He could not make out whether it was a surprise of the enemy by his own people, or a trap laid to entice him and his handful of men across the ravine. His first step was that of a cautious soldier. By numbering his men, he ascertained that Jonathan and his armour-bearer alone w^ere wantino-. It was therefore a surprise, not a trap. His next step was equally wise. He summoned the high priest with the ark to ask counsel for king and people. ' Bring near the ark of God and the children of Israel,' he said. Ahiah was dressed in his sacred robes ; the people were standing round ; and Saul was putting the questions for decision by the sacred lot. While he was The War of Independence, 69 speaking, the noises of a lost battle rose clearer on the morning air ; and the scenes of confusion became plainer to the spec- tators round the ark. Ahiah was putting his hand into the pocket of the breastplate. A minute more, and the counsel of Heaven would have been known. But Saul interfered. ' Withdraw thine hand,' he cried ; and the counsel desired was not got. A feverish excitement had seized the king, depriving him for the moment of the calmness of judgment necessary in a great crisis. But that idea is not a sufficient explanation of his rashness. There is another, and perhaps a better. Samuel had evidently left Geba, in anger at the presumption of the king. A great triumph had been gained, and was proceeding beneath Saul's eyes, but it brought no glory to him. He had been told a day or two days before, that, while he himself was rejected, another captain had been chosen over the Lord's people. Eeasoning on these grounds, Saul may have feared the threats of Samuel were working themselves out into facts. His fancy may have seen the new captain over the people already taking the command, routing the foe, and putting himself at the head of the nation. If, as Saul had reason to think, the Urim and Thummim of the high priest should refuse him light and guidance before the people, his rejection by Jehovah might become public talk. ' Withdraw thine hand,' he cried, lest no answer should be given. ' The noise and the flight ' are answer enough, he seems to have said to his followers, who may have been as eager to pursue the enemy, as he was to arrest the hand of Ahiah. But there were those present who saw the insult offered to the majesty of Jehovah. As Saul lay on the south side of the pass, and was thus between the enemy and their own land, short cuts across the hills would soon bring him on their flank or rear. His soldiers seem to have hurried forward with loud shouts, whicli would both strike more terror into the fugitives, and summon the Hebrews from the hiding-places to which they had fled. But a worse disaster befell the enemy. A body of Hebrews, 70 The Kingdo7n of All-Israel: its History, Avho had joined them in prosperity, deserted them in adversity. As soon as they saw their own king and people threatening the fugitives, they made their peace with them by falling on their former friends — a lesson of caution not forgotten by the invaders. There was thus civil war among the Philistines. Xo one knew who was friend and who was foe. When the pursuers at length came up wdth the enemy, the scene re- minded them of the promise which they had been accustomed to read in their sacred books, ' The Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty dest7mc' tion' (Deut. vii. 23). * With a very mighty destruction! or confusion, for so the narrative in Samuel reads, was the pass found to be blocked that morning. From Ephraim on the north, from Benjamin on the south, every commanding point was seized by mountaineers, who, as in later days, could hurl rocks down on the struggling crowd below. The shouts of pursuers increased the terrors of fugitives. For four or five miles the pursuit was urged by the Hebrew king, till Betliaven was reached. Of the greatness of the victory there could then be no doubt. Every foot of the road showed inviting proofs of its completeness, in arms thrown away, spoils abandoned, cattle and sheep deserted, men dead or dying. Saul was afraid of the temptations which he saw his unarmed and hungry soldiers exposed to. The day before he had left his camp to * bless ' or welcome Samuel, it^ow, with strange inconsistency, he has left his camp to reap the fruits of a victory which he had not won, and to curse the soldiers who might have made it complete. With a loud voice, so that all the little band of Hebrews heard the words, Saul exclaimed, * Cursed be the man that eateth food until evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies.' A curse so rashly uttered was productive of most serious consequences to the king and his family. The two youths, who gained the victory, had not joined Saul when the words were spoken. They knew nothing about the prohibition. Meanwhile the day was The War of Independence. 7 1 advanciiiGj ; the sun ^vas G^rowinGj hot, entailiiiGj tliirst ainl faintiiess upon the pursuers. ]\Iile after mile they hastened on thi'ough a friendly country, and along roads covered with abandoned spoils ; but the fainting Hebrews dared not partake of the refreshment provided for them by Heaven's own hands. In passing through a forest on the line of the enemy's flight, honey was seen flowing from the comb so copiously, that every one could have helped himself without delaying the advance. Streams of honey, such as the soldiers beheld, proved the heat of the day and the weariness of the chase. Jonathan, who had by this time joined the main body, lifted some of it to his burning lips. A fresh life blazed in his very eyes. The honey, which was forbidden in any offering made by fire (Lev. ii. 11), was a fatal indulgence in this sacrifice of enemies, devoted to utter destruction in the king's vow. One of the soldiers, seeing the prince dip the end of a spear, with which he had armed himself, into a honeycomb, told him of the curse uttered by the king. A rash word fell from Jonathan when he heard what Saul had done. ' My lather hath troubled the land,' the same word which Joshua applied to Achan when he asked him, 'Why hast thou troubled us ? ' and which Ahab in his anger applied to Elijali, 'Troubler of Israel, art thou here V The prince regretted his language, for he proceeded to explain, how that ill-advised curse lessened the splendour of the triumph by the faintness which want of food caused to the pursuers. From Bethaven the tide of war rolled all day westward to Aijalon, a distance of twelve or thirteen miles. It was a weary chase for fasting men. When word was passed to encamp for the night, and freedom was given to partake of food, impatience led the soldiers to break one of the most solemn laws in all the Hebrew ritual. Without waiting till the blood had been drained from the sheep and oxen, slain for their evening meal, some cut up the animals and dressed the pieces before camp - fires kindled by their comrades. 2 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its Histo7y. Several of the priests, alarmed at this breach of the law, appear to have called Saul's attention to what was going on. In all haste he bade them disperse themselves throughout the camp, and order every man to bring the cattle to a large stone or perhaps cairn, which his attendants had rolled together. Order was thus taken with these breakers of the law. They had to wait their turn, while the sheep and the oxen were slain or sacrificed in presence of the king and priest. The victory, for which thanks were due, the victims, and the stone or cairn, seem to have put it into Saul's mind that, in token of his gratitude, he should convert this slaughter-table into an altar, or, at least, should call it by that name. Our translators have overlooked the fact of the stone or cairn and the altar being one and the same. ' And Saul built an altar to Jehovah ; it (the stone or cairn) he began to build — an altar to Jehovah.' There is not ground for regarding the stone, which was thus converted into an altar, as a place of priestly sacrifice. The blood, which was there poured out, made it an altar according to the definition of a popular sacrifice. And it was also a lasting memorial of the great deliverance wrought that day, a monumental cairn, different from an idolatrous pillar, and perhaps the same as the ' hand ' or ' pointer ' which Saul is known to have erected elsewhere in gratitude for victory. As soon as the army should be refreshed with food and sleep, Saul proposed to descend from the heights on which they were encamped, and attack the enemy before morning. If the ' seven days ' were really the passover week, the assailants would be guided in their march by the moon, which rose at an early hour in the morning, and would give them light till day broke. Saul's plan was thus full of promise. The Philistines had reached a broad valley running towards Ekron, and, as they were extricated from the straits and rocks of the hills, considered themselves safe. Saul's officers entered heartily into his plans. But the high priest urged them to ask counsel of God before venturing on an attack : ' Let us The War of Independence. "j^^ draw near hither unto God,' he said, meaning by ' hither,' apparently, to the altar and the ark (1 Sam. x. 22). His advice was taken. But the oracle gave neither ' yes ' nor 'no/ when the questions asked by Saul were put, * Shall I go down after the Philistines ? Wilt Thou deliver them into the hand of Israel ? ' The brightness of the triumph gained was blurred by sin somewhere ; an opportunity which might never again recur was slipping from Saul's grasp. Evidently he was not to be any more the deliverer of the chosen people. Vexed at the failure of a plan which bade so fair for success, Saul, instead of seeing in himself the cause of the failure, hoped to discover it elsewhere. Exhorting the chiefs present to assist him in finding out the sinner, whoever he might be, and denouncing death as his due, Saul divided his little army into two bands, himself and Jonathan forming one, and the rest of the soldiers another. His captains heard him in silence. To most of them death in battle was part of a soldier's lot, from which they would not shrink ; but to risk life on the uncertainty of the lot, and as the forfeit due to a broken vow, filled them with alarm. Could they have read each other's faces by the dim light of the camp-fires, no one would have had reason to rally another on his frightened looks. ' Not one of all the people answered ' to the threat of death. ' Do what seemeth good unto thee,' was their reply about the taking of the lot.-^ With all solemnity the king besought Jehovah ' to give perfection ' in a matter so serious. It was soon decided. The people escaped. Saul was terribly in earnest now. According to his way of taking the lot, the sin lay with him or his son. ' Let the lots fall between me and between Jonathan my son,' he said ; and Jonathan was taken. His father asked him what he had done. ' I did certainly taste with the end of the spear which was in my 1 The high priest was not asked to decide by Urim and Thummim. Neither yes nor no might have been the result as before. With tlie ordinary lot a decision one way or the other was inevitable. 74 The Kingdom of All- 1 S7'ael: its History, hand a little honey. Here I am, ready to die.' ' God do so to me and more also/ replied the king ; ' but, Jonathan, thou shalt surely die.' With the calmness of a hero, the prince stood prepared for death. In the morning he risked his life in an enterprise which covered him with honour and saved his country from bondage. In the evening he found himself condemned as the sinner whose wronGj-doinsj had marred the great deliverance which he and his armour-bearer had wrought. A zeal bordering on madness, inflamed, too, by the feeling that the fault was wholly his own, was driving the king to take his son's life. Jonathan was ready to lay it down. But the common-sense of the army revolted against a deed so dreadful as the slaying of a victim who was not only innocent, but was also the Gideon of his day. Murmurs arose in the army. A life so precious to a people, casting away the chains of a weary bondage, should not be thus lightly taken. An instinct stronger than reason told the people that the prince was not the sinner, because of whom an oracle had been refused. The first sacrifice offered on this first altar built by Saul was to be his own son ! ' There shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground,' the soldiers say, ' for he hath been a fellow- worker with God this day.' And despite the terrible earnestness of the king, they rescued the prince from death. Though the people thus saved Jonathan from death, nothing could ever efface from his mind the remembrance of that moment of danger. Perhaps, too, he feared — and feared till the fear became a settled belief — that a father's rash vow had blighted his hopes of the kingdom. So far as a vow went, Jonathan was dead in law from that moment. The sun of his renown was under an eclipse, and it might never again come forth. The effects of this chain of events on Saul may also be easily traced. He familiarized himself with the idea of a son's guilt and a son's death. His son had taken his place as champion of the nation at a time ^Yhen Jehovah refused to The War of Independence, 75 give Saul light or guidance. While the king was earnestly seeking Jehovah's honour, this champion of the people was crossing his plans and breaking the vow he uttered. His own family were turning against him. The idea which thus took root in his mind, seems never to have lost its hold during the rest of his life. It broadened out into unfounded suspicions and cruel deeds. It led to the murder of the priests of Nob, to repeated attempts on the life of David, and to the throwing of a spear at Jonathan himself. Saul had begun the downward course, which ended in madness and death. Saul was not justified in thus appealing to the sacred lot as a means of discovering the sinner whose guilt had sealed the lips of Heaven. His own presumptuous act two or three days before, and his insult to the sacred oracle that very morning, rendered further search for a sinner unnecessary. No com- mission was given to him to destroy the invading army. Another had felt and had shown the faith which he neither felt nor showed. But notwithstanding these clear facts, he put himself in the position of God's avenger on the oppressors. And he presumed to x^lay this part at a time when his interference was not desired. His help, according to his own view of things, seemed indispensable ; his right to guide the flow of events seemed indisputable. Heaven was not needing his help, and did not respect his claim of right. It could dispense with his vow as it dispensed with his sword. But a second place in God's arrangements he was resolved not to take. Pride and presumption lured him on to his own ruin and the ruin of his family. Whether Jonathan were guilty or not, according to the way the law of the Hebrews was regarded in that age, need not be asked. But Saul had put himself out of court in a case so solemn. He was acting as both judge and plaintiff. When the high priest was within a minute or two of ascertaining God's will on Saul's enterprise that morning, the king stopped him because the thing was ']6 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, clear in itself; confusion such as reigned in the enemy's host was warrant enough for attack, without waiting for God's direction. He had therefore no right to ask counsel in the evening, when he had refused to wait for it in the morning. A night assault on a panic-stricken enemy, still quivering with the excitement of a disastrous day, was not more dangerous than the morning's march. The beaten soldiers were weary after a flight of many miles ; they were over- powered with sleep. If suddenly roused by fresh sounds of war, they would seek safety, not in resistance, but in a more headlong retreat. Saul's soldiers, on the other hand, were refreshed after their fatigue; they were inspired with the highest hopes ; they would choose their own time for delivering the attack; and they were constantly receiving reinforcements of men who had not shared in the weariness of the previous day, and who longed to strike a blow for freedom. On every view of the case, the man who refused to wait for the high priest in the morning, had no call to listen to the high priest in the evening. All the mischief that happened lay at his own door. If the rashness of the morning were right, Saul could not expect an answer in the evening. If that rashness were wrong, still less could he expect an answer about a night attack. Saul's vow was perhaps the direct result of a feeling of guilt in his own heart. It may have been meant by him as an atonement for his rashness in stopping the high priest at the last stage of consultation. Jonathan's breach of law — if it was such — and the people's eating of the blood could not have happened, unless the vow had been thrown as a stumblingblock in their path. The rod of punishment fell, as it often does, not on the offender, in the first case at least, but on Jonathan, Saul's pride and hope. The first stroke blighted the life and prospects of the prince when they looked fairest to the view ; the later and the heavier strokes fell on his father. Saul's rashness in acting as both judge and plaintiff in a cause which demanded him for The War of Independence. jj the accused, involved his brave son in a network of sorrow from which he never escaped. The success of the Hebrews in this campaign revived the spirit of freedom among them. They had the wrongs of many a year of suffering to avenge on other nations. In the hour of Israel's weakness spoilers had ravaged all his borders. Edom, ]Moab, Amnion, and Syria had grown rich by plundering and enslaving the disheartened Hebrews. But day had at length broken on the long night of oppression. In a series of campaigns Saul led his people to battle against these neighbours. The terror which had weakened Israel now lay heavy on them. As oppressors of the chosen people, they are called wicked men ; and the triumphs achieved over them by Saul are described by a word which refers to the over- throw of the unrighteous, ' Whithersoever he turned himself, lie proved them unrighteous.' Thus early had Israel become accustomed to the idea, fully developed in later ages by the prophets, that whoever set himself against the chosen race was a sinner in God's sight, and would meet a sinner's fate. For four or five years, it may be, Saul was thus engaged in building up his throne by paying back to his neighbours these out- standing scores. On every side, from the far north to the deserts of the south, from Amnion on the east to the shores of the Great Sea on the west, success crowned his efforts. To maintain the freedom of his country and the dignity of his crown, he was now also able to support an army, of which his cousin Abner became commander-in-chief And though the three thousand of the bodyguard only were actually kept under arms, steps seem to have been taken for training to war all the able-bodied men in the land. Anions^ the enemies whom Saul overcame at this time are mentioned the Amalekites : ' He gathered an host, and smote the Amalekites, and delivered Israel out of the hands of them that spoiled them.' This expedition is put along with the expeditions against Edom, Moab, Ammon, and Zobah. It is yS The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, the same expedition of which a full account is given in the following chapter. But the value of this anticipative mention of it is very great. By a device common to all writers, a series of events is sometimes mentioned by anticipation, before the writer proceeds to deliver his full narrative of the facts. A short-hand statement precedes ; a detailed history follows. This is called in grammar prolepsis or anticiixttion. If a reader neglect to observe this rhetorical device, which indeed is often essential to a good record of events, he may regard as different two narratives, which form really only two accounts — the first short and the second detailed — of one and the same event. The author of the books of Samuel indulges sometimes in this grammatical device. He is forced to it by the nature and course of the story. In most cases the device is clearly seen by the reader, as in the passage under review. But if the reader miss the writer's manifest purpose in using a prolepsis or anticipation of the narrative, he will find himself involved in confusion, and may do the author grievous wrong. When we come to David's first appearance on the stage of history, we shall see the advantage of bearing this grammatical device in mind. CHAPTEE IV. FINAL EEJECTION OF SAUL. (1 Sam. XV.) The threateninii of Samuel, that the kiiiQ-dom of Saul should not stand, remained a dead letter for several years. Per- haps it was forgotten in the tide of prosperity, which carried the Hebrews onward to freedom and honour. But the prediction, though seeming to sleep, again scared the king with its unwelcome waking. The threat of approaching ruin was renewed after an interval of years : in this, as in other cases, the scenes of Hebrew history are acted over again. Because judgment against an evil work did not come to pass speedily, Saul believed, or at least hoped, that it would never come at all. After Saul had attended to what might be reckoned pressing calls on the resources of his kingdom, in vindicating its freedom against the stranger, he was reminded of other duties still undischarged. He was not a law to himself, like the kings of neighbouring nations. ISTor had he merely to seek the greatest good of his people, as a wise ruler would do. He had, besides, to render obedience to the higher Power which drew him forth from obscurity and set him on the throne. The command lying on him especially as the king of Israel, was the command first given to the people on their arrival at Sinai four centuries before, ' Thou shalfc obey the voice of Jehovah.' And the time at last arrived for putting forth its claims : ' Samuel said unto Saul, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way when he came up from Egypt. 8o The Kingdoiii of A II- Israel : its History, ISTow go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all tliat they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.' This was the oath called clicrem, or utter destruction : ' Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth,' it said (Deut. xx. 16). The com- mand thus given by Samuel was connected with an attack made by a body of Amalekites or Bedouin on the Hebrews, in the neifrhbourhood of Sinai, about two months after the departure from Egypt. Though driven off by Joshua, they seem to have hung on the outskirts of the camp, and done what mischief they could to stragglers, to women and children, during the forty years' sojourn in the wilderness. The attack, in which they were beaten back, is recorded in an early part of the wilderness history ; their hanging on the rear of the Hebrew camp and army, for the purpose of cutting off the feeble and the hindmost, is recorded at the close of the march towards Canaan (Ex. xvii. 14, 16; Deut. xxv. 17). The blood feud, which thus arose, continued throughout the following centuries. Amalek's robbers repeatedly wasted the farms of Judah. Twice did Moses record the hatefulness of these people's inhospitality to the fugitive strangers from Egypt. Tw^ce also he recorded the punishment, which the children of the fugitives were ordered to inflict. It was an endless blood feud between two nations, but a feud counte- nanced by the Judge of all the earth. At no other period since the conquest of Canaan could the Hebrews have undertaken this war. Joshua was too busy, and the people's work of conquest too heavy, to allow them to turn their thoughts to the Amalekites. After Joshua's death there was even less hope of punishment overtaking the free- booters. On two occasions, indeed, during the times of the Judges, Amalek was able to plunder the country of the Hebrews, once as the ally of Moab and again as the ally of Midian. For three hundred years after the conquest, Israel was helpless to undertake foreign wars. His strength was Final Rejection of Saul, 8 r spent in shalving off tlie yoke of strangers, wliicli was soon cast again on his neck. In Saul's days the Hebrews began to see the advantages of acting together under one head. When the nation was then renewing its youth, awaking after a long sleep to a knowledge of its own might, the command came to Saul to pay back into Amalek's bosom the misdeeds as well of former ages as of his own. Obeying without delay ' the voice of the Lord,' he assembled his forces to the number of 210,000 men at a place called Telaim, perhaps the same as Telem, a town not far from Ziph, in the pastoral districts of Southern Judah. Of this large army the tribe of Judah furnished only ten thousand men, a singular circumstance when w^e consider its resources, and the ravages to which its position exposed it from the desert rovers. Other employ- ment must have been found for the soldiers of Judah. Edomites and Philistines might both have fallen on that tribe, if the borders were left unguarded. The first place attacked by Saul was a town called Ir-Amalek (city of Amalek). Xear it, and forming part of the defences, was a deep valley, in which a body of troops was placed to lie in ambush, while a feint was made to deliver an assault on another side. But the siege could not be pressed so long as the nomadic Kenites, who were allied to both parties, occupied a lofty rock in the neighbourhood of the town. By the law of Moses, as w^ell as by lengthened custom, it was forbidden to injure a tribe wdiich had rendered important service to the Hebrews amid the dangers of their wilderness journey four hundred years before. But if the town or stronghold of the Amale- kites were suddenly taken by assault, there was danger of Kenite blood being: shed, and the alliance between that tribe and Israel broken. Accordingly Saul gave them a free passage through his lines, as the quarrel w^as with Amalek, not with them. This remembrance of their fathers' kindness to the Hebrews, not less than the vengeance on Amalek, is a testimony to the truth of one of the smaller incidents in the 82 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. story of the coming np of Israel out of Egypt. The same feeling of national gratitude towards the Kenite encampment was afterwards shown by David, in the raids made by him and his men from Ziklag. If Israel inherited a blood feud from the past, they also inherited and faithfully kept ancestral obligations of friendship. Of the assault of this stronghold we have no account. It is included in the brief summing up of the events of the campaign : ' Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt,' probably the range of desert claimed by these rovers as their own land, extending from the neighbourhood of the Persian Gulf to the borders of Egypt. ISTot a soul whom the Hebrews found was spared save Agag, king of the freebooters. On the lofty rocks, beside the lonely wells, and amid the sands, two hundred thousand Hebrew swords avenged the ancient quarrel between the two nations. But though vengeance fell on as many men and women and children as were met in battle, overtaken in pursuit, or seized in strongholds, Saul, in defiance of the orders he had received, allowed his people to drive off the choicest of their flocks and herds. Everything of little worth in their camping grounds was destroyed ; whatever was worth taking was carried away : ' All the property, the worth- less, and the refuse, it they utterly destroyed.' As the Hebrews w^ere spread over a wide wilderness, seeking their enemies beside the wells, or following them to known lurking places, Saul might not, in the first instance, have been able to keep his soldiers from saving alive the best of the captured llocks. There may also have been many in the Hebrew army who imagined they recognised sheep and oxen which the rovers had driven off from the pastures of Israel. But as soon as the army reassembled, it became Saul's duty to give full effect to the commands he was himself acting under. He failed to do so. While the issue of the campaign was still in the balance, it might have been easy to destroy these captures. Final Rejection of SmcL Z'i^ But as soon as complete success crowned the Hebrew arms, there would be unwillingness to destroy valuable property, which may have been supposed to be the people's own. When Sihon and his people were overthrown, and when the Midianites were punished, Moses himself set an example which Saul may have thought he was entitled to follow : * The cattle we took for a prey unto ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took' (Deut. ii. 35). But the cases were not similar. Evidently Saul lacked the boldness needed to deal with soldiers in the circumstances. We may w^ell believe him when he laid the guilt, as he did a few days after, on the people. And it seems as if he consented to save the choicest sheep and cattle alive, only for the purpose of offering them all in sacrifice as soon as the army reached Gilgal. A great feast would please the soldiers ; a great sacrifice would please Heaven. Trying to please both parties by a trimming policy, he pleased neither. In a moment of weakness, he again turned the joy of a great triumph into the bitterness of a life-long sorrow. Punishment speedily overtook the disobedient king. Scarcely had he gathered together his forces and turned his face homewards, than a message from God came to the Prophet Samuel in Eamali. An affectionate regard for the brave king, several years of prosperity, and the clearness of the political sky, seemed to have lulled Samuel into the hope of forgiveness for Saul's former disobedience. In one moment his hopes are dashed in pieces. Clear and plain amid the silence of night spoke the still small voice which he knew full well : ' It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king ; for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments.' The vow of utter destruction, spoken in Jehovah's name, Saul had not performed or established, for the historian uses the very word wliich the law of vows uses in the Pentateuch to denote fulfilment or ratification. A night of restless anguish followed. The 84 The Kingdom of All- Israel: its History, affections of the prophet were twined firmly round the king. Without ceasing, the man of prayer fought all that night for the soldier. Connected with him by no tie of kindred, Samuel appears in this pleading for the fallen king as one who was girt about with the moral greatness of a loving heart. That night spent in prayer for his friend raises the old man to the loftiest heights of nobleness. But his prayers could not change the purposes of Almighty wisdom. When assured that the words of doom would not be recalled, his spirit settled into contemplation of the king's guilt. Having faith- fully discharged the duty of a friend, he could then, in the calm which followed the storm of his first anguish, as faith- fully discharge the duty of a messenger of God. Our know- ledge of the tenderness with which he did the former, inspires us with the greater awe, as we read the sharpness with which he did the latter. To be reproached by an enemy is easily borne ; but to be reproached by a friend like Samuel, after a night spent in praying for the turning aside of a king's ruin, might crush the stoutest heart. At daybreak Samuel went to meet the returning host. As the city in which he lived lay on or near the road it was likely to take, he expected to meet Saul in a few hours. But the king, after building a pillar or trophy of victory on the top of Carmel, a hilly district in Judah, eight miles south of Hebron, had turned eastward, and was gone to Gilgal, on the banks of Jordan. Samuel found him there. Several years before Saul had waited for the prophet in the same place — waited till he was weary, and till impatience led him to usurp Samuel's office. No such wrong was committed this time. Fatlings of sheep and oxen were ready for the altar, but not a knife would be lifted on them till Samuel came. On the former occasion, a mighty army of invaders threatened from the neighbouring heights to overwhelm Saul's little band; but at this time a host of two hundred thousand Hebrew soldiers, rejoicing in victory and laden with plunder, rested in Final Rejection of Said, 85 conscious strength at the sacred meeting-place. Then, as before, the king went out to meet the prophet, as soon as watchers announced his approach. Perhaps on the same road as before ; perhaps, indeed, on the very spot, Samuel and Saul again met. The pride of victory, the conviction of having fulfilled the mission laid on him, animated the king ; the sad message which he came to deliver, and tlie anger which he felt, depressed the mind of the prophet. ' Thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord,' were Samuel's words to the king when they last met in this place. ' I have done the word of the Lord,' was Saul's greeting now, a salutation which recalls the former to our mind, and shows it was present to his. With an unwillingness to remember the past, but with an evident looking back on it, quite in keeping with the place, Saul had addressed himself to Samuel. Our English transla- tion of Saul's words is far from happy. He was sent to fulfil a vow long registered against the freebooters. He was report- ing his discharge of it to the prophet, who sent him on the mission. Accordingly he uses the professional or legal word, which indicated a fulfilment of the vow on man's side. ' I have established or fulfilled the word of Jehovah,' therefore, conveys a better idea of the nature of Saul's welcome to Samuel. The prophet answered by expressing surprise at the voice or bleating of flocks and herds around the camp. In his eyes the Hebrew army seemed liker a host of plunderers, laden with spoil, than of obedient followers of Jehovah. Saul replied : * The people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God, and the rest we have utterly destroyed.' There was condemnation in every word spoken by the king. He was sent to obey the voice of Jehovah — the iirst commandment given from Sinai, and one which included all the others. But Samuel hears the voice of sheep and the voice of oxen ; and Saul has obeyed the voice of the people. The keynote of the whole story is S6 The Kingdom of A 11- Israel : its History, obedience to a voice. That forbidden sparing of the spoil was done by the 'peo'ple, not by Mm ; the rooting out commanded was done by ^is. * Leave off/ said Samuel ; * I will tell thee what the Lord hath said to me this night.' And then, sweep- ing away Saul's pretence about the people sparing the choicest spoil, he laid the guilt on the king himself. ' "Wherefore, then, didst thou not obey the voice of the Lord, but didst fly upon the spoil, and didst evil in the sight of the Lord?' Samuel was quoting well-known words from the law-books in Exodus and Deuteronomy, passages w^hich might almost have been given by chapter and verse. The whole force of the words he used lies in this fact. Saul would not have regarded them with the same alarm, nor striven to rebut the charge made, had he not seen how every hope of forgiveness for past wrong- doing perished, if Samuel's utterances were well founded. Eeady as of old to justify himself and to throw the blame on others, Saul again asserted, in reply, ' I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, and have walked in the way which the Lord sent me.' Both prophet and king were quoting the words of their law-books, and both knew they were. Modern readers are apt to overlook this link in the story. But Saul also again laid the guilt on the people. His excuses were of no avail. Eeminding him, as it were, of his great zeal for the honour of God in his efforts to root witchcraft out of the land, Samuel replied that a ruler who disobeyed Jehovah's commands, as Saul had done, was as heinous a wrong-doer as any who pre- tended to consult the dead, or by similar means to read the future : ' Ptebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubborn- ness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, He hath also rejected thee from being king.' His concluding words, ' To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams,' became the original of one of Solomon's proverbs : * To do justice and judgment is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice ' (Prov. xxi. 3). Dis- mayed at the dark gulf on the brink of which he saw himself Final Rejection of Saul, 8 7 standing, Saul is driven to the confession : ' I have sinned because I feared the people and obeyed their voice. Now, therefore, I pray thee, pardon my sin, and turn again with me that I may worship the Lord.' There was fire in the prophet's eye and scorn in his looks ; all his love changed into bitterness as he replied : ' I will not return with thee ; for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.' Sacrifice was the chief thing in Saul's eyes. Like the people in Jeremiah's time, he counted burnt-offerings and peace-offerings the sum of the law. But he discovered, as they discovered, that ' to obey' precedes sacrifice (Jer. vii. 22). The scenes of Hebrew history, though always changing, were often the same in their general outlines. If the sacred writer had not recorded the tenderness of Samuel in crying to Jehovah all night for the king, a reader might think every gentle feeling was dead in the prophet's bosom. In the interview which took place between them, there is a sternness of language in Samuel, and an uncommon boldness of rebuke. Not a gleam of sympathy with his lost favourite, not a trace of joy at the success achieved over Amalek, forces its way through the darkness of this scene. The overturning of a throne, unwept and unpitied, is recorded. King and princes are going down before an avenger, whom the king himself called up. Saul attempted to shut his eyes to this dismal fact ; but Samuel compelled him to look it in the face. He is dethroned, he is doomed ; this he is made to feel and to know. But the sternness of Samuel goes hand in hand with his tenderness. And when these two feelings invite our judgment on the part he bore in this interview, there is but one thing to be said : while the prophet loved Saul much, he loved Jehovah more. Because he loved Saul much, he cried to God all night, striving to tiirn aside the sword of justice. When he failed, the greater love which he bore to Jehovah came into play. By Saul's SS The Kingdom of All-Isi^ael: its History, presumption, dishonour Avas done to his heavenly Master, His own love to Saul had met with an unworthy return. And thoucjhts of these thinc^s turn the sw^eetness of a lovin^^ nature into wormwood. By some such process the tenderness of Samuel changed into severity, as he looked on the flocks and herds which the army brought from the desert. A man whose sense of honour and whose love of truth are high, will speak more sharply to those he loves than we might think at all possible, when he finds them stooping to the dishonourable as the only way of covering a fault. Saul had stooped thus low in his dealings with Samuel. Not only did he maintain as a fact what he knew to be untrue, but when driven to make confession of his guilt, he cast the blame off himself on his soldiers. Samuel's heart was moved, by these unkingly doings, to clothe his feelings in words of sudden and sharp re- buke. It must also be borne in mind that Saul did not destroy Amalek, as he professed to have done. Before many years elapsed, these freebooters were again plundering Judah, and one of them was a slave in the Hebrew army at the battle in which Saul lost his crown and his life. Their strength may have been broken, but enough was left to terrify Judah when its soldiers were called elsewhere to fight their country's battles. Three of Jesse's sons are known to have followed Saul to the border during the campaign in wdiich Goliath fell. David only was at home, and four sons remain unaccounted for. Evidently they were on duty somewhere, most probably in the south against Amalek. And when Saul was encamped on Mount Gilboa, a destroying band of these rovers burst from the desert on the unprotected south country. Saul had not executed his commission; his boast was an untruth designed to cover a breach of orders. Having delivered his message, Samuel turned his back on the fallen prince, determined to quit the camp. But Saul, seizing hold of his mantle, attempted to detain him. In haste to leave a man towards wdiom bitterness had taken the Fmal Rejection of Saul. 89 place of love, the prophet hurried away. The loose skirt of the robe, on which Saul had laid hold, was torn in the struggle. Indignant at this breach of dignity, Samuel turned on the king : * The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine that is better than thou.' Stunned, it would seem, by the suddenness of a blow which was dashing to the ground every remnant of hope, the humbled prince besought the prophet not to disOTace him before the elders of Israel : ' I have sinned ; yet honour me now, I pray thee, before the elders of my people, and before Israel, and turn again with me, that I may worship the Lord thy God.' A request so reasonable was not refused. The rending of the mantle, the sharpness of the rebuke, and the humility of the king's prayer, cooled Samuel's anger as quickly as it had grown hot. But several were probably standing by who witnessed the king's fall. Some of his officers may have seen and heard all that passed. In course of time the story of this interview, with the rending of the mantle and of the kingdom, would pass from mouth to mouth as a whispered secret, till it became the talk of the whole nation. Samuel yielded to the prayers of Saul, but it was to act according to his own views, not to humour king or people. Of worship and thanks for the victory the briefest mention is made. ISTor was a feast such as Saul intended possible, for the flocks and herds were accursed. After the worship, Samuel ordered Acja^ to be brou^lit forward. He came cheerfully, congratulating himself that the bitterness of death was past. Expecting to be received with respect, he finds himself face to face with death. ' As thy sword hath made women childless,' exclaimed his judge, ' so shall thy mother be childless among women.' And the soldiers standing by cut him in pieces. The king's disobedience had laid this terrible necessity on the prophet. Gilgal, the scene of friendship between Samuel and Saul in days bygone, thus witnessed the rending 90 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. of all tlie ties that bound them to one. another. The prophet withdrew to his own house to pray for the helpless prince, but he visited him no more. Saul also shunned the company of Samuel. Flatterers appear to have gained the king's ear, and to have set him against the prophet. Threats also seem to have been spoken by them, which alarmed Samuel for his life. Instead of being softened by the calamities w^hich were gathering round their sovereign, the courtiers became desperate. In the king, the beginnings of that madness which clouded his later years were alreadv working^, unknown to himself and to his servants. Disobedience to his superior led to tyranny of the worst kind toward his inferiors. But the two together unhinged his mind, till his insanity became a danger to every one who opposed his wishes. The story of the war with Amalek points back to the past as well as forward to the future. Xo reader even of our English translation can fail to discover in it the echo of words and ideas familiar to him in the Pentateuch : ' To obey the voice of Jehovah,' ' To do right or to do evil in the eyes of Jehovah,' and 'To be rejected' of Him, are phrases which would alone suffice to prove the existence of Exodus and Deuteronomy when the story was written. This is not denied now. Historical doubt has taken another and a more singular turn. The story is assumed to have been either inserted as it stands, or greatly embellished by a very late writer. Of this there is no proof. But the echo of a part of the story, heard afterwards in Hebrew history, justifies a reader in considering the story itself as containing an echo of earlier times. Samuel's rent robe indicated the rending of the kingdom. In the same way, though nearly a century later, the rending of Jeroboam's robe indicated the splitting up of Solomon's empire. An idea so similar in two cases, far apart in time, points to one as the original and the other as a copy. History frequently repeats itself on similar lines to these. Even the rebuke of Saul by Samuel is made more I Final Rejection of SaiiL 9 1 forcible by a quotation which it contains from the Song of Moses in the book of Deuteronomy : * To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams/ The burning of the fat by the priests is not the only reference to the law in these six Hebrew words, important though it is in its bearing on the existence of Leviticus at that time ; * fat of rams ' is found elsewhere only in the song (Deut. xxxii. 14): 'With fat of lambs and of rams.' It is impossible to get rid of these and other coincidences of phrase as accidental. They are nerves of life running through the history, and giving feeling to every part. If they be taken away, the history is reft of its life. It becomes a machine, wound up to go through certain movements, but destitute of the living action which marks this narrative. We have seen also in Samuel's words, ' To obey is better than sacrifice,' the original of one of Solomon's proverbs. As there is no doubt about the writer of that proverb, there should be none about the currency of the history of Saul in his day. The destruction of Amalek is one of those incidents in Hebrew history which is sometimes thought to leave a stain on the moral code of the people by whom it was effected. Like the slaughter of the Midianites by order of Moses, and the destruction of the Canaanites by Joshua, it forms an outstanding difficulty, which seems to conflict with tlie divine authority of Scripture. Perhaps, also, not a few shrink from regarding the command to utterly destroy Amalek as a command issued by Him who doeth good even to the unthankful and the unworthy. A wdiole nation is doomed to destruction, apparently for a fault committed by their fore- fathers four hundred years before. That doom is uttered by the Judge of all the earth. And the king, to whom the execution of it was entrusted, is deposed from his throne because he spared the head man of the nation, and did not cut the flocks and herds in pieces. These are the facts of the case. Humanity, it will be said, shudders at the command, 92 The Kingdom of All-Isi^ael : its History. at the slaughter, and at tlie doom of the hapless monarch. These breathings of humanity are sometimes turned into words. The Most High could have had no share in these transactions, and the book which sanctions them cannot be a revelation of His will. Or, if any be unwilling to speak so freely, they stop short on the ground that this slaughter was a result of customs which produced in the Hebrews a harsh- ness of manners condemned by our Lord Himself. In examining the morality of the destruction of Amalek, the number of men and women slain has nothing whatever to do with the principle in question. It makes no difference whether a hundred encampments were sacked, or only one ; whether ten thousand men were killed, or only one, if Saul had no right to invade and slaughter. A whole tribe destroyed, a whole nation blotted from the roll of mankind at one swoop, bulks more largely in our eyes than the slaughter of a few. But supposing there were no valid grounds for the destruction, there could be no difference in principle between ordering the killing of one innocent man and of ten thousand, or between the sacking of one encampment and the sacking of a hundred. So far as the principle of Amalek's destruction is concerned, the number of the slain does not require con- sideration. It may make the ruin bulk more largely in a reader's eyes ; but, if the principle be right, the heaps of dead have nothing more to do with the matter than hundreds or thousands of slain with the principle on which a war is waged in modern times. But further, this shrinking from the doom of the guilty is not a new thing in the world's history. It is older than the Hebrew nation itself. When the Most High made known His purpose to destroy the Cities of the Plain, Abraham, moved by the same stirrings of humanity, which we are apt to regard as the peculiar glory of our age, interceded for them. Human nature, as represented by the patriarch, shrank from the destruction. A feeling of wrong about to Final RejectioJi of SatcL 9 3 be done took hold of him at the thought of a whole com- inunity being suddenly swept off the earth. He struggled hard to keep that feeling down. He dared not clothe it in words, as the men of our time do. But mildly and sadly he so pleaded as to discover his thoughts. This feeling of humanity, therefore, is not a new thing. With our present knowledge, and in our present state, it is almost a necessity of human nature. But another feeling: has been c^iven to men to check the too vigorous workings of mere pity. In Abraham's case, we hear the counter feeling speaking when he asks himself, ' Shall not the Judi^e of all the earth do right ? ' A sense of justice and feelings of pity are thus allowed full play in Abraham's bosom. The latter are more vehement than the former, they hurry us away, they cloud our judgment. They look to only one side of a case, while justice requires us to understand and carefully to weigh both sides. With feeling there is an excitement which disturbs or darkens reason ; with justice there must be calmness of judgment. Far higher than feelings of humanity, there may be, though unknown to us, a justice requiring the infliction of a punishment, which our pity shrinks from as harsh or terrible. Knowing all the facts on both sides of the case, it is able to judge without the partiality which arises from the excitement of pity. The Judge of all the earth takes this dispassionate view. Men neither do, nor can. Seeing the destruction of a whole race, they judge as they would not judge were the sufferer one man guilty of crime. Pity is not allowed to interfere with justice when a traitor, or a spy, or a murderer meets his fate. But an all-knowing judge may treat nations and races precisely as men treat their fellows who have been guilty of crime. This is the position taken by Hebrew historians. It is a reasonable position ; one, too, which can be defended and vindicated on principles of the highest morality. As a man is to his fellow-men for reward or punishment, so may a nation be to God. 94 ^'^^^ Kingdom of All- Israel: its History, The present age cannot, then, take credit to itself for having advanced in refinement beyond these ancient Hebrews. Abraham, unquestionably, felt as we feel, and spoke as we would speak. The patriarch, indeed, seems to bear the character of a representative man in his interview with the Most High. He speaks for men generally, urging his plea on the purely human ground of pity for the doomed. He brings forward precisely the same arguments as are urged now to throw doubt on the morality of the destruction of nations by command of Heaven. In answer to his pleadings, feelings of pity are allowed to have full play. Step by step humanity carries Abraham into a region where feeling and ignorance would lead him into error. Divine justice silences the promptings of pity, and in so doing warns men to remember that there is a Judge whose sense of justice, arising from full knowledge of facts, may often do violence to man's mistaken pity. There are no other grounds on which the morality of Amalek's destruction can be placed. The customs of the age, and the harshness of manners among the Hebrews, furnish no explanation. God Himself commanded Moses to record the sin and the doom of the freebooters ; and God Himself commanded Samuel to send Saul on the work of destruction. The moral code of the Hebrews, the blood feuds, and other customs of the age, do not therefore come into play here, nor can they in any measure soften the apparent harshness of the doom of Amalek. Human pity looks at but one side of the case. It has not that knowledge of the other side — the guilt of the offenders — which enables divine justice to pass judg- ment without bias. CHAPTEE V. LAW AND LEGISLATION AMONG THE HEBREWS. There is one remarkable fact in Hebrew history wliicli seems to have been overlooked. At no time during the five centuries covered by the monarchy (1100-588 B.C.) is a word said of a body of laws enacted or codified by any of the kings. That silence of the writers who have recorded the rise and fall of the kingdom is made more impressive by the one law, and the only one, which is ascribed to a king — David's regulation for dividing the spoils of battle between the army in the field and its baggage guard. A thing so small in itself brings into bolder relief the fact of no prince either introducing new laws into the country, or reducing old customs to writing and giving them the force of law. Evidently a law code existed before a king filled the throne of Israel. At the choice of a king for the first time, Samuel the prophet acts the part of a lawgiver ; but never, except in the one instance referred to, are Hebrew princes represented as exercising this office. They make no show in liistory save as administrators or breakers of a code of laws already in existence. A position so singular is filled by the kings of no other nation whose annals have come down to our time. Of the power of law among the Hebrews too much cannot be said. Their proverbs, their popular speech, their songs, and the events of their daily life are full of its praises. Everywhere is seen the reign of law. But the rulers never pride themselves on, making new or codifying old laws. They build and endow a magnificent temple, they restore a neglected worship, they repair a temple that has been burned or has fallen into ruins. Tliev rearrange the recognised 96 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature. ministers of religion according to their ideas of what is fitting and honourable ; they fortify cities and equip armies at their will, or according to their ability. But we never see them ordaining new laws, or altering old laws to meet the changing needs of society. Always do they appear as if their hands, quite as much as those of their subjects, were tied by an existing code. A law of the land, given before kings began to rule, seems to have stood high above both throne and people. Unquestionably, a relation so unusual, subsisting for five centuries, is a peculiarity which distinguishes Hebrew history from the history of every other people. No romancer could have invented the idea of laws, once given, remaining unchanged, without addition and without subtraction. Still less could a series of historians have imagined the idea of subjection to these ancient law^s in a race of princes, some of whom were conquerors, some tyrants, and some obstinate to their own and to their people's ruin. To call this the result of a designed concealnxient of facts is an incredible explanation of the silence. The writers had nothing to conceal. They knew that these kings dared not add to or alter the people's law-book. Part of it might be set at defiance for a time, but their pages showed the ruinous consequences of this course, and the power of the law to vindicate its majesty. These writers recognised certain well-marked boundaries, within which the national code confined both king and people. Fullest freedom of action w^as allowed to them if they did not overstep these limits ; no freedom whatever was given to either prince or people to travel beyond. We must therefore go to the history itself to ascertain the beginning and completion of the law code which attained to this paramount rule in the nation. A law-book, once given and remaining unchanged for centuries, is pronounced an impossibility. But theoretical views of the possible or the impossible have no place in the matter. "We are dealing only with facts, and these carry us back for the beginning of a law-book to the sojourn of the people in Egypt. Law and Legislation among the Hebrews. 97 When the Israelites were marching to Mount Sinai, it required uncommon forethought and practical knowledge in the leaders to keep order among a host so numerous and so unaccustomed to freedom as the Hebrews were. Born and brought up in bondage, they did not at once become free in mind, as they became free in body. Into the free ways of free men the vast bulk of the nation carried the thoughts and feelings of slaves. Their sudden deliverance from hard task- masters only gave room for fuller play to the slave habits, the littleness, the trifling, in which their lives had been nursed. Apparently the two leaders, who had fought the battle for them with Pharaoh, had none to rely on for preserving order and maintaining justice among the fugitives but the elders and the judges (Ex. xxi. 22), whom the experience of a few days proved to be worthless. Assault, theft, quarrel, smiting to the death, losses from accident or design, straying of cattle, goring by oxen, were certain to occur among the people as they fled before the Egyptians. Possibly, however, the twelve months which preceded their deliverance gave Moses time and food for thought, if they were not meant to prepare him for the troubles of leadership. From Egypt, also, they carried with them a body of national customs, which had been the growth of centuries in that land, or which, having sprung up in Palestine under the patriarchs, had slowly received additions in Goshen. To suppose that Moses, as a lawgiver, worked on virgin soil, and that the people he commanded had no law code, either written or traditional, when he was placed at their head, is too wild an idea to be entertained. The Hebrews took down to Egypt with them a body of divinely sanctioned laws or customs, adapted to their needs. They also took a similar body of laws and customs with them into the desert under Moses. Common sense recognises these as first principles. A vague idea seems to prevail that Moses found no ties among them to bind society together ; that he was the giver, or the supposed giver, of every law ; and that till he 98 The Kingdom of A 1 1- Israel: its Literature. spoke the words none of tliem knew his own rights or duties. To put this idea in writing is sufficient to show its futility. It is the same as if we should propose to reduce the Hebrews below the level of savages. With the laws which the people took with them into the desert, no one was better acquainted than Moses. Oricjinatinfr in the land of Canaan, to which the fugitives were bound, they had been tested by experience in the somewhat similar land of Egypt, which had harboured their fathers for ages. Time and custom, working with the divine sanction, had given them a binding force on the con- science of every family in the nation. To write down offhand a complete law-book for two or three millions of men, and to work its statutes into their hearts immediately, was not the problem before Moses during the flight from Egypt ; he taught them ' tlu ordinances and tlie laws' (Ex. xviii. 20), the ancient ' statutes of God.' Before they have been two months out from Egypt their leader is seen toiling from morning to night, dispensing justice among his quarrelsome followers. Jethro, a desert chief, sees the endless toil; he knows it cannot last ; and advises the appointment of a graduated series of judges, who should take this unbearable weight off their leader's shoulders. These judges, small as well as great, had the same ancestral laws and customs to appeal to as Moses himself. Justice would be best dispensed if they had a written code before them, which the education, the training, the habits of their leader, made it likely he would furnish — a transcript of ancestral customs, common law as it is called in England. New cases were certain to emerge in the new circumstances, but ancient rules would suffice in the great body of suits that might arise. The Five Books contain these ancient laws and customs of the Hebrews. However much they may be disguised by new legislation, which a more formal worship and the changed position of the people made necessary, we shall find them in the Pentateuch. The man who was first told to commit them to writing, though he need Lazv and Legislation among the Hebrews. 99 not have first delivered them, may have been the lawgiver of the Hebrews. Justinian and Napoleon were lawgivers, although they did little more than commission learned men to reduce to order laws and customs which had existed ages before their day. If, then, we examine the book of laws which follows the promulgation of the Ten Commandments (Ex. xxi.-xxiii.), we shall find only a small part of it bearing on the reason given for the people quitting Egypt, ' to hold a feast unto the Lord in the wilderness.' But that section of the code is too elementary to be regarded as aught higlier than the beginnings of legislation on national worship. Unless there be good evidence to the contrary, we may therefore consider this book as one which the people largely used in their land of bondage. It lays down the relations between man and man in the ever- changing circumstances of life ; but while it contains nothing peculiarly applicable to Palestine, it introduces and omits arrangements which point rather to Egypt, if not as its birth- place, at least as long its field of operation. Ex. XXI. Ex. XXII. Ex. XXI Hebrew men slaves, 1-6 — — Hebrew women slaves, . 7-11 — — rl2-15 ies, . -? 18-28 (26, 27 — — Assault, degrees of, and penalt — — — — Law of retaliation, . . 23-25 — — AVresting of justice, — — 6-9 Theft of men, . 16 — — Theft of beasts and goods, — 1-5, 7, 8 — Respect to superiors, 17 28 — Accidents — oxen, . . 28-36 — — Fire-raising, . — 6 — Deposits, — 7-13 — Hires, .... — 14,15 — Seduction, — 16,17 — Witchcraft and idolatry. — 18-20 — Strangers, widows, etc., . — 21-24 — Usury, .... — 25-27 — Firstlings and first-fruits, — 29,30 — Torn flesh, — 31 — Laws of good citizenship. — — 1-5 Sabbatic year and day, . — — 10-13 Feasts, .... — — 14-19 lOO The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Literature. The sections in this code are not always kept distinct in the division according to verses. ' Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk,' has no reLation to the section preceding (Ex. xxiii. 14-19). Had it formed a line or a verse by itself, as it obviously ought, some misapprehension would have been avoided. There is not one enactment in the code, which might not have been in force among Hebrew villagers and shepherds on the banks of the Nile, even to the annual feasts — religious assemblies which are well known to have been common in Egypt. According to Graf, it represents the Hebrews as not only settled in Palestine, but in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the country. But he goes farther. From the word 'ruler' (Ex. xxii. 28) he infers that a king is meant, — a large assumption, although there is nothing to prevent us applying it to the kings of Egypt, who had sheltered Israel for generations, — and, from other parts of the code, that the X^eople were living in peace with strangers about them. With but one exception, these views seem perfectly just : Palestine is not mentioned in the code. Twice are the people reminded, * Ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.' But between that reminder and the ascription of conquered Palestine as the birthplace of the code, there is a wide gulf. To add the reminder to an ancient code, when it was ratified at Horeb, was most natural, and will sufficiently explain its presence. On the other hand, the mention of houses and door-posts proves that this law-book did not originate in the wilder- ness— the land of tents, not of houses. The laws relating to slaves contemplate none but those of Hebrew blood, sold by fathers, or bought, it may be, from creditors. Had these laws originated in Canaan, this narrow- ness of view would be unintelligible. A people in undisturbed possession of their country and enjoying the blessings of plenty, would, in that age of the world, have had other slaves than their own countrymen and countryw^omen. But the code speaks of Law and Legislation among the Hebreius. loi none else. Evidently the state of things contemplated in it is more applicable to Egypt, the house of Hebrew bondage, than to Palestine, the home of Hebrew freedom. Pharaoh, jealous of the strength of Israel, would not allow the people to increase their numbers, by purchasing prisoners brought from foreign parts, or slaves sold in an open market. Their own country- men they might purchase, slave grinding slave still lower, in furtherance of the king's pLan to destroy the might of the Hebrews ; for all the Hebrews in Egypt were not on the same level of bondage to Pharaoh. All were subject to Egypt, and all were oppressed ; but even then there were various decfrees of wealth and various ranks amonoj the Israelites. It ought not, therefore, to cause surprise, if we find the richer families buying and the poorer selling their own kindred. The omissions in the code appear to be remarkable. The code says nothing about boundaries of private lands, — if there were such in Goshen, — or thefts of ground by removing boundary stones. An open country, unfenced and undivided, is clearly contemplated in this most ancient law-book. On the other hand, the book of Deuteronomy is particularly strong on an act so dangerous to the peace of an agricultural community as the removal of a boundary : ' Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which former men set in thine inherit- ance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the Lord thy God giveth thee to possess it,' and ' Cursed be he that removeth his neighbour's landmark' (Deut. xix. 14; xxvii. 17). As this law became the source of a proverb in Solomon's reign, the change of words made on it brings clearly out the effect of time in modi- fying the view taken : ' Thou shalt not remove a landmark of antiquity, which thy fathers made.' There is slight mention of antiqidty or fathers in the law as first given. A code, which had been in force in Egypt, could say nothing about land- marks, which would also hold true of Palestine ; for between the mud dykes of the Nile country and the rocky fragments of Palestine there was nothing in common. Besides, the 102 The Kingdovi of All-Is7'acl : its Literature, falling in of the banks of the great river, and the sweeping away at times of the dykes or other fainter boundary lines of estates, rendered it necessary to have recourse to surer means of measurement than any, which then sufficed for countries bordering on Egypt. In other ancient law-books prominence is justly given to questions aff'ecting the boundary marks of private lands.^ A recent discovery of boundary stones, covered with writing, shows the importance attached to them as far back as 1175 B.C., even in the alluvial lands of Baby- lonia." And in the famous Athenian law-code (594 B.C.), the lawgiver Solon laid down the distances at which walls and houses required to be built, or olives and other trees planted on either side, an authority Avhich the Twelve Tables of Eome afterwards followed. The omission of both the word and the thing in this Hebrew law-book is therefore not without meaning. On the sale or mortgaging of land, the code in Exodus is equally silent. Private property is recognised, — sheep, oxen, or any beast, clothes, corn, * money or stuff,' — but not one word is said about private estates, which men could sell to others or pawn for a temporary loan. But arrangements for raising money on land were unavoidable in a country divided, as Palestine was, into innumerable small properties, occupied by the owners themselves. There is, therefore, something unusual in the silence of this ancient law-book on that subject. It seems to point not to the existence of private estates as in Canaan, but to a common possession of a wliole district, which was at first certainly the condition on which tlie Hebrews received Goshen from Pharaoh. The Israelites may not have had private estates in Egypt. But they did possess private estates in Canaan, and detailed arrangements were made in their law- book for buying and selling, for transfers, and for mortgages. ^ Wordsworth, Fragvients and Specimens of Early Latin, 258. 2 For a recital of the boundaries of estates in Egypt, see Brugsch, Egypt under the Pharaohs, ii. 174. Law and Legislation among the Llebrews, 103 So miicli the more singular is the silence of their oldest law code on these subjects. A third point about this code is the vagueness of its dealing with vines and olives. The vineyard is mentioned three times, in a way so cursory as to suggest doubts of much acquaintance with it among the people. The olive, again, is dismissed in a single word. How different with the corn ! Take one example in proof from the law of lire-raising : ' If fire break out and catch in thorns, so that the stacks (heaps) of corn, or the standing corn, or the field be consumed therewith, he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution' (see Judges XV. 5). A vineyard in Egypt was a luxury, fenced in with walls and guarded by gates and bars.^ But in Palestine it was a common tiling. Even in the deserts of that country, the long miles of rough walls for training the vines still show how plentiful and how common the grape was among the Hebrews. This luxury of Egyptian kings and nobles w^as promised to the children of Israel before they escaped from bondage ; it was used afterwards to taunt their great leader with : ' Thou hast not brought us into a land that floweth with milk and honey, or given us inheritance of fields and vineyards' (Num. xvi. 14). Besides, the very use of the words for standing corn and vineyards is peculiar. ' Six years shalt thou prune thy vineyard and gather in the fruit thereof exhibits the sort of acquaintance with grapes shown in the books of Exodus and Leviticus. It is theoretical, not practical But, in Deuteronomy, a living thing is before a reader, not merely the letter of a law : * We will not turn into the fields or into the vineyards,' said the Hebrew messengers to Sihon and Edom when pleading for right of way through their countries ; and, ' When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou may est eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure ; ' or, as if to condemn the Egyptian custom of plant- ing various sorts of trees in their luxurious vineyards, ' Thou ^ Wilkinson, Anc. Egx/p.^ i. 377. I04 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature, shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds.' ^ Since there is but slight mention made of the vine and the olive in the Exodus law-book, they were not, up to that time, or had not been, of practical value in the eyes of the Hebrew people. Although gardens, containing fruit trees and vines, were not uncommon in Egypt, strangers seem to have seen little of them, for early Greek writers did not consider Egypt a grape country. Vineyards were manifestly things of luxury and not in common use. In Palestine, again, the vine and the olive w^ere almost necessities of life. When, therefore, the Hebrews left Egypt, they had a code of laws or customs with them, which we cannot be far wrong in identifying with the precepts contained in Ex. xxi.-xxiii. They were acquainted with sacrifices also — peace-offerings and burnt-offerings — from a remote antiquity. Even ' Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God' (Ex. xviii. 12) before they reached Sinai. Clearly, then, they must have had altars of some kind. The law or custom followed in building them was probably the same as that in Exodus : * An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt-offerings and thy peace-offerings. And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone ; for if thou lift up thy tool upon it thou hast polluted it.' But there was growth or development in this law, for an addition was made to it at the end of the fugitives' wilderness wanderings : ' Thou shalt not set up to thee an image of any wood beside the altar of Jehovah thy God wliich thou shalt make for thyself ; and thou shalt not raise for thee a stone pillar, which the Lord thy God hateth ' (Deut. xvi. 21, 22). When that addition was made, Israel ^ Num. xxi. 22, xx. 17 ; Deut. xxiii. 24, xxii. 9, vi. 11. The words for standing corn and vineyards occur eleven times in Deuteronomy, and eight times in Exodus and Leviticus together. As vineyards are named four times in Numbers, which recounts the passage of Hebrews through a grape country, we have to add them to the eleven of Deuteronomy. It was theory in Exodus and Leviticus ; it was sight in Numbers and Deuteronomy. Law and Legislation among the Hebrews, 105 was in a country abounding with idolatrous pillars, both wood and stone. They were not heard about; they were seen. Abominations were connected with them, which made the addition necessary to the old altar law. Pillars such as it allowed were no longer permitted. Even the name ' pillar/ though used by Jacob and Moses, ceased to be a word of honour in the Hebrew tongue. It was a doubtful term at the best (2 Sam. xviii. 18). A memorial pillar was no longer called by that word. ' Hand ' or ' Place,' as our version translates the new word, was preferred. ' Absalom's hand,' or ' Saul set him up a hand,' are two examples of this use. Hence the distinction in the law-book, ' A pillar which Jehovah hateth.' There were pillars which He did hate : there were others which He did not hate. The same word expressed both kinds ; but gradually the idolatrous kind secured the word mainly to itself. Quite in keeping with both this law and the addition to it, therefore, is the record of an altar which Moses is said to have ' builded under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel ' (Ex. xxiv. 4). These twelve stone symbols, standing round a central altar, betokened unity of faith as the surest bond of the rescued people. But he did more than build an altar and pillars. He sent certain young Hebrews to act as priests in offering sacrifices. Moses him- self, officiating as high priest, sprinkled half of the blood on the altar, and sprinkled the people with the other half, after he had ' read the book of the covenant in the audience of the people.' This book contained the Ten Commandments (Ex. XX. 1-17) and the law code, which extends from Ex. xx. 22 to Ex. xxiii. 33. Immediately after comes a record of the writing out of ' all the words of the Lord,' the building of the altar, and the ratification of the covenant by Moses as priest (Ex. xxiv. 7). The story is thus full of instruction. ' Pillar ' and ' priest ' are used in it in ways that were modified or for- bidden at a later period. Each word thus came to have two io6 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature. meanings in the written record. ' Priest ' in this narrative evidently means a young man of the highest rank in society. It was the same as first-born when used of the young chief of a family, or a collection of separate households. Prince or iiohle is the corresponding word in our language. It retained that meaning for ages afterwards, though it was gradually lost in the increasing glories of ' the priests the Levites.' Even pillars, which Jehovah did not hate, were found near the altar, when heathenism ceased to be a snare to the people. At the north side of the altar in the second temple were eight dwarf pillars, with a cedar beam over them.-^ But, while the narrative shows the familiarity of the people with the idea of priests, this law code neither mentions the name nor assigns them revenues. It existed and was in operation before the Leviti- cal priests were heard of. But a serious objection to the authority of this ancient code is frequently urged. The laws, thus said to be ratified by Heaven on Sinai, are declared to be contradicted by laws, which were given forty years after in Deuteronomy on the plains of Moab. Both sets of laws cannot, therefore, have come from God ; one .or both must be the growth of man's experience and man's wants. The whole thing, then, resolves itself into a question of fact : Are there contradictions between the two sets of laws ? Let us take the following as a speci- men, one also that has been strongly insisted on : — Ex. XXII. 31. Deut. xiy. 21. ' Ye shall be holy men unto me ; * Ye shall not eat anything that dieth neither shall ye eat flesh torn of beasts of itself ; thou shalt give it unto the in the field ; ye shall cast it to the stranger that is in thy gates, that he dogs.' may eat it ; or thou mayest sell it unto an alien ; for thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God.' The two laws refer to similar things, or rather, the one is an explanation of the other. But a look at the original Hebrew discovers a letter added by our translators to the Exodus law, 1 Barclay, Talmud, 261. I Law and Legislation among the Hebreius, 107 which has gone far to obscure the meaning. ' Ye shall cast it to the dogs/ they have put, instead of, ' Ye shall cast it to the dog.' The whole dispute, then, turns upon the meaning of ' the dog.' Had the words been, ' Ye shall cast it to your dogs,' the mean- ing would have been plain. But in one of these codes we have the law. Thou shalt not bring the price of a dog into the house of the Lord (Deut. xxiii. 18), which cannot evidently mean a dog in the literal acceptation of the word. ISTo more can the word be so taken in the common phrases, * A dead dog,' ' Am I a dog to do this thing ?' ' A dog's head,' and so forth. ' The dog ' clearly means any one who is not holy as the Hebrews are, that is, stransjers and aliens. The law then runs thus : Ye shall be holy men unto me ; neither shall ye eat flesli torn of beasts in the field ; ye shall cast it to the unholy, that is, to any one of another race from you, to stranger or alien. As soon as we put ourselves in the position of those who at first received this law, all semblance of contradiction between the two codes disappears. This most ancient code of Hebrew laws reveals a people far advanced in civilisation. Private righting of injury is not allowed, except, manifestly, in the case of wilful murder ; but even then it is kept within bounds by the intervention of a higher authority. Magistrates take up the quarrel raised by wrong-doing. The state, of which they are the embodiment, stands between the sufferer and the wrong-doer, takes charge of the offender, and lays down the punishment. It does not look on with unconcern when a wrong is done, or when tlie injured cry for justice. A masterful man could do what he pleased in the heroic age of ancient Greece, till he met wdtli one more masterful than himself. The widows' and the orphans' cries were then unheeded. Hebrew law abhorred this indifference to right. It threw a shield around the weak, the helpless, the unprotected. It defied the strongest to set its commands at naught. It warned him of a mightier than the mightiest, who regarded the tears of the oppressed, with io8 The Kingdom of All- 1 S7'acl\ its Lite7^ature. full purpose of avenging their wrongs. The state is taken bound to discharge these duties as the representative of this mightiest of overseers. This law-book, therefore, does not bind men together as members of society by an agreement to adopt the best plan for securing their own protection, or their own interest, or the greatest happiness of the greatest number. There is nothing abstruse or philosophical in its arrangements. It is intensely practical; it may even be called so common- place as to be level to the understanding of the humblest reader. A higher power is recognised at work in the world, rewardinsf the cjood and returnimjj evil to the evil. Eiohteous- ness, not self-interest or • mere utility, binds society together, and is ever striven against by the passions of evil-doers. All magistrates and judges are taught to look beyond themselves to a Judge, who shall weigh their actings in the balance of purest justice. A view of society so simple is apt to be thought little of, because it is the view with which all are familiar in Britain. But Hebrew statesmen held that view more than three thousand years ago. And they held it in a fulness and purity unknown to the world at large, till within the last half century (Ex. xxi. 6 ; xxii. 7, 8, 10, Heb.). This law code is sometimes compared with the laws of the Twelve Tables at Piome, which were the gathered wisdom of Greece and of the Italian states, a thousand years later than the exodus. Several laws in the two codes are the same, or almost the same ; but in breadth of view and in humaneness of feeling, the Hebrew far surpasses the Eoman. It was not a heavy yoke, thrust by a few above on toiling thousands below ; nor was it the work of these thousands, bursting the chains of oppressors, and claiming for themselves something of justice and fair-play. On its face it bears proof of an honest desire to lighten the load of ill in man's life, by guard- ing the rights of the weak against the strong, and by dis- pensing to great and small the even-handed justice of heaven. Degrading punishments were not known to this ancient law- Law and Legislation among the Hebrews. 109 book of Israel. Tree men might be scourged for crimes, for those who had disgraced their position as citizens forfeited its rights. But the outrages on humanity tolerated by Koman law in the prisons of rich men, or in the army, were unknown in Israel. Unfortunate debtors in Eome were deprived of every right of manhood and citizenship by creditors, who were often the guiltier of the two. Officers of standing in her con- quering legions could be caned by their superiors, as were the common soldiers. Torture also, as a means of discovering the truth in legal proceedings, w^as entirely absent from Hebrew history. Cruelties, which have disgraced the most civilized nations of modern Europe, were not condemned, because they were wholly unknown in Israel. ' My son, give glory to God,' that is, ' confess,' is the only torture read of in the Old Testa- ment, applied by a judge to a criminal. It was the most sacred appeal, which could be addressed to a wrong-doer's conscience. Egypt w^as in this respect less advanced in civi- lisation than Palestine. Even the exposure of dead bodies on the gibbet, beyond the day of execution, was forbidden in the Mosaic law. The sorrowful story of Eizpali in David's reign is an exception which proves the rule. How different from the state of things in our own country little more than half a century ago ! The streets of London, the roads leading to it, and the river Thames were then barbarously defiled by the bleaching skulls and bones of dead criminals, exposed to the public gaze for a terror to evil-doers. We do not wish to keep out of view a well-known and opposite side to this account of Hebrew civilisation, as seen in the law-book. The wholesale slaughter of Midian, the curse on Amalek, the root- ing out of the Canaanites, are problems in moral philosophy, which have drawn down on the Hebrew law^giver condemna- tion for barbarity. But it is most unjust to study these problems without regard to the legislation of which he was the author. His critics may have viewed them from a posi- tion which he knew as well as they, but may have refused to I lo The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Literature, occupy. His laws ought to be considered as a whole ; for it may turn out that the acts condemned as inhuman prove to be justifiable in the light of facts. Set over against these problems, which have two sides, laws for all time like the following, wliich have but one side, and are found together in a cluster in the law-book : ' Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself ; ' ' The stranger, thou shalt love him as thyself ; ' * Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure ; ' ' The wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night till morning' (Lev. xix. 13, 18, 34, 35). The course of the legislation thus begun at Sinai was broken in upon by a most untoward event — the casting of the golden calf. As a fault is in geology, parting the strata, and bringing their faces to an abrupt end against the faces of other strata, so that event w^as to the course of Mosaic legis- lation. What preceded it was parted from what followed by a violent interference, coming from an unlooked-for quarter. The whole le^^islation had to be done over acjjain. The broken tables of the law had to be renewed ; the written conditions had to be repeated, at least in their principal parts, if the covenant was to stand. In this renewal of the covenant several of its provisions are repeated word for word. We have no reason to be surprised at these repetitions. They occur in other ancient writings as well as in Exodus. But there is a marked advance in the renewal over the statement originally made : ' The Lord descended in the cloud, and stood wath him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord.' Spiritual worship cannot exist along with molten gods. Evidently the Hebrews thought the two could live together, without the former receiving hurt from the latter. They discover now that this cannot be. The renewal of the cove- nant leaves them no room for doubt. This way of renewing the broken covenant is regarded as a suspicious proceeding. Eor 'in Ex. xxxiv. 17-26 there is a Law a7id Legislation aino7ig the Hebrews. 1 1 1 group of various legal precepts, which are found already standing together in the collection (chap, xxi.-xxiii.), and in part agreeing exactly and verbally, and these various laws are also to some extent connected together in just the same w^ay in both these passages.' Ultimately the repetition is pared down to less than half that number of verses ; but it is reckoned so ' surprising ' as to be an ' argument against the Mosaic authorship.' ^ If there is any force in the argu- ment, it comes to this : A history which records the making of a treaty, the breaking of it, and the renewal of it, cannot be genuine if, in the story of the renewal, it record again the main provisions of the treaty as first given ! Or, to ensure its genuineness, it must distinctly warn the reader of the reason for thus repeating these provisions. In other words, by supposing a reader to have the sense to discover for him- self the reasons of things, the history incurs the charge of not being genuine ; if it had warned the reader of reasons so plain, it would have been at once pronounced a forgery. So difficult is it to avoid the Scylla and Charybdis of criticism ! But there is another repetition of larger dimensions ready to the hand of an objector. The whole section of the book of Exodus, xxv.-xxxi. 17, respecting the building and appoint- ments of the tabernacle, is repeated, sometimes word for word and verse for verse, in the section of the same book, xxxv.- xxxix. The repetition is no longer three or four verses ; it is now five or six chapters. But there is even worse. The former of these two sections ends with a strongly expressed order to keep the Sabbath ; and the second of them begins with quoting and even expanding that order. Both of these orders are substantially repetitions of the fourth command- ment, already given on the arrival of the people at Sinai. But these repetitions prove nothing against the genuineness of the book. On the contrary, the author, acting as many other writers have acted, repeated sections of his work without 1 Bleek (Wellhausen), § 22 (84). 1 12 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its Literatui'e, thinking the repetitions would ever be quoted as grounds for denying his honesty or his existence. We come now to the legislation in the book of Leviticus. If we accept the statements of the book itself regarding the course of the legislation after the building of the tabernacle, we have a plain, and usually a clear narrative of facts. Should we reject these statements, we find ourselves in a labyrinth of doubt. Thus, on two pages of Block's Introduc- tion to the Old Testament (2d ed.), translated for the benefit of English readers, we have the following mixture of hesitating view, confident assertion, and condemnation of others respect- ing the laws in Leviticus.^ While he regards a large portion of the book of Leviticus to be Mosaic, and none of it as belonging to a later age than Saul's, he feels himself on such sinking sand, that his reasoning in the two pages referred to is a conglomerate of a most elastic nature. ' Perhaps ' occurs thrice in them ; probably, twice ; probable, twice ; very probable, twice ; likely, twice ; ' it may be maintained with certainty,' once ; ' tliis may be certainly assumed,' once ; ' we cannot analyze this book in detail with any certainty, but I think it is tolerably certain,' once. And no fewer than nine lines contain a hearty condemnation of De Wette's view, that ' the various parts of Leviticus were added gradually by different compilers.' ' This supposition,' he says, ' is quite inadmissible, and has been tacitly retracted even by De Wette himself.' Here, then, are thirteen ' probables ' in about seventy lines. For any practical purpose the reasoning is absolutely worth- less. A ' probable ' every five or six lines may prove a writer's inability to make up his mind ; it can never lead to definite and sure results. And yet Bleek, whose wide know- ledge of the subject is universally recognised, is a model of modesty and fairness in comparison with others who know much less. The book of Leviticus, like most of Exodus, and especially 1 Introd. i. 310, 311 (Leviticus). So in 4th eJ. "Wellhausen, § 55 (117). Law and Legislation among the Hebrews, 113 like Deuteronomy, contains the record of a brief space of time. While Exodus, from the twelfth chapter to the end of the book, narrates the events and tlie legislation of little more than eleven months, Leviticus and Deuteronomy contain the history of but one month each, at the beginning and at the end of the march to the Promised Land. What Leviticus does for the scientific or learned class, Deuteronomy does for the people generally ; each of them provides a handbook of rights and duties. In both cases the time seems to be the same, though Lev. xxv. 32-34 may have anticipated a law afterwards given by the lawgiver (Num. xxxv. 2). If any one finds cause for surprise at the rapid march of events in the later book, he will be equally surprised at the rapidity in the earlier. Or, if he entertain suspicions of undue crowding in the story of the one book, he must be prepared to admit similar suspicions in considering the other. A more cautious reader will rather feel disposed to regard the month of the one book as supporting the historical accuracy of a month in the other. ISTo writer of romance, or unhistorical history, would be so blind as to repeat an invention which would betray the inventor. Where Exodus ends, Leviticus begins ; where Leviticus ends, the book of Numbers begins. An order is observed which indicates unity of design, if not of authorship. By failing to see this order, and by arguing from facts which have no exist- ence, Bleek and Graf, and many others, have done grievous injustice to the author of the Pentateuch. Exodus ends with the setting up of the tabernacle. After preparing it and its furniture, the builders handed the whole over to Moses. He was to officiate as the high priest at first, for the priest's due from a sacrifice at the consecration of Aaron and his sons is specially assigned to him (Ex. xxix. 26). But the Levites proper, or the rest of the tribe, are not mentioned in Exodus as priests' assistants, nor even in the singular passage, xxxviii. 21. When the children of Levi are found in its pages. 1 14 The Kingdoin of A II- Israel : its Literature, the meaning is clear. The writer is speaking of the tribe as a whole, not of a part of it. ' The families of Levi ' occur twice, ' all the sons of Levi ' once, and ' the sons of Levi ' twice. Not a word is said about part of the tribe becoming priests' assistants, although this is assumed by many theorists. Nor are arrangements made in Exodus for taking the taber- nacle down. Leviticus finds it standing ; but priestly sacrifice requires a law-book for its regulation. Leviticus supplies that want. It deals chiefly with priestly duties ; indeed, the word priest occurs nearly one hundred and eighty times. Of a distinction among the members of the tribe of Levi the book does not s^ive the remotest hint. The word Levite occurs four times in a short section of three verses, and includes both ' priests and priests' assistants, in short, the whole of the tribe (Lev. XXV. 32-34). Leviticus ends with the tabernacle standing and priests officiating. The book of Numbers makes a step forward. It contains the arrangements for taking the tabernacle down, and for packing and carrying its furniture. Not a word has been said on these points before. Then also comes into view, for the first time, the distinction between 2)7'iests, sons of Aaron, and Levites, or the rest of the tribe of Levi. It is given in Num. iii. 5— 13, and is made the founda- tion of duties, which are fully detailed in two or three of the following chapters. Elsewhere the distinction is not broadly drawn. It is assumed, and it is built on in Deuteronomy; but it is not again broadly re23eated there. Leviticus insists on every animal slain for food, ' in the camj) or out of the camp,' being brought to the tabernacle door, and presented there as a sacrifice (Lev. xvii. 5). Deuteronomy advances a step farther. Wherever the animal was slaughtered in the country of the twelve tribes, it was to be counted a sacrifice, and part of it was to go as a tax, or offering, to the priests (Deut. xii. 15). Such, then, is the order of events in these books. Unless we keep it in sight, mistakes are certain to , arise. But such is not the view given by modern criticism. Law and Legislation among the Hebrews, 1 1 5 Speaking of Deuteronomy, Bleek (Wellhausen), § 62 (124), says : ' The Levites always appear in the preceding books, in a subordinate position only, as servants of the temple.' As they never so appear in Exodus and Leviticus, if, indeed, the rest of the tribe, as distinguished from the priests, appear in them at all, the grossness of this blunder might well shake all confidence in other results of the same writers. The book of Numbers is distinctly said to consist of two halves, with a long interval of years between. The one half, embracing the first nineteen chapters, belongs to the very beginning of the wilderness wanderings. The other half, or the remaining seventeen chapters, unquestionably belongs to their close. A gap of about thirty-eight years exists between these two halves. This gap is as great a source of offence to critics, as the rapid movement in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. It ought not to have been. No true historian would have allowed it to stand in his book without a bridge across, without plain intimation given that the chasm was there, and that no effort would be made to fill it up. Therefore it is argued the book of Numbers cannot be the handiwork of Moses, nor of any one who followed him through the wilder- ness. It may have been compiled three or five or ten cen- turies afterwards by an author, who strung together written pieces, which he found floating down the stream of time far apart, or who invented most of the book out of a lively imagination. Now it is not easy for any one, who knows the many gaps which exist in historical books without even the semblance of a bridge across, to comprehend this argument. If the writer of the book of Numbers considered it necessary to bury in oblivion the events of these thirty-eight years, he only did what every other writer would have done. These Hebrews had had their chance, and had thrown it away. Politically they were dead men in the eye of the historian Even their children did not receive the rite of circumcision, 1 Bleek (Wellliausen), § 28 (90). I 1 1 6 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature. the seal of the covenant. Civil death had passed on the camp of Israel (Josh. v. 5). A generation would elapse before they would sleep in their graves ; but to record their lives, their doings, their hopes, would have been a barren waste — a record of a race that had been effaced from the world. Lightning had struck the stock of the tree. A young shoot was growing up : thirty-eight years would be required before the blasted trunk would decay, and the young shoot attain to its most vigorous growth. Moses refused to write the history of the lightning-struck stock. The thread of the narrative could only be resumed when the chance, which the parent stock had thrown away, should be again given to its better offspring. Most justly, therefore, does the chasm exist, for the men, whose deeds would have been recorded, were dead men in the eye of the law, condemned to life-long imprisonment in that wilderness peninsula. The long gap, instead of being a proof of unreality in the history, proves, on the contrary, a deliberate desigjn in the author. But a gap in the history of Israel, or indeed of any nation, is not an unusual thing. Coming down to time which may be called recent and well known, we find two gaps of large extent following each other in the history of the Hebrews. From the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar to the return of the exiles in the reign of Cyrus, is an interval of about forty-seven years. The story of Daniel does not fill it up in any way ; nor has Jeremiah or Ezekiel done much to bridge it across. Another gap, as wide, follows, stretching from the building of the second temple (536-517 B.C.) to the appear- ance of Ezra at Jerusalem (460 B.C.). This wide gap of more than fifty years begins at the last verse of Ezra's sixth chapter, and ends with the first verse of the seventh. No indication of this great width is given to a careless reader, not a shadow of bridge spans the chasm to his eye, for the one chapter follows the other with the ordinary note of a continuation, ' Now after these thinojs.' The arsjument is therefore worth- Law and Legislation among the Hebrews. 117 less, which relies on the thirty-eight years' gap in the story of the wilderness wanderings. With as little reason can the story of the man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day be twisted into a proof of the late compilation of the book of Numbers.^ It begins thus : ' While the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day.' The note of time, * While they were in the wilderness,' seems to indi- cate that the story must have been written when they were out of the wilderness. There is no room for doubt on the subject. There is no discovery here ; far less is there a proof of the late editing or compiling of the book. But there is a very satisfactory proof of the mis-handling to which the critic has subjected the author ; for the latter distinctly states that the book was written or published in the plains of Moab, by Jordan side, near Jericho.^ It was therefore strictly within the author's right, if the circumstances of the case did not require it to be his duty, to say that the story of the man gathering sticks happened while the people were in the wilderness. The incident did not take place in a well- timbered land, such as Israel was then occupying. It hap- pened where bushes were few in number. The man could not have pleaded necessity in the plains of Moab. But he could have made a good case on that plea in the wilderness. And yet the plea did not avail, for ' all the congregation brought him without the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died.' By putting ourselves in the author's place, and viewing things as he may be thought to have viewed them, we are more likely to get at the real truth of his story than by heaping ' perhaps ' on ' probable,' and ' very probable ' on ' more likely,' till we raise a scaffolding high as the heaven, but with foundations on a quicksand. ^ Bleek (Wellhausen), § 19 (81) ; Num. xv. 32-36. - The Peiitateucli was not written in the wilderness, for the author of that work distinctly states that three-eighths of the legislative part were written after the Hebrews left the wilderness (Num. xx.-xxxvi. ; Deut. i.-xxxiv.). ii8 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Literature, A clear proof of disagreement between two sets of laws in the book of Numbers is found in the age at which the Levites were ordained to begin their service. In one place the beginning age is fixed at thirty, and the age for leaving off work at fifty. But in another passage, separated from the former by nine or ten pages, the beginning age is fixed at twenty-five, and the Levites above fifty continue still to * minister with their brethren in the tabernacle of the congre- gation, to keep the charge ' (Num. viii. 24—26, iv. 47). These two sets of laws were given within a few days of each other. The first is thought to be Mosaic, therefore the other cannot be. Such is the argument, such is the large conclusion de- duced from the apparent change of thirty to twenty-five. But the argument is not fairly stated when the beginning age only is looked at. If exception be taken to it, exception must also be taken to the chans^e in the asje assic^ned for leavinff off work. Fifty years is stated to have been that limit ; but men who were older were consecrated, and remained in office as Levites, precisely as were also men under thirty. Fifty and thirty were the limits of age for work in fetching and carry- ing ; but men, who were exempted from this work because they were over fifty, were consecrated to the office. In the same way, men under thirty were consecrated to the office, even before the work was assigned to them. It was a natural arrangement to give young Levites five years of an appren- ticeship before they commenced their service, whether that apprenticeship was limited to acquiring a knowledge of the law, or was extended to occasionally helping in the work. Nor was the service regarded by them with a light heart. Provision had to be made for one family of the Levites, ' that they may live and not die when they approach unto the most holy things.' But if a reader of the law-book refuses to accept this reconciliation of a divergence of its statement, and if that divergence bulk so largely in his eyes as to hide the countless proofs which the legislation furnishes otherwise of Law and Legislation a7nong the Hebrews. 1 1 9 its Mosaic origin, lie can only be urged to carry the same uncompromising spirit into the study of other histories and other legislations. He will then find them all sinking beneath his feet. Perhaps the strangest of all the objections, advanced against the Mosaic origin and authority of the legislation, is drawn from the names given to the cardinal points of the compass. ' There are phrases,' it is said, 'which prove quite unambiguously that the Pentateuch was written in Canaan. In Hebrew, the common phrase for " westward " is " seaward," and for south- ward, " towards the JST^geb." The word ISTegeb, which primarily means " parched land," is in Hebrew the proper name of the dry steppe district in the south of Judah. These expressions for west and south could only be formed within Palestine. Yet they are used in the Pentateuch, not only in the narrative, but in the Levitical description of the tabernacle in the wilderness (Ex. xxvii.). But at Mount Sinai the sea did not lie to the west, and the ISTegeb was to the north.' ^ Had these phrases been carefully examined, the results arrived at might have been different. The word Mgeh occurs ten times in Numbers and twice in Deuteronomy. Every one of these passages will bear the rendering Steppe country or wilderness, without detriment to the meaning. Our translators have always used the word south for Mgeh. In this they are pro- bably not correct; but the Hebrew term might have been allowed to stand as the name of a known district, and not as the name of a quarter of the heavens. In Leviticus the word never occurs at all. In Exodus it occurs five times altogether ; but in four of them it is treated as a word of doubtful meaning. Only once does it stand by itself, without another word to give it clear definition. As the Hebrews looked towards the rising sun, that is, eastward, when naming the points of the compass, their name for south was Teyman, or the right hand. Now this word occurs as often in the legis- 1 Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, p. 323. I20 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Literahtre. lative portions of Exodus as the word N^geb. But that is of small consequence. Four times the designation runs, ' the south side southward' (Ex. xxvi. 18); in the fifth passage (Ex. xl. 24), there is no necessity for thus limiting N^geb. But ' the south side southward ' is literally ' the N^geb towards the rigjht hand.' That there micjht be no mistake about the meaning of Negeb, the lawgiver added another term clearly to define it. About that term there could be no doubt — towards the right hand. A clearer proof could not be given of his fear lest the word, which his countrymen had brought with them to Egypt from Canaan, might cause confusion, nor a clearer proof of the means he took to avoid that source of error. The use of the word l^egeb is therefore an indication of the wilderness origin of the book, in which the meaning of it is so carefully defined. But even thoudi there had not been this careful use of the word l^egeb, we should still have had to ask what language the Hebrews took with them to Egypt, and continued to speak there. Beyond doubt it was the Hebrew tongue. And if they took down with them names for the cardinal points, they would continue to use these names, although the words had ceased to have the same accurate meaning which they had to residents in Palestine. In the same way they continued to call the first month of their year by a name appropriate to the greatest part of Palestine — Abib, or green ear of corn, although during their stay in Goshen the harvest had pro- bably been ready, if not gathered, before that month began.^ Nothing else could have been expected of a people who were speaking a language which their fathers had used for ages. But even the word Negeb meant other things than the dry steppe in the south of Judah. It is used of Egypt as being the south land to Palestine, and it is also used to express the ^ See Ex. ix. 31 : ' The barley was in the ear,' a considerable time before Abib. Fields in Egypt are ready for reaping in March. But in Palestine barley harvest is a month later. Law and Legislation amo7ig the Hebrews. 1 2 1 south quarter, without the slightest reference to any steppe, as, ' The kings that were on the north of the mountains, and of the plains south (N^geb) of Chinneroth,' that is, south of the Sea of Galilee (Isa. xxi. 1 ; Josh. xi. 2). Most justly, then, may we dismiss the objection as neither fully and fairly stating the case, nor as having any weight even if it did. But what is thus believed to be an insurmountable objec- tion to the reality of the legislation, becomes an unanswerable proof of its antiquity. Ezekiel, when sketching with a free pen the temple which was to be built on the ancient site, speaks twice of ' the side of the south southward,' or, ' the side of the ISTegeb southward.'^ There w^as no call on him to add southvxtrd after N^geb. He was in Babylon, far to the north of Judah and its dry steppe, at the time of drawing up that sketch. Only one reason can be given for his unnecessary plainness of speech. He was echoing or copying the words which were used in describing the building of the tabernacle in the wilderness. Nowhere but in Ezekiel's writings, and in the Pentateuch, do these strange words, ' The side of the south southward,' occur. One author clearly borrowed the phrase from another. If the Pentateuch was the book in which it first occurred, the borrowing of it by Ezekiel is easily under- stood. But if, as several writers think, Ezekiel used the phrase first, then the addition of southward to south becomes a puzzle of greatest difficulty. He had no reason for so doing. He was uselessly repeating the same idea in other words. He was committing a fault of style, which laid him open to censure. But there was no fault and no censure, if he was echoing, as he unquestionably was, the words of an ancient and much esteemed author. But the prophet gives a curious and convincing proof of his indebtedness to the Pentateuch. ' The south side southward ' 1 The word 'side' is very ancient (Amos iii. 12). Its occurrences elsewhere are singular : Exodus 15 times, Leviticus 6, Numbers 6, Joshua 6, Jeremiah 4, and Ezekiel 47 times. No one can read the north, south, east, and west in Ezekiel (xlv.-xlvii.) without feeling that he is copying Exodus and Numbers. 122 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its Literature. was an archaic phrase, which a reader and imitator of ancient books was entitled to borrow. 'The east side towards the sun-rising/ was another found in Exodus (xxvii. 13), Numbers (ii. 3, xxxiv. 15), and Joshua (xix. 12). Ezekiel altered it into ' the east side eastward,' by repeating the word for east. The change of word does not indicate originality. But he rounded off the four cardinal points in the same way, and he stands alone in so doing. He spoke of ' the north northward ' (Ezek. xlvii. 1 7), and of ' the west westward ' (Ezek. xlv. V). He was imitating an old book ; he was not borrowing from it. Beyond doubt, EzekieTs imitations and borrowings in this matter show the homage paid by him to the same Pentateuch which we now study. The labour of examining all the objections taken to the Sinaitic origin of the legislation would be great, and the profit small. No sooner is an objector dislodged from one position than he entrenches himself in another, as little capable of defence. Although the marks of originality and antiquity in the legislation are too distinct to be all explained away, this fact is not strong enough to override the difficulties which beset the narrative, as they beset all narratives of the olden time. Some of these difficulties are historical knots, so entangled as to call for most careful handling. But a set of tangled threads needing unravelling is a different thing from there being no threads to unravel. And when the lawgiver has left us these knots to disentangle, he has bequeathed to us a legacy, the same in kind as every historian of any name has left behind him. An ancient history, free from puzzles which critics labour in vain to read, would not be a history of much worth. To infer from them that the historian, whether Greek, or Eoman, or Hebrew, did not record the puzzles which baffle our understanding, or that he did not exist at all, is to confess our inability to discover a solution. One of the most real of these puzzles in Hebrew legislation is the small number of first-borns said to have been found in the camp. Had the 1 Law and Legislation among the Hebrews, 123 statement been false or fanciful, it would not have been made, for the number is so ridiculously small as to carry with it a conviction of our use of words not being the same as the historian's. The number of men above twenty years of age in the camp was 603,550, but the number of first-born males among them, counted from a month old and upwards, was only 22,273. Practically, according to Bunsen, the proportion of first-borns was one in a hundred of the whole population ; that is, every family, whatever the meaning of the word may have been, contained about one hundred members. As the proportion in our country is one in five or six, the case, stated as we have stated it, seems a hopeless puzzle. Bleek,-^ who expresses his views with moderation in a matter so little known to us, believes that the statement of the number of first-borns could not have proceeded from Moses, or from a contemporary author. Does any critic fully understand the statement made ? But the case is far from being so hopeless a puzzle as it looks. We have only a part of the story, not the whole. A writer acquainted with figures, as the author of the book of lumbers was, would evidentl}^ have seen the inaccuracy of the figures, if they had been really wrong. If they had been correct, according to his way of regarding things, he would never have thought, when writing the narrative, of the likeli- hood of strangers looking at the figures in another way, and deducing from them an impossible result. The case seems so clear against the accuracy of the numbers, that a fear arises, lest we be putting on words other meanings than those put on them in the Hebrew camp. A change of meaning, insensibly creeping in, may cause grievous miscalculation in the reckoning. And the first thing which ought to infuse caution into a reviewer of this passage, is the change of front presented in the numbering of the Levites, without a word of explanation. At first they are set down as number- 1 Introduction, § 57 (119) g. 124 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its Literature, ing in all 22,300, reckoned from a month old and upwards; but the sum total is suddenly changed to 22,000 (Num. iii. 22, 34, 39). Whoever considers the difficulty, cannot think to remove it by regarding the change as springing from the common wish to use round numbers. Instead of being a solution, this is an insult to the good sense of both ancient author and modern reader. For 22,300 is itself a round number quite as much as 22,000. Besides, the exact number of first-borns among the other tribes was 22,273, a very odd figure to give. Apparently they are fewer by 27 than the Levites (22,300) ; but really they turn out to be more by 273 (22,000). For each of these 273 a sum of five shekels had to be paid. View this matter as we may, we must come to the conclusion, not that the author has made a mistake, but that we cannot fully understand his words, since the whole story has not been told. With this clue in our hands, we should have no difficulty in threading our way through the narrative. The traditional altar-service among the Hebrews was to undergo a change. The honour of acting as priests and altar servants, which had belonged for ages to a class, then well defined, and called First-lorns, was irrevocably transferred to others — the sons of Levi. We do not know precisely who had enjoyed the rights and honours of priesthood till this time ; in one passage they are said to have been ' young men of the children of Israel ; ' in another they are simply called 'priests (Ex. xxiv. 5 ; xix. 22). They are generally allowed to have been Bechorim or First-horns. But the transference of priestly honour was made without their consent bein^x asked. The chancre was resented, was fought against, and was never fully acquiesced in, though it was sanctioned by the clear voice of Heaven. Every time we read, as we frequently do, ' The priests the sons of Levi,' it seems as if a warning finger were lifted against using some other phrase, such as * The priests the first-borns.' * Priests,' then, continued to be a word which, Law and Legislation amojig the Hebi^ews. 125 even in the days of David, seems not to have lost its ancient meaning of nobU or 'prince. By this transference of honours, the Levites got what the deprived class lost. The former were exchanged for the latter. All that we know ahout the men who were deprived of their rights is their name First- horns. But the same word may be a title of nobility for a few, as well as a common name for many. Our own word chief, in the same way, may mean one man in a multitude, or many, according to the context. Clear though this is to us, it is not always clear to foreigners, and might perplex them in reading the history of our island, especially of the Highlands of Scotland. If, then, first-horns had two meanings, a narrow and a wide, our misunderstanding of the passage may be due to a simple cause. Changes came over the meaning of the words ' pillar ' and ' priest,' till they were used in two senses widely different. ' First-born ' appears to have had a similar history. New laws and new arrangements were causing changes in language, which were destined to give scholars trouble in after ages. It has always been so. A reader, who finds a minister of religion with the word of honour Sir pre- fixed to his name in pre-Eeformation times, is apt to con- sider him a member of some noble family. On the contrary, it indicated the want of honour; it meant he had not taken his degree at the University. It is generally allowed that the right of priesthood belonged to the first-born son of a family. But the number of these first-borns would depend on the number of families, a word of which the extent is now unknown to us. A family does not mean a household, consisting of father, mother, children, and servants, having the eldest son as priest, in succession to his father. On the other hand, there seem to have been a number of such households grouped together to constitute a family, while several families formed a tribe. Twenty house- holds grouped together would give a family of 100 or 110 — the number required for one first-born. A priest for every 126 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Literature, five or six, such as a family is with us, would make the honour so common as to be little esteemed. We know it was counted a great thing, indeed the greatest thing, among the Hebrews in very early days. It was therefore something uncommon. Supposing the priesthood was an office belonging to a group of households forming a famil}^, and that first-horii was the official title of the priest, the whole difficulty vanishes. A word has been used in an official sense which could also be used in an ordinary sense. At the same time, it becomes clear how first-horn or ^:>?'ies^ might also mean prince or chief ruler. There are other two points about this choice of the first- borns which seem worth looking at. One is, the small muster-roll of Levi in comparison with the other tribes. Of the latter, the smallest roll is that of Manasseh, 32,200 men above twenty years of age. But in Levi there cannot have been above a third part of that number. It may be that the fury of Pharaoh's persecution fell chiefly on Levi's sons. Another point to be observed is this. While a reason is given for numbering the people generally from twenty years old and upwards, no reason is given for numbering the first-borns and the Levites from a month old. Fitness for war is the reason assigned in the former case ; the law seems to supply the reason in the latter. Considering the importance attached to circumcision, we might have expected the reckoning for first- borns and Levites to have run from the day on which that rite was performed — the eighth day after birth. But a different reckoning is adopted — a month old. It seems as if this date referred to the presentation of boys at the altar — three-and-thirty days after birth — a round number, precisely as the sum total of the Hebrew armies is put down in round numbers at the beginning of the story, as ' about six hundred thousand men on foot, beside children.' Here, then, is satis- factory cross-examining of a witness. While the book of Leviticus G;ives no indication of a division of the tribe into Law and Legislation amo7ig the Hebrews. 1 2 7 priests, sons of Aaron, and Levites, assistants at the altar, but leaves the duties of the latter to be detailed in the book of Numbers only when the time of their service approaches, the book of Numbers, on the other hand, assumes, without a word said on the subject, the law of presentation at the altai-, previously laid down in Leviticus (xii. 4). A coincidence, undesigned and clear, ought to carry weight in discussing the dates and authorship of these two books. They must have been at least carefully revised. If so, a supposed blunder like that of the first-borns, or of the Levites' age of service, must be rejected as unlikely. CHAPTEE VI. ANOINTING AND ADVANCEMENT OF DAVID. (1 Sam. xvi. 1-xviii. 19.) The bitterness of feeling between Samuel and Saul soon became known to the people. A heaviness of heart weighed down the prophet as he mourned night and day over the casting off of his former favourite. But in Saul, instead of grief for errors that could no longer be remedied, there was anger with the messenger by whom judgment was pronounced. The prophet was alarmed at the threats of violence uttered by the king, and reported to him from friends at court. Like many other men who have attempted to thwart the purposes of Heaven, Saul seems to have threatened with death any one who should dare to anoint another as king of Israel. Courtiers and people knew that he would not fear to stain his hands with the blood of Samuel himself, much less would he hesi- tate to punish meaner instruments who might venture to carry out the purposes of Heaven. Samuel had other reasons to fear violence, if he anointed the wortliier neighbour, who- ever he might be. Saul was a successful soldier, whom the people had repeatedly followed to victory. Would the soldiers, who had threatened the chiefs of the nation with death for their treatment of Saul at the beginning of his reign, listen even to Samuel, if he proceeded to depose their favourite ? Only a spark was needed to awaken into flames the hatred lurking in Saul's bosom. But none knew when or where the spark might fall. During that season of uncertainty, the elders of Bethlehem-Judah were surprised one day by the appearance of Samuel at the gate of their city. He was then Anointing and Advancement of David, 1 29 a very old man, whose long and uncut hair had been grey for more than twenty years. A bullock, driven perhaps by attendant Levites, went before him. When tidings of his coming reached the elders, he appeared to be a fugitive seeking shelter among them from the fury of the king. The storm which had been years in gathering was bursting at last ; messengers had been sent from court to take the life of Samuel, who, apprised of the design on foot, was fleeing from his own city to Bethlehem. If the two towns lay close to each other, as some may be disposed to infer from the story of Saul's anointing, Bethlehem may have been his nearest place of safety. Eespect for the prophet, and regard for the ancient custom, which required a host to defend his guest even to the death, made the elders ' exceedingly afraid.' But they con- sidered also their relation to the king, who might dare them at their peril to harbour the man he hated. There were good grounds for alarm and confusion among them that day. However, the prophet soon allayed their fears. His coming betokened peace, not war. He called on them to sanctify themselves for a sacrifice, w^hich he intended to celebrate to Jehovah in their city. Jesse, one of its oldest people, was specially set apart for the solemnity, with seven of his sons. To see this man and his family Samuel came to Bethlehem. In visions of the night he had been told to anoint one of Jesse's sons to the throne in place of Saul. By a sacrifice to the Lord he did' not necessarily mean a priestly or atoning sacrifice, in which all or part of the victim was burnt on the altar. There is no reason for reading that meaning into Samuel's words. He lived not far from the town of Bethlehem. He came as a neighbour of the elders, and in right of his office as a prophet to teach, or to encourage, or to reform something which may have been amiss. But there is no word of altar or of priest, or of atonement Mention is made of a feast, to which the elders were invited with Jesse and his sons. ' To sacrifice to the Lord ' is a phrase occurring 130 The Khigdom of All-Israel: its History. in Dent. xvi. 2, for a feast at wliicli all the victim was eaten. Those who sat down at that feast were consecrated, as the elders and Jesse were consecrated. The book of Exodus (xix. 10) preserves a record of a similar consecration, even when there was no sacrifice : ' Go nnto the people, and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their clothes.' A sacrifice in this meaning implied neither altar nor atonement, nor high place. It was a word in popular, well- understood use — a feast. In this, as in many other cases, the scenes of Hebrew history are repeated after the lapse of several years, and with different men. At a sacrifice in a city, Samuel met Saul for the first time, and honoured him at the feast which followed. Then, also, he informed the young man of his appointment to the throne. A few hours later he poured on his head the sacred oil. More than twenty years after, the same things happened to David. At a sacrifice in Bethlehem, Samuel met him for the first time, and honoured him at the feast. Then, also, he anointed him as chosen kin^^ of Israel. Had the two narratives been presented in this form only, modern theories of history would have found in the one a clumsy copy of the other, or in both two versions of the same story. But the circumstances which form the settings around them are wholly unlike. Had these few circumstances been passed over by the sacred writer in his brief narrative, many in our times would have pronounced the two narratives copies of one and the same story by different hands. But this view cannot be taken. Bamah, or a town now unknown, is the scene of the one ; Bethlehem of the other. Samuel meets Saul, as it were by chance, knowing nothing wdiatever about him. But he is told to repair to David's father's house. He is most anxious to see Saul ; on the contrary, he is most unwilling to have any hand in anointing David, and, when he does s^t out on that errand, it is masked under show of a sacrifice to Jehovah. The settings of the two narratives are detailed with such effect i Anointing and Advancement of David. 1 3 1 that no writer would dream of pronouncing them the same story, dressed up by different hands. But if the record had been as brief as in the reigns of other kings, the anointing of David might have been considered a copy of that of Saul. Immediately before the feast, Samuel took Jesse and his sons apart to a retired spot, where, as in the case of Saul, there should be no onlooker save Him whose eyes run to and fro throughout the earth. When Eliab, the eldest of the family, was introduced by his father, the prophet, struck by his handsome presence, saw in him a worthy successor to Saul. But an inward voice pronounced Samuel, uninspired by God, not fit to judge of men. Eliab was not the choice of Jehovah. Abinadab, Shammah, and four other sons of Jesse w^ere brought in by their father, one after the other, but the same inward voice warned Samuel to withhold from anoint- ing : ' Neither hath the Lord chosen this.' ' Are here all the young men ? ' inquired the prophet in surprise. ' There remaineth yet the little one, and, behold, he feedeth the sheep,' was the answer of Jesse. ' Send and fetch him,' returned Samuel, ' for we will not sit down till he come hither.' ' The Lord hath not chosen this,' was the riddle-like sentence addressed to Jesse by the prophet, as each of his seven sons withdrew. It must have awakened strange feelings in the old father's breast. What the meaning might be he could not tell. Still greater would be his surprise when the prophet refused to sit down to the feast, till ' the little one,' or ' the beloved,' as his name, David, meant, was sent for from the hills. In discharging the duty laid on him, Samuel rises above the apprehensions which he showed on receiving orders to proceed to Bethlehem. He was afraid lest Saul, hearing of his journey, should kill him. To calm his fears, he was allowed to give, as the reason of his journey, a sacrifice to the Lord. But no sooner is he engaged in the work than these fears entirely leave, him. The assembled company must wait the arrival of David. At the word of the Lord, the chief men of the city, the boy's 132 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its History, father, and the great propliet cannot sit down to meat till he be present. Were there not whisperings of the reason among the townspeople that day as they talked the matter over ? They may not then have connected the honour paid to their youthful townsman with the sentence uttered against their king, and known most probably to them all ; but the danger run by Samuel in thus waiting himself, and in keeping the elders waiting for the coming of a boy, is manifest. It is nothing more than often happens, when men of great zeal and of a high sense of honour find themselves compelled to face risks from which they used every lawful means to escape. Two sacrifices have thus occurred in the history, about the nature of which reasonable doubts may be entertained — the first at the anointing of Saul, the second at the anointing of David. As the word sacrifice is of ambiguous meaning, de- noting an offering by priests on an altar, or an animal slain for food, the context alone can help us to the right sense in any passage, or the traditional interpretation of the story. But in these two cases the context leaves the meaning undeter- mined. There is no mention in them of altar or peace-offering ; there is mention of a feast. So far, therefore, the context supports the view we have adopted of a purely festive meeting. But the traditional rendering of the first story among the Jews puts the accuracy of this view beyond doubt. Josephus is our authority. He describes the supper or feast which Samuel prepared ; a sacrifice is neither mentioned nor hinted at. In his view there was no priestly or atoning sacrifice ; there was only a feast. But his words are different when he describes the anointing of David. He then uses the words for both a sacrifice and a feast. He translates the Hebrew literally into Greek, precisely as our translators rendered it literally into English. But he does not indicate the meaning which he puts on the word sacrifice,. While he leaves no doubt of his meaning in Saul's case, he does Anointing and Advancement of David, 1 3 3 leave it doubtful in David's. One tiling, however, is plain. If Samuel observed only a feast at the anointing of the one, he is not likely to have done more at the anointing of the other. We are not told Samuel's first impressions of David. But they were not favourable. Every reader is aware of the high place held by King Saul in the affections of the prophet. The inspired record breathes it forth in all the incidents which bring the two together. Nay more, it takes a tone and colouring from the love which glow^ed between them. From the effect of Eliab's handsome figure on the imagination of the prophet, a reader may reasonably assign to him a place in Samuel's esteem, which would have been as high as Saul's had he been chosen for the throne. But there is not a word said of any admiration the prophet had for David. Perhaps there was no ground for it in the young man's appearance. His hair was ruddy ; he had beautiful eyes, and his face was handsome. He was also tall, like some of his brothers. But the rawness of unformed manhood may have been too great a drawback for these beauties to captivate a spectator. Neither then nor in after years does he appear to have held a place in the affections of Samuel equal to that enjoyed by Saul. In all their intercourse is perceived the coldness of duty, but never the warmth of a personal regard. This idea is strength- ened by Samuel making no movement to rise from his seat on the entrance of David. In the dialogue carried on between the Spirit of God and his heart, he was the first to speak when Eliab passed in review. But he is the last to speak when David enters. Jesse's youngest son was clearly the one chosen for the throne. Samuel knew this, but he shows no enthusiasm as the youth enters. He was then awakened to his duty by the half-reproachful words : ' Arise, anouit him ; for this is he.' The ceremony was probably performed in the presence of Jesse only. Although said to have taken place in the midst 134 The Kingdom of All- 1 S7'ael : its History, of David's "brethren/ these words can mean nothing more than the anointino- of David in the town where his kindred and clansmen dwelt. And though the story oozed out in course of years, there is no reason for attributing to Eliab or any of the brothers an acquaintance at the time with the honour bestowed on David. As the feast could not begin till he arrived, suspicion must have been awakened respecting the cause. From what happens every day in ordinary life, the probability is that none of the guesses made came near the truth. Samuel may have wanted a page for a special purpose, or an officer for his household, or a skilful harper to fill a vacant post in his college of prophets. But all the guesses made would be wide of the truth. This much is certain, Eliab became unfairly jealous of David. From that day the current of the young shepherd's life seems to have changed. Deeds of daring were wrought by him which drew the eyes of men. The lions and bears, that prowled round the flocks of Bethlehem, found in him a hunter bold enough to look them in the face. Eepeatedly these beasts of prey fell on the sheep under his keeping. Ee- peatedly, too, he bearded them, and killed them with club or spear. His courage and success became the talk of the neighbourhood. Men, who knew nothing about his anointing, said Jehovah was with the lad. In no other w^ay could they explain his feats as a hunter. But there was at the same time a gentleness about his bearing, a freedom, too, from boast- ing, which won for him the esteem of men, who might other- wise have envied a prowess so far above their own. He became equally renowned for his skill as a harper. The same good Spirit from the Lord, which strengthened him for a hand-to-hand encounter with wild beasts, tuned his young heart to poetry and music. In Bethlehem and the neighbour- ^ This phrase occurs in no other passage of the Old Testament but in Deut, xviii, 2 (Heb.), immediately after the law of the king. Its use here at the anointing of a king is a reflection of its use in Deuteronomy. Anointing and Advancenierit of David, 1 3 5 hood, David was known as a youth of might and prudence, and as a skilful harper — ' a man of valour, and a man fit for war.' In the meantime, Saul had sunk into fits of deep dejection. They came only at intervals. While they continued, he was a helpless madman, unable to restrain the passion which pos- sessed him for the time. Gloomy and sorrow-stricken, he sat humming to himself the sacred songs sung by the sons of the prophets when celebrating worship. His vexed heart was evidently going back to those days of young hope, when he joined the bands of singers coming down the hill from evening prayer. Fain was he to be once more what he had been then. And as he brooded over the past, snatches of its sacred songs floated up in his memory, relics saved from the wreck of his hopes. The ghost of departed happiness was mocking him with pleasant memories. But the servants and courtiers recognised an unearthly ring in the king's music. To them his melancholy seemed the work of an evil spirit. Knowing the real cause to be their master's rejection by God, they said the sender of the evil spirit was Jehovah. Saul might thus be reckoned the guiltless victim of a lordly and inexplicable act of the great Judge, or a criminal tried in the court of heaven and punished on the earth. The former was the aspect under which Saul's illness would be spoken of among his courtiers, and to himself. He was unlucky ; he was not wicked. But while Saul was suffering, David was rejoicing. An evil spirit sent from Jehovah plagued the former. ' The Lord is with him,' was a common remark regarding the latter. The two men were weighed against each other before they met in court or camp. Saul's councillors were at last compelled to action. As their master was unfit for business, a remedy must be found for his illness. Acting on the principle of healing by con- traries, some of them proposed to provide good music, wliich might drive away the bad. They told him of his illness, ' an 136 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Histoiy, evil Gocl's-spirit troubletli thee.* Then they proposed the remedy, * seek out a cunning player on the harp.' The king, gratified by their flattery, took their advice. One of them was ready with a minstrel's name : ' Behold,' he said, ^ I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person ; and the Lord is with him.' This praise of David came from a courtier whose word carried weight with Saul. ' I have seen him,' he said, implying per- sonal knowledge of the hunter and poet. Strangers discerned his greatness, although his brother counted him only fit for keeping a few sheep among the hills. Seldom have courtiers spoken so truly, or kings been served so well. Messengers were despatched to Bethlehem ; they were told to ask for the son of Jesse, ' which is with the sheep.' However unwilling Jesse might be to expose his son to the dangers of a court like Saul's, there was no help for him but to obey the king. The purposes of God had begun to unfold ; earth was manifestly conspiring with heaven to advance the youth to greatness. Selecting a present for the king such as suited his slender means, — an ass load of bread, a skin of wine, and a kid, — Jesse sent David to court along with the messengers. But Saul and his worthier neighbour were not destined to meet as king and minstrel. A prince might honourably descend for a season from his greatness to show his skill as a harper, but it would not have been becoming had a mere minstrel been raised to the dignity of prince or captain. And David was destined to stand before the nation as Saul's equal before he tuned the harp to soothe that moody spirit. On reaching Gibeah the minstrel found his aid was not needed. The city was ringing with the clang of arms ; for the Philistines, with a suddenness not uncommon (1 Sam. xxiii. 27), had broken into Judah, and spread terror over the fields. The excitement of action had charmed the melancholy out of the king's mind. "War had done what the courtiers trusted in music to accom- Anointing and Advancement of David. 1 3 7 plisli. David was not required in the camp ; he might at once return home.^ David returned from the court of Saul to his father's house at Bethlehem. Every village through which he passed was mustering its men to resist the inroad. When he reached home, the same ardour was firing the people of his native town. As he had seen more of it in the course of his journey than any of them, his heart was more touched with a longing to join the contingent from Bethlehem, especially as he was a soldier of nature's own making. He seems to have asked leave to join the ranks. But his wish to become a soldier was first laid before a family council. As far as can be learned from what afterwards turned up, his elder brother Eliab upbraided him for his ' wrongness ' or naughtiness of heart in even daring to put his wishes forward. Perhaps there was the meanness of jealousy in this upbraiding. ' You may do well enough for a minstrel, or to be favoured by Samuel,' was the meaning it conveyed. ' You think yourself a soldier too ; but let others mind a business which is too high for you.' When the young men told off. to defend their country marched out of Bethlehem, David, as the least esteemed of the family of Jesse, was sent to watch their few sheep in the upland pastures. Meanwhile Saul, with his bodyguard of three thousand men, was marching to the borders. Every village that he passed poured forth its soldiery to swell his army. So suddenly had his troops been assembled, and so warlike was his array, that the Philistines did not dare to move more than ^ Although David's art was not required, the writer of the book of Samuel follows his usual course of tracing the story farther on, before he passes from it to other matters. This has caused a difficulty ; but something similar takes place in all histories. ' Each of us,' says Horace Walpole, when writing of the Countess of Suffolk, ' knew different parts of many court stories, and each was eager to learn what either could relate more ; and thus, by comparing notes, we some- times could make out discoveries of a third circumstance before unknown to both.' Compare also his note on the passage. Critics seldom think of the third cir- cumstance that reconciles two differing versions of the same story. — Reminiscences, chap. vii. 138 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. a few miles beyond their own frontier. Their plundering had been speedily checked. Drawing their forces together on the approach of the Hebrews, they pitched their camp on a hill, whose height and steepness served them instead of a fortress. Another hill right opposite furnished the Hebrews with an equally safe camp. The face looking towards the invaders was too steep to allow an attack in front. Besides, the open plain of Elah (terebinth tree) lay between the two hills, and rendered a surprise on that side impossible. A stream with steep banks, and with terebinths or bushes shading its bed, flowed through the plain, apparently nearer the Hebrew camp than that of the invaders. The rear of the Hebrew camp was less securely guarded by nature. Though a steep crag on the one side, the hill fell away on the other with a tail of such gentle slope as not to be difficult of access for the lumbering bullock waggons of the Hebrew peasantry. Where these could climb, the light war chariots of the Philistines might act with advantacje. The Hebrew kino- was aware of his danger. In later times, a ditch and rampart would have beeii the defence provided ; but another, equally effectual, could be thrown round the camp with less trouble. Constantly coming and going were trains of Hebrew bullock waggons, bringing stores of all kinds to the soldiers. Some of them were the king's, but the greater part belonged to families which had sent sons and brothers to the war. An officer was appointed to keep this line of defence unbroken, as waggons left and came to the camp. He was called ' the keeper of the carriages' (1 Sam. xvii. 22). However much a rampart so primitive may provoke a smile in our day, it was then a dangerous obstacle to an advancing enemy, and has proved a most efficient barrier even in modern warfare. Arranged in two or three lines with open sp>aces between, these rows of countr}^ carts gave the Hebrews the advantage of hurling their weapons from above on an enemy climbing up from lower ground. A fresh line of defence was ready to furnish a ' Anointing and Advancement of David, 139 second shelter should the first line be forced. Alexander tlie Great once led his horsemen against a triple line of waggons 'on a hill-top not precipitous on all sides.' ^ Although the foe thus assailed was only the armed peo^^le of a city in the Punjab, their rampart proved an effective barrier to his advance. He would have been driven back had he not dismounted and led forward the infantry. The energy of the Hebrew V\\\<^ involved the Philistine chiefs in difficulties. Knowing the danger of assaulting his camp in front or in rear, they found themselves reduced to inaction. Should they risk a march into Judah, flying bodies of Saul's army might carry fire and sword to the gates of their principal towns. Unless, then, the Hebrews could be tempted to quit their hill fortress, the Philistines could not venture to penetrate into the heart of Judah, while it would be a disOTace to return home without striking^ a blow. Baffled in their plans, and seeing no other way of honourable escape, their leaders had recourse to a device that was often practised afterwards. They proposed to decide the war by single combat. In the army of the invaders was a man of gigantic size, called Goliath of Gath. He was well known to the Hebrews. Prom his youth up he had been skilled in deeds of arms, mostly in wars waged with King Saul. The Hebrews spoke of him as ' the Philistine,' and ' the Man.' As nearly as we can judge, he was about eight and a half feet high, or a foot and a half taller than the o-reat Kin^jj Porus, whom Alexander conquered on the banks of the Indus, and whom the Greeks admired for his size and beauty.^ Whether Goliath's stature 1 Arrian, Anab. v. 22, 23. ^ Arrian, v. 19. * Three of the most remarkable men of the century gave a reception on Friday night at the Royal Aquarium, and were visited by many persons interested in anthropology. The giant Chang, a tea merchant of Pekin ; Brustad, a tall Norwegian ; and Che-mah, described as "the Chinese dwarf, the smallest man in the world," received their friends, and being not much given to talk themselves, had their history related for them by a showman. It appears that Chang is the largest giant in existence, that he stands 8 feet 2 inches, and is 140 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its History. was measured with modern accuracy, or whether it was the fighting height from his brazen shoes to the top of his helmet, we are not informed, nor does it much matter. He was a giant, and wielded a giant's might, with probably the smallness of mind that often attends vast bulk of body. He was covered with a coat of scale-armour, 5000 shekels or 230 lbs. in weight. As they were exceedingly burden- some under a Syrian sun, his helmet and shield were carried by an armour-bearer. Without a war-chariot, he would have been as useless in battle as a heavy armed knight five centuries ago without his war-horse.^ To walk was a trouble to this weighted giant, while an attempt at running was almost sure to be destruction. But, as we have seen, chariots were valueless against the skill shown in pitching the Hebrew camp. Goliath's heavy spear is compared to an Eastern weaver's beam, or to a pole not half the length of a telegraph post, while its iron head weighed nearly 20 Ibs.^ Strapped across his shoulders was a short javelin for throwing to a distance, and picking up again as the enemy's line was driven back. It is called a target in our version, and was of solid brass. He expected to have little use for it. highly educated, speaking five different languages, including English, which last he speaks very well, but with the well-known sing-song of the Chinaman. He is 8 feet high without his boots, he measures 60 inches round the chest, weighs 26 stone, has a span of 8 feet with his outstretched arms, and signs his name without an effort upon a signpost 10 feet 6 inches high. Next to Chang, and next by no long interval, stands Brustad, about 7 feet 9 inches high, very muscular, very broad-backed, having as great a girth of chest as Chang, and a wider span in proportion to his height. He has a low forehead, but speaks English fairly well. His ring is 4| ounces in Aveight, and a penny goes easily through it. To grasp his mighty hand in greeting is like shaking hands with an oak tree. His weight is 28 stone, greater than Chang's, for his bones are more massive. His age is 35. Che-mah, the dwarf, gives his age as 42, sings a Chinese elegy, describes himself with much fluency and variety, and as his height is only 25 inches, appears to be what he is described, the smallest man in the world.' — Times, 14th June 1880. 1 Compare Plutarch's account {Demetrius, 21) of Alkimos, who wore a panoply of two talents, or about 4000 shekels weight. ^ ' His spear's head six hundred shekels of iron. ' Care must be taken to place the commas so in English as to bring out the sense of the Hebrew. ' His spear's head (six hundred shekels) of iron.' A 7iointing and Advanceme7it of David. 141 He made the mistake of not having it handy for throwino- ; the time required to disengage it from its fastenings would have given an active enemy an irretrievable advantage. Goliath was got up for effect more than really equipped for battle. He was a grand show, that struck dismay into soldiers who had seen him as a mounted warrior in former campaigns. A fresh eye would pick out a joint in his harness, through which a weapon might reach his heart. Was tradition to prevail, or was a change of tactics at hand in these border wars ? The appearance of this ^A'ell-known soldier on the plain spread terror among the Hebrew skirmishers. The petty battles, in which outposts or adventurers engaged, stopped at once : the Philistines giving way to their great champion ; the Hebrews, from dread of his prowess, crossing the stream or retreating up the hill. Goliath's shouts overtook the latter in their flight : ' Why are ye come out to set the battle in array ? Am not I the Philistine, and ye servants to Saul ? Choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me. If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants ; but if I prevail against him and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.' He smiles to himself at the thought of being slain by a Hebrew. ' Kill me,' he cries, and 'we shall be your servants;' not 'the Philistines,' nor ' my people,' but ' we,' as if his fall were a thing to be put out of view. ' I reproach the armies of Israel this day,' he added ; ' give me a man that we may fight together.' A terrible dread seized the Hebrew army. The giant had put them in a difficulty before the world. Brave men, who would cheerfully have gone to death in a general battle, shrank from the same danger in a single-handed encounter with the giant. Their country's freedom perished with failure ; and their peo^^le's honour. With all, save very few in any age or nation, the risk could only weaken the hands in a combat weighted with such momentous issues. 1 42 The Kingdom of xA II- Israel : its History. Day by clay, about nine o'clock in the morning, and four in the afternoon, the giant appeared to repeat his reproach. He Avas doing to Israel and its king what Nahash did — putting a reproach on All-Israel. It was a parade of war, a boasting of undisputed prowess. For well-nigh six weeks the defiance was given, but no one took up the gage of battle so boastfully thrown down. Saul and the Hebrew chiefs felt the affront. To encourage volunteers for the fight, the king even offered his daughter in marriage to a successful champion, and immunity for his family from taxation and service. But the offers were made in vain ; day by day the giant delivered his defiance from the plain, and possibly the last day of his challenge had come. He gave the enemy six times as long as Nahash had allowed them to roll away the reproach. His challenge was not accepted, though every man of might in All-Israel had known of it for weeks. Meanwhile the provisions of the Hebrew soldiers were running short. According to custom, each soldier had to find himself in supplies, which were usually brought with him, or sent at intervals from home, if the ground they occupied did not furnish them with food from an enemy's stores. As the days of inaction wore on, the trains of country carts, convey- ino" provisions to the army, became more numerous. In charge of one of these the hero arrived, who was destined to strip Goliath of his laurels, and to shed lustre on the Hebrew arms. The three eldest sons of Jesse the Bethlehemite were in the army. Of his other sons, only one was at home, ' the little one,' David. After the campaign had lasted six weeks, Jesse bethought himself of sending provisions to his three sons. He was too old to go himself. A servant might have been sent ; but the father, while perhaps wishing to gratify his youngest son, may have considered one of the family a more trusty messenger. David's dream of military service had passed away. Six weeks of the usual shepherd life had dulled, i if not effaced, the visions awakened by his journey through A nointing and A dvancenicnt of David. 1 4 3 a country mustering its forces to repel an enemy. But the orders of his father to prepare the needed stores, and to set out on the following morning, brought back the past to his mind. His sheep were left in a keeper's charge. With earliest dawn he was driving a bullock waggon towards the Hebrew camp. The load consisted of roasted corn and loaves of bread ; for parched or roasted corn was then, as it still is, the staff of life to soldiers, wayfarers, or peasants in Palestine. But David had also with him ten slices of thickened milk or cheese — a cool and agreeable present for the commanding officer. It was part of his orders to bring back a pledge of his brothers' welfare ; a proof, at the same time, that he had delivered the supplies. This pledge was a written slip — whether paper, parchment, or bark. If David, the youngest of the family, could write, it is most unreasonable to imagine the elder members of tlie household ignorant of letters. Bethlehem appears to have been about twelve miles, in a north-easterly direction, from Saul's camp. At the present day, the townspeople cut down firewood on the road more than half-way to the site of Shochoh, near which the two armies were posted. Almost every step of the road would thus be known to David. Although the rough and hilly patli rendered the journey toilsome for a laden bullock, the young shepherd would have little difficulty in reaching the army about nine o'clock or earlier, before the day began to grow hot. On nearing the waggon rampart, he was directed by the officer in charge to a vacant space for his cart. But even at tliat distance from the brow of the hill, the sounds of war could be made out. The youth was so deeply moved that he proceeded at once towards the army. Both sides had moved out in battle order, as if the end of the challenge to single combat had come. Philistine soldiers were lining one hill- top ; Hebrew soldiers another. ' Array against array ' was the scene presented when David reached the higher ground. As his duty was, he delivered to his brothers the message he 144 ^-^^ Kingdom of All- Israel : its History, had brought from home. Whilst he was thus engaged, the attention of the Hebrews on the height overlooking the plain of Elah, was drawn towards the Philistine champion, who was seen once more advancing to repeat his reproach of Israel. The Hebrews who happened to be on duty below fled in terror up the hill-side. Tumult and excitement rose among those round David. Whether it was eagerness on his part to get a better view, or the swaying hither and thither of the crowd, he was separated for a time from his brothers. But he was among acquaintances from Bethlehem. He was as excited as any in the army, though for a different reason. Angry at the patience of his countrymen under the insults of the giant, his heart gave free expression to his feelings. A knot of men, apparently from Bethlehem, gathered round him. The excite- ment of fear was troubling them ; the excitement of indigna- tion was troubling him. ' Have ye seen this man that is come up?' they were asking. 'Surely to reproach Israel is he come up.' The gossip of the soldiers then passed to a proclamation that had been put forth by King Saul: 'The man who killeth him, the king will enrich him with great riches, and will give him his daughter, and make his father's house free in Israel.' David heard their remarks and gossip. His spirit was touched with shame at the reproach cast on his people, and with hopes of prizes so easy to be won. But loftier thoughts than of self or country swelled his heart. Turning to the men around him, ' Tell me,' he said, ' what shall be done to the man that killeth the Philistine there, and taketh away reproach from Israel ? For who is this uncircumcised Philis- tine, that he should reproach the armies of the living God ? ' The words and looks of the soldiers, combined with the promptings of his own heart, were driving David to contem- plate a deed of arms, that would place him at one bound on the pinnacle of a soldier's glory. The modesty of the young shepherd made him insensible to the greatness of the undertaking; his braveness of heart Anoiiitifig and Advancemerit of David, 145 despised the danger. But the venture seemed easy of accomplishment. Knowing no fear himself, he was unable to understand in others the weakness of shrinking from duty, or inability to apply the ordinary rules of warfare against unguarded haughtiness. He was thinking of nothing that many another in the army might not as well have done. He was planning in his own mind an easy feat of arms. The least skilful might be able to say he could have done as much himself had he only taken thought. But here lay the breath- ings of genius. At the first glance David saw the rent in the giant's armour ; he looked at nothing else, for he was skilled in a weapon which could enter at that rent. Others could certainly wield the same weapon as well as he ; but they lacked the wisdom to see the opening in the giant's mail, or their hearts failed them at the sight of his bulk, and at the boastfulness of his words. Scarcely had he made up his mind to accept the giant's defiance, than his brother Eliab approached the knot of men by whom he was surrounded. The eager words of the shepherd are passing from man. to man. Eliab soon gathers their import. He is filled with angry scorn. IsTot a word of kindness has he for that bold spirit. His heart is not touched by the danger his youngest brother was proposing to himself. He utters no entreaty or remonstrance. He makes no appeal to affection, to home, to an aged father and mother ; but with cold, hard-hearted jealousy he upbraids the youth for wrongfully aspiring to things too high for him, and neglecting the few sheep which were his proper charge. Almost in as many words he told David not to make fools of himself and his relations by absurd speeches. The youth listened to these reproaches mostly in silence. The men of Bethlehem knew they were unfounded, and his own heart was not ruffled by upbraidings so unfair. "When he wished to join the army six weeks before, Eliab's sharp words might have had a show of reason ; but * What have I now done V he asked ; and then, pointing to the giant K 146 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its His lory. on the plain below, 'Is not that a cause?' Unmoved by Eliab's cruel tongue, he turned to another knot of people to speak to them also in language that left no doubt of his readiness to fight the giant. Eliab withdrew, ashamed to own as his brother the stripling who was thus offering himself a victim to the giant's spear. The discovery of a willing champion was soon noised throughout the camp. From the men it passed to their officers, and from these to the king's tent. David was summoned to Saul's presence. The greatest warriors of the kingdom were standing round as the shepherd entered. All had declined the honour of vindicating their country's name. For six weeks their manhood had been proudly reproached by a masterful enemy ; the only champion who at last offers is a raw, unknown shepherd lad. But what seems ridiculous or out of place to us was neither ridiculous nor out of place to them ; for the history of their race was a history of surprises, brought about by means as contemptible. From smallest things in their former struggles with masterful foes had grown the greatest, sometimes by imperceptible degrees, sometimes at one bound. If it could only be said of a Hebrew, ' The Lord is with him,' there was nothing which that man was deemed unable to accomplish. Saul himself could never forget the one step he took from following the oxen home, in the beginning of the week, to the overthrow of an Ammonite horde at its end. Misrht not this shepherd lad work a deliverance as great against Goliath ? The king seems to have been more touched with the youth's modesty than was Eliab. His heart warmed at the bold words David uttered when he stood within the circle of chiefs : ' Let no man's heart fail because of him ; thy servant will fight with the Philistine there.' Saul hesitated to accept the offer ; for the difference between the men seemed to him too great to risk the chance of battle. 'Thou art but a youth,' he said, ' and he a man of war from his youth.' But A nointing and A dvancernent of David. 1 4 7 the shepherd entertained neither doubt nor difficulty ; opposi- tion made him more eager. With the simplicity of one who believed himself a favourite of Heaven, he told the king his adventures with beasts of prey in the hill pastures round • Bethlehem. Lions and bears pounced on the lambs of his flock. But he never failed to face, or, as he called it, to beard the robbers. And often as he had faced them, he never came to harm. Conquered lions and bears were witnesses to his skill and courage, spoken of throughout the whole neigh- bourhood. His heart kindled with a generous w^armth as he added, by way of clinching his argument, ' The Lord that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, He will deliver me out of the paw of the Philistine there.' David's words were ringing with victory. All that was good in Saul caught their generous glow ; ' Go,' he said, ' and the Lord be with thee.' But Saul's second thoughts were his worst. A right royal nature lay on the outside of his heart : a leaven of meanness lurked below. Saul discovered that his own small ideas were requisite to complete David's great ones. Instead of letting him go forth to fight in his own way, and with his own weapons, Saul is so foolish as to prescribe both to the Hebrew champion. He equipped the untrained lad with the coat of mail, the helmet of brass, and the great sword that he wore himself. It was a well-meant act, but the good intentions of the foolish are often the ruin of great enterprises. David walked out from the king's presence in this glittering armour. It was an unfortunate attempt ; his courage was oozing away ; his heart w^as sinking. Fears, that he had been a strangjer to, were comin^f and f^roinof in his breast. Pieturning to the king, he calmly said, 'I cannot go in these, for I have not proved them ; ' and he laid them aside as things he should never have put on. Possibly his return to the king was greeted with remarks from both officers and men that w^ould have disheartened other soldiers. But David knew w^here his strength lay, if allowed to fight after his own fashion. 148 The Kingdo7n of All- Israel : its History, Saul's armour could not have fitted David unless he had been almost of as great size as Saul himself, taller by a head than the rest of the people. His only objection to tlie brass helmet and mail coat of the king was that he had never tried them in combat. His three eldest brothers were tall and handsome. Samuel was even as highly pleased with their figures as he had been with Saul's. In point of size, then, there may not have been the great disparity between the two champions that is commonly thought. The staff, that he laid aside in his attempt to grasp a sword, David took up again before leaving the king's presence. It had been a companion of all his toils ; it was a reminder of past achievements, and an encourager to still greater. Captains and soldiers may well have held their breath when they witnessed a shepherd, in ordinary country dress, stepping forth to meet in single battle the mightiest of mighties, clad in full fighting gear. Few of them could fail to fear that the combat would either be shunned by the youth, or would speedily end in his death and their own disgrace. But there was no faltering of pur- pose in David when his hand grasped his staff, and he saw the leathern wallet slung again from his girdle. Without a look of regret at the shelter behind him, he descends the crowded heights of the Hebrew camp. He had marked the stream from the high grounds ; its channel contained all the artillery he required. ISTeither excitement nor flurry disturbed his arrangements, for he left the heights, and advanced half- way to the battle without completing his preparations. He asked no one for help ; he seems to have confided to no one his plans, and he left it in no one's power to claim even the smallest share of his glory. On reaching the streamlet he was lost to sight, for the fringe of trees and bushes or the high banks would screen him from observation.^ But the ^ The bed 'some ten to twenty feet wide, with banks over ten feet high, would form a natural barrier between the hosts, and a formidable obstacle to the flight of the defeated. . . . The gleaming torrent bed, and the steep water- Anointing and Advancement of David. 1 49 time lie spent in making his arrangements unseen would appear to many to indicate unwillingness to meet the giant. The sunken bed of the brook, and the fringe of bushes or trees on its banks, enabled him, at the last moment, safely to shun the combat, without being seen till he was far beyond the reach of danger. But David was not thinking of escape ; he was busied about his artillery while those on the heights were impatient for the encounter. From the rounded stones in the deep bed of the brook he chose five of the smoothest for his hitherto concealed slinc^. It was a work of some time ; an ordinary choice would not be sufficient when the issue of the battle was the rolling away of a kingdom's reproach. At last he is seen on the giant's side of the brook. Few in either army could be doubtful of the result, and bitterly would Eliab deplore the evil chance which sent David thither that morninej to brin^; disgrace on him and all the family. When David cleared the fringe of trees, and stood full in view of the giant, he seemed far less formidable than when seen at a distance, descending the slope of the hill. Then his tallness may have deceived Goliath into the belief that the biggest of the Hebrews had been chosen as their champion, a picked man sought out from the whole nation. But a nearer look of the Hebrew hero inspired the giant with disdain. He was bareheaded ; his hair seems to have been auburn or red, and his beardless face showed inexperience in war. Tall and raw% perhaps somewhat uncouth in his gait or looks, David seemed a mockery, not a reality. His beautiful eyes were too far off to strike the enemy with fear of a dangerous foe. The Hebrews, in Goliath's opinion, were befooling him by sending to the. combat one who might run away but would never stand CO fight. He despised his foeman ; he thought there worn banks, consist of pebbles of every size, worn smooth by tlie great winter l)rook which has brought them from the hills.'— Lieut. Conder, Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly Statement, October 1875. 150 The Kingdom of All-Is7'ael : its History. was no purpose of battle : ' Am I a dog/ he exclaimed, evidently in the words of a proverbial saying, ' that thou comest to me with the staves ? ' The sling was hidden over the staff-head in the hollow of David's hand ; but the giant saw and thouo-ht of nothinsj save the staff. It was the shepherd's only defence against the throw of his mighty spear. Saul and his captains watched the progress of David from the hill-top. Not one of them had asked who he was, or how he came to volunteer so late in the campaign. Wearied with long waiting, they had lost all spirit and all curiosity. The king himself appears to have been the first to ask who the youth was. Abner, to whom the question was put, knew nothing about him, and none of the officers in attendance were better informed. Evidently the excitement caused by his offer to fight the giant had overpowered every other feeling; the means by which he was brought to the king were also forgotten. An unknown, heaven-sent champion had appeared in the Hebrew camp. As David advanced towards the giant, Saul could only command Abner to inquire who he was. If disaster befell, he might inform his kindred ; in the event of success, he would know whom to honour. Partly from disdain, partly from an idea that the Hebrew king was playing off a jest in sending a raw youth to sham a combat with a great warrior, Goliath allowed passion to over- master judgment. Eaining a shower of harmless curses on David's head, he invited him to approach, promising, at the same time, to feast the vulture and the jackal Avith his flesh. Clean-picked skeletons of fallen soldiers were lying on the plain within sight, and the threat of sending the shepherd to keep them company seemed to Goliath sufficient to scare David away. But there was no thought of flight in the Hebrew champion. His tongue is sharper and his views are loftier than the giant's — ' Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a javelin : but I come to thee with the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the A7iointi7ig and Advancement of David. 1 5 1 armies of Israel, whom thou hast reproached. This day will the Lord deliver thee into mine hand ; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee ; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth ; that all the earth may know that God is in Israel.' A right royal spirit does this anointed king show in his first essay against his people's enemies. Then, looking round on the heights before and behind, topped by crowds of soldiers, he added, ' And all the assembly, this here, shall know that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear ; for the battle is for Jehovah, and He will give you into our hands.' Goliath had the worst of the speaking. His temper was ruffled ; his perceptions were dulled by the passion that troubled his heart. He resolved to chastise the Hebrew's insolence without another word. His foeman was shieldless and bareheaded ; would it not seem something like fear if he, the chosen champion of a warrior race, delayed the meeting with this sharp-tongued stripling till his armour-bearer fitted his helmet on, and handed him his shield ? ISTo, it could not be ; he would go as he was, for the youth would not wait his coming. Beckoning off the soldier who carried the shield and helmet, Goliath's only safeguards, the giant slowly stalked forward. His heavy armour forbade rapidity of movement. David stood still, to allow his foe to increase beyond recall the distance between him and his armour-bearer. Every step forward brought the giant into greater danger, and David into higher hope. This inaction threw Goliath off his guard. A few steps more, and the Philistine is confident that the Hebrew will turn to flee. But he is mistaken. Instead of turning back, the shepherd suddenly comes on at a run. Men have crossed the spear and the staff in mortal combat before. Goliath and the spectators who crowd the heights believe the Hebrew wiU be foolhardy enough to try that way of battle. He appears to have no other. But wary soldiers 152 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, in both armies begin to see something more in the shepherd than meets the eye. He is cooler than his foeman ; he is bent on closing, not on running away. The mystery is soon solved. David has stopped in his forward run : he has also thrown his staff on the ground. The giant alone is near enough to see the cords of a deadly sling flung out from the hollow of the hand, the rapid gathering up of their ends, the loading of the leathern belly with a stone sharply drawn forth from the shepherd's wallet. He is betrayed to death by his own rash- ness. Neither helmet nor shield are at hand to save that bared head in front or behind.^ If he turn towards his shield- man there is greater danger than if he face the slinger. His only safety lies in baffling the Hebrew's aim. By running forward, he may escape a pellet, however well shot ; but his weight of armour tells severely on both body and mind. It deprives him of that power of rapid action which was essential to safety; it also confuses vision and thought. Were he near enough and had the chance, he might draw the brazen javelin that was strapped across his back, and discharge it at David. But he is afraid to stand still ; he is even afraid to let go the weaver's beam which he holds in his grasp. His practised eye was sharp enough to take in all the danger at a glance, but he was not cool enough to devise a means of escape or defence. David was both cool and practised in measuring his advantage. To hit a bird on the wing, to bring down the game of the desert at full speed, were feats he, like other skilful hunters, was accustomed to.^ But to strike a mark so broad as the great face of the slowly running giant was work for a tyro, not for a practised slinger. If, however, 1 In the Hebrew original the words, when translated into English, run : ' The stone sank into his forehead.' But in the Septuagint the same words are turned into, 'The stone sank through the helmet into his forehead.' Feeling the difficulty, they solved it in their own way. 1 Sam. xvii. 50 (45). ^ * 1 was very much pleased with the precision with which my black friend (a tall, fine-looking black fellah) could sling smooth stones : he had no difficulty in hitting a bird sitting on a bush at 40 or 50 yards, and he could throw con- siderably further.' — Warren's Underground J erusalem, p. 203. Anointmg and Advancement of David, 1 5 3 excitement should unsteady his hand, he had other four pellets in his scrip, wherewith to renew the attack. He did not need a second shot. As the giant came on, runninfi- towards the slinger, the smooth stone met him, making a deep dent on the forehead. Stunned by the blow, he fell on his face.^ He was not killed, for the seal-stamp of the stone ^ had caught him when his heart was in a flutter, and his vital powers were worn out with an exhausting run. But he was on the ground, seemingly dead. That was enough for his armour-bearer, and for the soldiers of both armies. The Philistine host broke in disorder ; the Hebrews pressed down the hillside in pursuit. Great as was the boastful confidence of the former an hour before, as great was their fainting of heart when their champion fell ; while from the inaction and gloom that are fatal to an army, the soldiers of Saul were suddenly lifted to a gladsome vigour, that plucked the fruits of victory in their first bloom. The reproach cast on All- Israel was rolled away that morning as effectually as Saul rolled away a like reproach at Jabesh. But the hero who did the deed was greater than Saul. He wrought a deliver- ance which the king for six weary weeks had in vain attempted to effect. Faith in his anointing to the throne was the talisman w^hich he bore with him to the battle, and cherished in the secrecy of his heart. What Saul had lost, David had found — the armour furnished by faith in his divine commission. Ptunning forward to secure his prize, and safe from attack by the flight of the armour-bearer, David drew the giant's ^ This proves he was running, and so bending foiward. At the battle of Tel-el-Kebir (13th September 1882) the same thing was seen in the slain High- landers : ' The enemy lie dead in hundreds, while only here and there a Highlander lies stretched among them, lying face downwards, as if shot in the act of charging, A few feet only in front of one of the bastions, six men of the 74th were lying, heads and bayonets pointed forward.' ^ The stone made its mark on the giant's forehead as a seal makes its mark on wax. Josephus says : ' This stone fell npon his forehead and sank into his brain.'— ^7? ^22 . xi. 6, 9. See also "Wilkinson, i. 219. 154 ^^^^ Kingdom of All- Israel: its History, sword from its sheath. Completing his work by severing the huge head from the body, he was seen with the dripping trophy in his hand, as the Hebrews passed him in pursuit. Abner immediately conducted him with his gory prize to King Saul. What he had begun, others might safely be left to finish. When he and Saul met for the first time, it was not as harper and king. David liad then become as much the representative of the nation as the king himself. He was not raised from a menial office to one of the highest in the land. But he sank his greatness, by laying aside the sword to play the minstrel for the • king's good. Only the noblest men in the kingdom could thus act. David w^as known as a soldier before he was known as a king's minstrel. It was God's arrangement, and it was the best. On learning that he was a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, Saul appears to have requested the father's permission to retain David at court : ' He hath found favour in my sight ' (1 Sam. xvi. 22, xviii. 2). The march of events, the strange shaping of human ends, described by our great poet as the work of a divinity, took from Jesse the power to refuse. His father's house and the pasture grounds of the village were no longer a fitting place for David ; ' Saul took him, and would let him go no more home to his father's house.' His first appointment seems to have been armour-bearer to the king. During the campaign that followed the overthrow of Goliath, the gallantry of the young hero, his modesty and his skill in war, made him a favourite with chiefs and soldiers. Soon he was appointed by the king ' over the men of war.' He became second in com- mand to Jonathan over the three thousand soldiers wdio formed the king's bodyguard. The three chiefs of thousands would then be Abner, Jonathan, and David. Among the officers who watched the fight with the giant, and were present at the king's interview with David after- wards, was the brave prince, Jonathan, the favourite of the Hebrew people. No sentiment of jealousy or envy troubled Anointing and Advance7nent of David. 1 5 5 his great heart, when he saw his own deliverance of the country thrown into the shade by a shepherd lad. Far too noble to be ruffled by a feeling so mean, he was drawn towards David by the earnestness of his patriotism. ' Jonathan loved him as his own soul.' A bond of friendship was formed between them, which neither time nor trouble ever snapped. As this flame of affection first broke forth in the prince's breast, so it continued to burn there, with a purity and strength that it did not always retain in David. Of David's greatness Jonathan made no secret from the beginning. He clothed him in his own garments, he armed him with his own sword, and bow, and girdle. Not a man among the soldiers was allowed to remain ignorant of David's high position ; for Jonathan publicly proclaimed it by presenting him to the army as his own equal. Every one who saw the shepherd youth, dressed in the prince's robe, girt with the prince's girdle, and armed with the prince's sword, knew that he wished David to be as highly esteemed as he was himself. Friendship could not have shown itself in a purer form. What his father promised, and sought to avoid performing, Jonathan performed at once, by recognising David as his brother and his equal. From the moment David joined the army, Saul's affairs prospered. Defeated in battle and cooped up within their strongholds, the Philistines seem to have abandoned to the victors the spoils of a virgin country. Booty easily gathered and triumph undisputed raised the greatness of David higher every day. "When the campaign ended, and the soldiers were on their homeward march, a more signal proof of the position he had won met them at every Hebrew town and village. "While the warriors were gathering the spoils of Philistine fields, the women of the nation were preparing a garland for the hero. With timbrels and triangles and with gladsome songs they poured out to meet the returning army, and to offer it the praise that had been got ready against its 156 The Kingdom of All-Isi^ael: its History. coming. With songs and dances, we are told, tliey formed themselves into two companies, one on each side of the line of march. ' Saul has smitten by his thousands,' was the joyous song of one band ; it was answered, probably by the younger women, with a more joyous song, ' But David by his ten thousands.' This harmless play from those whom Saul's victory had ' clothed in scarlet with other delights, and put ornaments of gold upon their apparel,' made a deep impres- sion on all who witnessed it. Somehow it even travelled into the land of the vanquished Philistines, borne, perhaps, by captives of high rank in Saul's train. The songs of a nation rejoicing over victory would not speedily be forgotten by prisoners. Ten years after, these songs of his countrywomen were the means of saving David from the danger of fighting against his own people on Gilboa. But Saul felt more dejected at the songs than any Philistine captives could do. Especially when the army was entering Gibeah, did their welcome jar on the king. His attendants saw there was something wrong. With the return of peace there came also the evil spirit on Saul. The songs of the women roused it from sleep. ' They have given unto David ten thousands,' he said to his confidants, ' and to me they have given thousands ; and what can he have more but the kingdom ? ' The fears of Saul had divined the truth. He beheld in David the * worthier neighbour ' who was to become king. As he thought over this fear, his crushed heart saw the ' rending of the kingdom,' thus begun in the women's songs, ending in his murder by David. Saul came to beUeve in the youth's purpose to kill him and seize the throne. Nothing could convince him of the contrary. Evil men around him encouraged him in this view. But the clearest proofs of David's innocence failed to produce more than a momentary impression. And with this clue to his actings, we can easily understand the outgoings of his madness in the plans he laid against David's life. i Afiohiting and Advancement of David. 1 5 7 The day after Saul's return to Gibeali, his madness appeared in a serious form. He was singing, as at former times, snatches of sacred song, unreal and weird. David was called in to charm the evil spirit by the music of his harp.-^ The two were alone in the chamber, the elder unsteadied by his thoughts, the younger calmly alive to the danger. A light javelin was in the king's hand. Without seeming to notice the madman's motions, David was an attentive watcher. His fingers touched the strings of the harp ; his eyes observed every change in Saul. The clutching of the javelin, the raising of it, and the unsteadiness of the aim, were all seen by the harper. It was easy for him to shun the weapon. ' I will pin him to the wall,' said the king to himself: but David bent his head, and the spear flew harmless into the wooden partition. Before the attempt could be repeated, David escaped from the room. A passing fit of madness, it would be said, prompted this outrage : nothing of the kind could happen again. David, unconscious of fault, might be disposed to take the same view. But he would be more on his guard. And there was need ; for a second time was the spear thrown, and a second time it missed the mark. * The Lord is with him,' said the wretched kino;. A higher power was watching over his rival's life. Fear of this higher power induced Saul to lay aside these thoughts of murder. He removed David from court to discharge in the field the duties of his office as captain of a thousand. Evidently there was war on the frontier. But the change from court to camp only heightened Saul's fears. The young commander became the idol of soldiers and people. Every- thing seemed to prosper in his hands. His prudence and gallantry were conspicuous in every enterprise. Erom every tongue came the acknowledgment, ' The Lord is with him.' But while the king, wrapped in gloomy fears, was hidden from ^ ' And David played with his hand as at otlier times ' [as usual]. The words seem to refer to the past. But this is not all the idea conveyed by the Hebrew phrase, which means, ■pait ox future. 158 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History public view, David ' went out and came in before ' the nation. If Saul expected tbe captaincy of a thousand to draw out in David blemishes of character previously unknown, his spies soon informed him of the vanity of these hopes. By living in the public view, David was only making it more clear that * the Lord was with him,' the highest honour he could enjoy in public estimation. Saul had in vain tried two ways to rid himself of David — open violence in the palace, and the lowering of him before the world. His mind, fertile in resources for evil, discovered a more promising means of accomplishing that end : ' Let not mine hand be upon him,' he said to those who could be trusted with his secret thoughts ; ' but let the hand of the Philistines be upon him.' Accordingly, in an interview he had with David, he put on the air of a man who, while re- gretting, wished to atone for the past. The reward of David's success in the fight with Goliath had not been fully paid — no arrangements had been made for marriage with the king's daughter. Saul now proposed to pay this reward. ' Behold,' he said, ' my elder daughter Merab, her will I give thee to wife ; only be thou valiant for me, and fight the Lord's battles.' David does not appear to have entertained suspicions of plot or treachery. He avowed his unworthiness of the honour ; his very life was a small thing to spend in the king's service ; he would spare no effort in fighting tlie Lord's battles. The betrothal of David and Merab took place ; the time was fixed when she should have been given him in marriage. But David was not slain in the passages at arms to which his brave heart prompted him during the year of betrothals. Saul's third plan for ridding himself of a rival had thus failed. He was blind to his own interests. Instead of receiving David into the bosom of his family by marrying him to Merab, he gave her ' to Adriel the Meholathite to wife.' It was well for the princess that her father's sins brought no further harm to her, for she is the only one of Saul's family who can be said, Anointing and Advancement of David, 1 5 9 if not to have lived happily, at least to have died in peace. As her sons are called the sons of her sister Michal (2 Sam. xxi. 8), she may not long have survived the death of her father and her brothers on Mount Gilboa. The fight with Goliath has given rise to many a fight be- tween critics. In 1 Sam. xvi. 21, David the harper is said to have become Saul's armour-bearer; but (1 Sam. xvii. 15) about a page farther on in the story, he goes back to Bethlehem to keep the sheep. Then in 1 Sam. xvii. 40, he appears dressed as a shepherd; and in 1 Sam. xvii. 55, both Saul and Abner know nothing about him. A great difficulty exists here, or there is no difficulty whatever. The former view of the passage has been in favour for many centuries. As long ago as the copying of the oldest manuscript of the Septuagint Greek, not only was the difficulty felt, but an attempt was made to remove it out of the way. That attempt has met with approval in modern times. It consisted in omitting 1 Sam. xvii. 12-31 from the text. The going back of David to his father's house, his visit to the camp, his conversation with Eliab, and with the soldiers, were left out as pieces somehow added to the real story. This solution is accepted as giving the ancient Hebrew account of the fight. The twenty verses omitted are considered a later embellishment, which a blunder- ing editor found current, and thrust into the Hebrew text without thought, or in despair of reconciling the two. Does this solution remove the difficulty, as several critics imagine ? It does not ; it leaves matters worse than it found them. In 1 Sam. xvi. 21, David appears as Saul's armour-bearer; but in 1 Sam. xvii. 40, immediately after the omitted verses, he appears in shepherd's dress with staff, scrip, and sling. And in the previous verse (39), he avows himself ignorant of sword, and helmet, and arms generally, although he is supposed to have been Saul's armour-bearer. What, then, is gained by omitting the verses ? ISTothing ; but the inconsistency in the i6o The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. story only becomes greater. David tlie armour-bearer turns out to be David tlie shepherd ! The omitted verses have actually to be supplied in some way before we can understand the verses which are retained. Eeally, however, on a fair reading of the story, there is no difficulty whatever. A writer is entitled to anticipate in his book parts of the story which he intends to relate fully afterwards. This is done every day. Let the last three verses of 1 Sam. xvi. be read on the supposition of the writer having adopted this principle, as he has often adopted it in other passages, and the difficulty will prove to be no difficulty at all. Thus 1 Sam. xvi. 21, 22: 'David came to Saul, and [as I shall relate fully afterwards] stood before him ; and he loved him greatly, and he became his armour-bearer. And Saul sent to Jesse, saying, Let David, I pray thee, stand before me, for he hath found favour in my sight.' After the story of the fight, this sending to Jesse is clearly hinted at (1 Sam. xviii. 2) as a point already related : ' Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father's house.' A view of the passage which reduces everything to order without violence, and without resorting to ' critical subterfuges,' is the simplest way. It is also in accordance with the rules of historical writing, which have been followed in all acres, and which are observed in the book of Samuel. Thus there are two accounts of Abiathar's coming to David (1 Sam. xxii. 20-23, xxiii. 6). But the Greek translators, believing he did not join the outlaws at Keilah, and yet fearing this inference might be drawn from the Hebrew, brought the two into agreement by a slight change on one word : — 1 Sam. xxiii. 6 (Heb.). 1 Sam. xxiii. 6 (Greek). When Abiatliar fled to David to When Abiathar fled to David, he Keilah, he came down with an ephod also came down with David to Keilah, in his hand. having an ephod in his hand. CHAPTER VII. DAVID AN OUTLAW AND AN EXILE. (1 Sam. xviii. 20-xxvii. 12.) [The chronology of the events related in this section may be thus arranged : — B.C. 1066. Fight with Goliath, about harvest-time (April or May). 1065. Marriage of Merab at the end of her year of betrothal. 1064. {Autumn.) Marriage of David with Michal at the expiry of 'the days,' i.e. the year of betrothal, xviii. 20-28. 1063, Year of inaction, Deut. xxiv. 5. 1061. {April.) "War again, xviii. 30-xix. 8. 1061. {October.) Flight of David to Gath. 1060. {April.) David saves Keilah in harvest-time. 1060. {June.) Flees to Ziph. 1059. {April.) Is at Engedi, xxiii. 29. 1058. {Spring and Autumn.) At Maon. 1058. {Winter.) At Ziph. 1056. {April.) Becomes king in Hebron, after residing one year and four months among the Philistines. As David was thirty years of age at Saul's death, 2 Sam. V. 4, and was fit for war, that is, twenty years of age, when he slew Goliath, Num. i. 3, the above may be regarded as an approximation to the truth.] Michal, the younger daughter of Saul, was a woman of a bold and forward spirit. She was not one who would shrink from publishing in the palace her right to become the wife of David, after Merab was bestowed on Adriel. Every person was aware of Saul's promise t-o bestow one of his daughters on the hero ; and there would not be wanting handmaidens to whisper to Michal his praises, and tlie happiness of the woman who might become his wife. Things fell out as 1 62 The KiJtgdom of All-Is7'ael: its History, might have been expected : the story spread through the palace that ' Michal was in love with David.' That love was connected in some measure with the right which her father's promise gave him to claim her as his wife. Eumour carried to the ears of Saul word of his daughter's feelings. Another chance to rid himself of a dangerous neighbour was thus offered to the king. Nor was he slow to seize it. ' I will give him her that she may be a snare to him, and that on him may be the Philistines' hand.' And thus the sunshine of a court seemed again to beam on David. The king spake as his friend ; captains and statesmen had a kindly greeting for the soldier. In a few days David and Michal were betrothed. Saul affected satisfaction at their approaching union ; ' a second time this day,' he said, ' art thou become son-in-law to me.' His words almost imply a reproach of David for not having married Merab. And the reason is not far to seek. Unable to pay the ransom required for Merab's hand, David had been set aside in favour of a w^ealthier suitor. Would his success be greater with the younger sister ? As month after month of the year of betrothal passed away, David began to fear an adverse turn in his fortunes. He heard whispers of a heavy payment or dowry for his wife. Men spoke to him of the honour of marrying a king's daughter, and asked what ransom he intended to give. David saw the deceit and the snare. Saul, keeping his promise to the ear, was preparing to break it by again asking a price he could not pay. He had neither gold, nor silver, nor lands wherewith to buy Michal. He had bought her at the risk of his life ; he had no higher price to give, and if dowry were demanded from liim, he let it be known that Michal could not become his wife. Things had fallen out so far exactly as Saul wished. By his orders, the courtiers threw out hints of the kind's increasincj desire to have the hero for a son-in-law. Accident brought about these private meetings between them and David ; in David an O it t law and an Exile. 163 reality tliey were part of the plot. Tlie talk always turned on the dowry. ' See/ they said, ' the king delighteth in thee, and all his servants love thee ; so pay the dowry and become his son-in-law.' One after another told him the same story. It was given, as it were, in confidence, and more in the way of hints than direct encouragement. But David had no delicacy in making his want of means the reason of his unwillingness to 00 forward. The burden of his answer to their hints and words always was, 'You seem to think it a light thing for a poor man to become the king's son-in-law, but I cannot pay him any suitable ransom for his daughter.' The go-betweens reported these answers to their master. They were precisely such as he wished. ' Tell him,' he said, ' that I have no pleasure in the ransoms commonly paid, but in a hundred slaughtered Philistines, that vengeance may be taken on the king's enemies.' The hook was too well baited, in Saul's opinion, not to lure David on to destruction. No sooner was the matter set before him in this light, than honour and patriotism combined to urge him onward. But the time allowed for gathering this ransom of death was brief. ' The year of betrothal was not run out,' we are told (1 Sam. xviii. 26); it soon would be, and in that partly lay the danger. Saul had delayed letting David know the price he wanted, till the time for paying it was almost come. If not paid on the very day, the hand of Michal would be forfeited. Should David attempt to reap the dowry on the fields of Philistia and fail, his reputation would suffer. But, as he would dare almost anything rather than fail, this enterprise of hazard seemed one from which he would never return. Saul was perhaps in as great a difficulty as David. While unwilling to receive him into his family, two members of his own household were eac^er for the alliance. It was not safe to disoblige either of them. Jonathan, moved by affection for his friend, could use more freedom than any other man in representing to the king the dishonour of making a promise, 164 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its History, which, though perhaps kept to the ear, was broken in its spirit. And Michal's speeches may have been harder to bear than her brother's reasoning. She would have her own way in any- thingj on which her heart was set. If father or friends refused to humour her wishes, she had means of annoyance at her command which might make them glad to yield to her will. David may have suspected guile on the king's part in this sharp dealing about the dowry. But he had the prudence to conceal his thoughts. Assembling his men, he at once repaired to the frontier to seek among the armed bands of the Philistines, or in some of their border strongholds, the price of Michal's hand. The level nature of the country, and the hatred borne by Hebrews and Philistines to each other, made the enterprise one of unusual danger. Along the borders men sowed, and ploughed, and reaped their fields with arms in their hands, and under the shelter of fortresses or of bodies of troops, to which they could run for safety in a sudden raid. But David and his men lauc^hed at toil and dan^^er. Before the year of betrothal expired, he returned with double the price asked by Saul. The short time allowed for reaping this harvest of death from the Shephelah may not have been the only drawback with which David had to contend. *A hundred dead Philistines without the loss of a Hebrew life ' may have been a more serious difficulty, leading David, as it would do, to risk his own safety with a rashness unwarranted in other circumstances. The marriage of David and Michal could not be put off, after the dowry asked by her father had been paid twice over. But these events only deepened in Saul's mind the bitter conviction of his own rejection by Jehovah. It bore fruit in due time. He disliked the marriage, and would gladly have broken it off at the last moment if he could. Owing to these feelings, Saul declined to receive David into his own house. The young captain held hic^h office at court, and was son-in-law to the kins: ; but he lived in a house at some distance from the palace. Saul David an Outlaw and an Exile, 165 feared the youth who had stolen the people's hearts, his son's affection, and his daughter's love : ' the Lord was with him.' According to Hebrew law, a man who had been newly married was not called on to go out to war or to undertake any public business for a whole year (Deut. xxiv. 5). He was allowed to stay at home. David's union with Michal was therefore followed by a year of inaction, which gave Saul no new cause for alarm. For that year, at least, his name was seldom in the mouths of men. But these days of idle- ness came to an end. The storm of war again broke out on the borders, and again a large Hebrew force assembled to drive back the invaders. ' The princes of the Philistines ' led the heathen army ; Saul, along with Jonathan, David, and other captains, was in the Hebrew camp. While the two armies lay watching each other's movements, detachments of the invaders spoiled the neighbouring country. They were resisted by Saul's troops. Skirmishes were constantly taking place, with varying success ; the balance turning now to the one side, now to the other. But though disasters befell several of the Hebrew captains, none happened to David ; 'as often as [not afUT'\ the princes of the Philistines w^ent forth, David behaved more prudently than any servant of Saul, and his name was exceedingly precious.' This success awoke the madness that had been slumbering for a year. Determined to rid himself of this ever-present dread, Saul issued orders to Jonathan and his chief servants to have David put to death. Afraid to raise his own spear again, he trusted to the swords of others to make surer work. The order was given at night, perhaps at the evening meal in the kino-'s tent, and the time of executincr it was fixed for the followinfT morninGj. But Jonathan was horrified at the wickedness. Anxious to save his father from the guilt of innocent blood, he discovered the king's intentions to David : ' Saul, my father, seeketh to kill thee ; and now see that thou assuredly beware in the morning to abide in the secret place, i66 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its History. . . . in the field where thou art. I will speak of thee to my father, that I may see his mind and tell thee.' David's place of hiding was thus well known to his friend. Apparently this hiding is contrasted with another hiding, immediately before David fled altogether from Saul's court. The one was a Sabbath-day's work; the other a week-day's (1 Sam. xx. 19; see xix. 2). Next morning Jonathan drew his father near the spot where David lay concealed. As they walked along, he reasoned with him on the sin of shedding innocent blood, and reminded him of the joy he expressed in word and look when he saw the Philistine fall under the hand of David. When eJonathan said of this deed of arms, ' The Lord wa-ought great salvation for All-Israel,' he used almost the same words as fell from Saul on his refusal to shed his Hebrew enemies' blood after the overthrow of ISTahash. They touched chords of tender memories in the king. No wicked advisers were at hand to take the edge off Jonathan's reasoning. Saul's heart was softened. Leaving him no escape from following the path of right, the prince persuaded his father to utter the solemn oath, ' As Jehovah liveth, he shall not die.' Believing his friend's life no longer in danger, Jonathan then called for David, told him what had passed, and presented him to Saul. And thus, at least for the time, this family quarrel, as shameful as it was unfounded, was healed. Before the close of the war against the Philistines, tilings came to a pitched battle, in which the heathen were defeated with great slaughter. This success was mainly due to David. AVhile it brought him the gratitude of his countrymen, it awoke again in the king's breast a hatred which neither the ties of kindred nor the solemnity of oaths could allay. The end of the campaign also brouglit with it a return of Saul's illness. The same fear of David haunted him ; the same wicked counsellors, who had sown discord between them in past years, again gained his ear. Whether by design or by David an Oittlazu and an Exile. 1 6 7 chance, David was called on one evening to soothe the madness of Saul. The murderous attempt, made in the same place four years before, was repeated with a like result. The spear sank in the wall, and David escaped to his own house. But Saul's fears were not again awakened by his failure. Prompted too, perhaps, by wicked men, he despatched guards to watch the house of David, and put him to death in the morning. It would have been dangerous to attempt an attack by night. The man, whose skill brought down Goliath, was not to be rashly dealt with when he stood at bay. And, in the confusion of night, his craft might succeed in turning the guards on each other, while he himself escaped unhurt. But Saul's own children atrain crossed his desims. Michal learned that guards were posted round the house, and that her husband was doomed to die in the morning. Probably Jonathan sent to inform her of the deed of blood which Saul had resolved on. He could not venture to visit his sister himself, for his love to David was too well known ; but the bearer of the tidings might be some woman-servant, who had ways and means of passing the guards which the prince had not. Michal's short and decided way of breaking the news to David showed no alarm either for his safety or for her own. ' If thou save not thy life by flight this very night, to-morrow thou shalt die.' Some of Saul's children inherited the spirit of their father. Michal was one of them. Her courage rose with danger. David's heart, on the other hand, sank within him. In presence of an enemy, the young man was cool, and ready to run any risk. Struck at from behind by those who were afraid to meet him to his face, his nature shrank from the ignoble contest. Had he been left to himself that night, he would have waited the inevitable approach of death in the morning. But his wife was of another mind. When every sound in the household was stilled, the guards might be expected to watch with less care, if she had not persuaded them to leave a place unguarded for her hero and 1 68 The Kingdom of All-Is7^ael : its History. theirs to escape. Then was her husband's chance. Providing herself with a rope, she waited with him in one of the chambers on the upper floor of the house till it was time to make the attempt. Withdrawing the casement and lowering the rope, she listened as David noiselessly slipped down, passed the guards, and escaped into the open country. At daybreak next morning the guards made no attempt to enter the house. They shrank from taking the life of their hero. Their unwillingness to do more than watch was reported to the king, who sent another band, not to kill his son-in-law, but to bring him a prisoner to the palace. Almost every one around Saul felt that if the hero were to be put to death, no hand save Saul's own should shed his blood. But besides the time lost in this passing to and fro, a further start of an hour or two was obtained for David by the cunning of his wife. When the guards arrived from the palace, she pretended he was sick. She refused to let him be annoyed with business, however pressing. With an authority which the wilful daughter of a king can use, she forbade the men to enter the sick-room. They had no wish to see their prisoner, and would have been deceived had they entered. The figure that lay on the bed was a large wooden idol, which Hebrew women sometimes kept as a household god unknown to their husbands, and which they regarded as the giver of good fortune and a happy life. The head was resting on a pillow woven from dark goat's hair, and the body was covered with a garment often worn by David, and perhaps well known. The captain of the guards, believing his prisoner secure, returned with the soldiers to the palace. Saul gave him no thanks for his tenderness : ' Bring him on the bed to me to put him to death,' exclaimed the enraged king. The trick was then discovered. Again there was a passing to and fro of messengers between David's house and the palace, and a further gain of time for the fugitive. Michal was summoned to answer for her conduct. In the David a7t Outlaw and an Exile, 169 weakness caused by sudden terror, she held up her face to a lie, when she would have earned the purest honour by confessing the truth. 'Wherefore hast thou thus deceived me,' demanded Saul, wdien she made her appearance, * that thou hast sent away mine enemy, and he is escaped ? ' Had she boldly answered, ' Because he is my husband, and I love him,' her praise would have been in every mouth to this hour. But she entered in her own defence a plea that was false : ' He said to me. Send me away ; wherefore should I slay thee ? ' Her defence confirmed Saul in the view he had taken of David's designs. If he could thus threaten his wife with death, he w^ould not hesitate to kill her father, who stood between him and a throne. Michal served her husband in the evening by helping him to escape ; in the morning she did him the greatest disservice by this purposeless lie. After passing through the guards, David made for Naioth on Eamah, the city of Samuel. It seemed his only refuge. Samuel, who was afraid to go to Bethlehem to anoint David, has no fear of consequences in receiving the fugitive. He learns, perhaps for the first time, the story of the king's attempts to take David's life. Soon the truth w^as placed beyond doubt by the approach of soldiers, sent to bring him to Saul. The prophet met them with the weapons of spiritual warfare. The ' sons of the prophets,' fifty or more in number, w^ere arranged in or near their school or college. Samuel led the worship in which they were engaged. David was with him, at once the cause and the prize of this contest between the sword of the State and the sword of the Spirit. As the troops climbed the hill, strains of sacred music filled their ears. A change began to pass over the hardy soldiers. They dishked the business on which they were sent ; they disliked it more when, as each man looked on his comrade, there was seen gathering on his face an awe that betokened failure in their enterprise. Apparently their leader, seeing the looks of his men, went forward to judge for himself: ' He saw the com- 170 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Histoiy. pany of prophets singing, and Samuel standing as appointed over them.' Both he and his men caught up the strains of the prophets, for the songs of praise were well known. An nnseen power was moving the whole detachment, as the rising wind ripples the face of the ocean. When they reached the buildings, they were powerless to seize their prisoner. Ac- knowledging the might of Samuel, they joined his band of singers, and became worshippers themselves. The tidings of defeat soon travelled to Saul. A second and a third band were sent on the same errand, with the same result. Unawed by these warnings of Jehovah's purpose to shield David, Saul resolved to lead a fourth detachment him- self, to vindicate his right to rule in his own land. They halted at ' the great well,' on a shoulder of the double hill of Eamah, which, from the view obtained on its top, was called Sechu or ' watch-tower.' Probably near this well Saul met the maidens at whom many years before he asked where the prophet lived. He was making a similar inquiry on this occasion at, perhaps, other maidens sent for water to the well. Without knowinc^ it, Saul stood on the edGje of a charmed circle, within which he should no longer be master of himself or of his soldiers. Every step he took towards its centre saw his purpose and his authority growing weaker. As he climbed the hill, the songs of worshippers arose from him and his men instead of the sounds of war. But Saul did more. On meeting Samuel he cast off his upper garment and prophesied, singing the sacred songs of the prophets. The conflict in Saul's breast between his madness and the feelings that now stirred it ended, as such conflicts often do, in a fainting fit of many hours' duration : * he lay down naked all that day and all that night.' This cannot have taken place before the crowd in the streets of Eamah, but in the house of Samuel, where none but the prophet and trusty servants witnessed the wreck of a great mind. The people, who heard or saw somewhat of the outer workings of this spirit in the David an Outlaw and an Exile. i 7 1 king, were reminded of a saying once well known in the neighbourhood, and which these events saved from being forgotten altogether : ' Is even Saul among the prophets V The family quarrel seemed to be again made up, and David returned to his place in Saul's court. But the wicked men around the king gave the youth no rest. E"ot long after his flight from Eamah, as his return to court was called, a plan was arranged for murdering him in the palace ; the time chosen was a new-moon feast, at wdiicli the kinq; c^ave a two- days' entertainment to his courtiers. Knowing Jonathan's friendship for David, Saul advised his counsellors not to make the prince aware of their design. The precaution proved to be useless. David heard of the plot through some other channel, perhaps through Michal, who lacked neither the bold- ness nor the cunning to follow up any hints of danger, till she discovered the whole truth. On hearincf the storv, David sought the help of his friend and brother Jonathan. Their interview took place in Gibeah, and perhaps in Saul's own house. ' What have I done,' he asked, ' that thy father is again and again seeking my life ? ' He was beginning to lose heart. Scarcely is he rescued from one net than he is in the toils of another. Jonathan was somewhat displeased with his friend for entertaining these suspicions. * Far from it,' he said in reply ; ' thou shalt not die. Behold, my father doeth nought, great or small, without making it known to me ; and wherefore should my father liide this thing from me ? It is not so.' But David knew the plans of his enemies too well to be lulled into security by these assurances. Calling Jehovah to witness to the truth of his statements, he said : ' Thy father hath said. Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved ; there is but a step between me and the death designed.' Half doubting, half believing this tale of bloodshed, the prince puts himself in David's hands, and asks how he can best show his friendship. To ascertain the truth or falsehood of the plot, David proposed a plan which Jonathan undertook to follow. 172 The Kingdom of All-Is7^ael : its History, Afraid lest there was danger in the house in which they then were, the two friends withdrew to a spot in the open fields, in which, according to their plan, David would be in hiding on the third day after. It was an archery park among the broken ground on the south of the city, and on the road to Bethlehem. A large stone, or stone-heap, called Ezel or departure, marked the place.^ In that retired spot they renewed their league of kindness and love, Jonathan spoke as one who had no right to entertain hopes of ever filling the throne of Israel. Sadness, pervading the view which he took of the future, threw a deeper gloom over their meeting that day. According to the plan agreed on between the two friends, Jonathan returned to the palace, while David hastened towards Bethlehem, to be present at a yearly festival of all his rela- tions, to which he had been summoned by his brother. As the distance was only about ten miles, there was ample time to go and return before the third day. The first day of the new-moon feast passed without David taking his seat at Saul's table. The place set apart for him remained empty. But the murderers, unaware of his absence, carried out their designs as far as they could. A messenger entered the room to summon Jonathan away on business. Abner at once took the empty seat by the king's side ; but the victim did not come to the slaughter-house as they wished. Several who were in the secret feared he had been made aware of the plot. The king thought differently. ' Not so,' he said; 'it is a chance. He is not clean, perhaps,' meaning 1 In 1 Sam. xx. 19, 41, the Septuagint Greek renders the Hebrew by 'remain beside that Ergab,' and he rose 'from the Argab.' The word is supposed to mean a stone caum ( Argob) ; and several writers prefer the Greek to the Hebrew. But they overlook the changes made by the Greek on the spelling of the word ; and they do not seem to be aware of the ignorance of Hebrew, shown in the Greek, when it gave that very word, ergah, twice in circumstances which render the use of it exceedingly ludicrous (1 Sam. vi. 11, 15), and once Mergab (1 Kings iv. 34). And they overlook also a clear mistranslation and ignorance of Hebrew in 1 Sam. xx. 3, 5, 19. Amattar'i (ver. 20) (a mark) seems to be confounded with Saul's family of Matri, spelled in the Greek Mattari (1 Sam. x. 21). David an Outlaw and an Exile, 173 that lie had by accident touched a dead body, or in some other way broken the ceremonial laws. When the guests took their seats at table on the following day, there was still no appearance of David. Saul's suspicions were then awakened. Turnincj to Jonathan, he asked him the reason of the son of Jesse's absence. The prince replied that he had given him leave to run to Bethlehem to see his kindred at their yearly gathering. The question of Saul and the leave-giving of Jonathan prove that, whatever was David's rank at court, he held command under Jonathan. The king had therefore no reason to find fault with his son-in-law. But his well-laid plans were again crossed. The gloomy madness that had spent its force hitherto on David now turned on his own son. While cruelly reproaching him for his love to the national hero, he let out the real source of his own hatred : ' All the days that Jesse's son liveth upon the ground, there shall be no security to thee and to thy kingdom.' Every one at table must have then seen the true reason of Saul's jealousy. It was the crown itself for which he was afraid. And from other quarters had already come, or soon would come, rumours of the anointing of David, which, magnified by these heartburn- ings at court, would pass in ever-increasing whispers from tribe to tribe throughout the kingdom. Saul's madness urged him further than was prudent. * Send and fetch him to me,' he said to Jonathan ; ' he is doomed to death.' But the prince refused to act till he knew what ground there was for this step: * Why should he die ? What hath he done?' Lifting his spear, Saul threw it at his son for daring to stem the tide of his rage. Indignant at the insults heaped on him by his father before guests and servants, Jonathan left the room without tastingj food. Heavy at heart he repaired next morning to the stone Ezel, at which he had ac^reed to meet David. As his move- ments were likely to be watched, he made it appear as if he were intending to practise archery. A boy, carrying bow and 1/4 1^^^ Kingdom of A II- Israel: Us History, arrows, accompanied him to the shooting ground. When they neared the stone the boy ran forward, while Jonathan shot three arrows beyond him. They missed the mark, as was intended. 'Is not the arrow beyond thee?' the prince cried, loud enough to be overheard by David, who had returned from Bethlehem, and lay in hiding hard by. These words had been agreed between them as the signal of danger. Displeased, apparently, at missing the mark three times, Jonathan called to the boy to make haste in gathering up the arrows and in returning to the town. His hand was not steady nor his eye true that morning. And if the lad knew, as it is likely he did, what took place at the king's table on the previous day, it would seem to him most natural in the prince, skilful archer though he was, to miss the mark, and to desire to nurse his grief in solitude. AVhen he was out of sis^ht, David rose from the south side of the stone or cairn Ezel, where he lay in hiding. It was tlie side next Bethlehem, from which he had come that morning. There was not time for much speaking. Thrice, as he approached, he cast himself on his face to the earth before the prince in token of regard. They kissed each other ; they wept bitterly ; but David's grief, if not more deeply seated than his friend's, found vent in fiercer bursts of tears. In few but weighty words, Jonathan sent him away in peace, reminding him as he did so of the solemn oath they had sworn, to show kind- ness to each other and to each other's children in all time coming. This interview took place on a Sabbath morning. Within an hour or two after leaving Jonathan, David got from the high priest five of the twelve loaves of shew-bread, newly taken off the table in the Holy Place. According to tlie law, these loaves were removed on the Sabbath (Lev. xxiv. 8). The month seems to have been October. As the campaign on the borders ended some time before, the new- moon feast was in the fall of the year. But the moon of October, from which the Hebrews are believed to have David ail Oittlaw and an Exile, 175 reckoned tlieir civil year, was a season of general joy, at which a two days' feast might be held in the palace, or a family gathering in Bethlehem. The labours of the year among an agricultural people were then ended ; a harvest- home could be kept with friendly meetings and general rejoicing. After parting from his friend and brother, David hastened southward to the city of i^ob, in the neighbourhood of whicli the Mosaic tabernacle had been set up. Ahimelech, the high priest, and many of his kindred, then resided there. He was a son of Ahitub, who w^as grandson of Eli. Whether he was a brother of Ahiah, or the same man with a slightly different name, — a thing not uncommon in those days, — cannot now be determined. As David approached the town, hunger con- strained him to seek for food after his journey from Bethlehem and his flight from Gibeah. He was sure of a friendly recep- tion, for he was well known to the high priest, nor had he any fear of treachery. Even though every priest in Nob had seen him at the tabernacle, there was no dangler. Holdincj office from God, and not from the king, the priesthood, when guided by a man of worth, was a barrier against the encroach- ments of despotism on the rights of the people. When David reached the tabernacle, the high priest was engaged in the duties of his office. Morning worship, which continued longer on Sabbath than on other days, was just over. Ahimelech trembled on seeing him alone and unarmed. He loved the soldier, but there was something in his manner that betokened anxiety ; his dress also told of travelling during the early morning. The thought flashed into the high priest's mind, ' He has again fled from Saul's anger ; this time he comes to the altar of Jehovah, the next resort after Samuel.' ' Why art thou alone and no man with thee V he asked. David pretended business of importance, which the king desired to conceal from others. He was not alone, he said ; the soldiers appointed to attend him were waiting his coming at a place 176 The Kingdom of A II- Israel \ its History, not far off. Of the falsehood of the first of these statements there is no doubt; the second was true. Young men who had been with him to the family feast at Bethlehem, and whom he had persuaded to share his flight, — Joab, Abishai, and Asahel, if not others, — were waiting for him not far from Nob. They were his own kindred ; his dangers were theirs ; his honours would also be shared by them. Safety and hope urged them to cast in their lot with David in this dark hour of his fortunes. But Ahimelech was unable to furnish the fugi- tive with the bread he asked. Although the town contained not less than sixty or eighty households, none of them could give him a few loaves. The same thing takes place in that country to this day. Often is the hungry traveller surprised by finding it impossible to procure bread for himself and his servants in a good- sized village. But the high priest offered to give David part of the shew-bread which had been removed that morning for the priests' use. He took the soldier's word for it that he could, with a clear conscience, exercise his dis- pensing power by giving the young men bread, forbidden to all but the priests. * Although the way or business we are on is common,' David said, ' you safely may.' But there was a spy in the court of the tabernacle watching what was going on. An Edomite, named Doeg, whom Saul had made chief of his herdmen, and who had become a proselyte to the Jewish faith, was for some reason detained before the taber- nacle at that time. He drew near as the high priest was giving David the loaves. He did not know the sacredness of the bread, only there were so many loaves given that he spoke of them afterwards as 'provision for a journey.' But he overheard what passed. David asked for sword or spear, as he had hurried away from Gibeah without arms or armour. Ahimelech said the only weapon in the place was ' the sword of Goliath, wrapped in the robe behind the ephod.' ' None like it,' he answered ; ' give it me.' But the mention of the ephod, the high priest's sacred dress, seems to have suggested David an Outlaw and an Exile, 177 to David the idea of consulting Jeliovali regarding the future. Ahimelech had done this for him before, and willingly did it again. Perhaps, then, the assurance was given, of which we read afterwards, and which seems to have heartened both him and his followers when hard pressed by danger, ' I will deliver thine enemy into thine hand, that thou mayest do to him as it shall seem good unto thee ' (1 Sam. xxiv. 4). Accompanied by several of his men, David sought refuge in the city of Gath, without leave from its king (1 Kings ii. 39). It was a bold step he took in thus venturing into the lion's den, for there w^ere not a few among the citizens to whom lie was known by sight. He may have expected to escape notice in the crowd till he should find means of return- ing to his own land. But if he did, he was mistaken. The attendants of Achish, prince of Gath, heard of the prize that was caged within their walls. Expecting a reward for their zeal, they brought him to the palace. But the same cunning that foiled their champion five years before, foiled them also. ' Is not this David, king of the land V they ask, when their prisoner stood before Achish. ' Was it not of him they sang in the dances, saying, Saul hath smitten by his thousands, and David by his tens of thousands ? ' The Hebrew prince was greatly moved by their words. It would have been well had his outward demeanour answered to the thoughts that were then passing through his heart. ' I sought the Lord,' he says, in a sacred song written after his escape, ' and He heard me, and delivered me from all my fears.' But, unhappily, he did more. Before all in the palace he spoke and acted as if his misfortunes had deprived him of reason. When shut up in prison he scrawled on the doors, and let his spittle roll down his beard. One knows not at which part of these proceedings to feel most grief; at the hypocrisy which was soiling a great name, or at the meanness of a hero who, after having often risked his life in battle, was sacrificing honour to save himself from enemies. David was M 178 The Kingdam of All-Israel: its History, suffering from one of those fits of weakness that sometimes overwhehii the noblest of our race. But Achish did not thank his servants for the prisoner they brought. Even though their story were true, he would not have touched a hair of David's head. ' Is it not clear to you/ the king asks, in mockery of his servants, ' that he is mad ? Why have ye brought him to me ? ' Have I not got madmen enough when I have such as you ? With these and such reproaches Achish ridiculed his servants, rating them so soundly for their lack of discernment that they were glad to let the prisoner go from the town. The cave of Adullam was the next hiding-place of David and his men. It appears to have been one of those many- galleried caverns that are found scooped out by nature in limestone rocks. As it gave shelter at one time to not fewer than four hundred men, besides women and children, its numerous galleries must have been of great extent, well aired, if not lighted in some parts from above. In short, the cave of Adullam was an underground city or camp.-^ Trusty messengers soon conveyed to David's kinsmen in Bethlehem tidings of his place of refuge. The news arrived in time to save their lives. His father, his mother, and all his kindred, fled to Adullam. Men of broken fortune, and of a desperate or discontented spirit, also saw in him a leader round whom they might rally with hope of recovery in the world. Because he needed the swords of daring men, they sold him theirs for the safety or the honour which they expected in return. Pamiour rapidly spread the news among all in debt and in distress, for whom the charms of life could only be regained by some lucky stroke, that Adullam was a centre at which they would be welcome. It was on the debateable land between Judah and the country of the Philistines, a district in which the unfortunate of both nations would meet as fellow-sufferers, and not as enemies. Debtors who fled from more guilty creditors ; aspirants to 1 See MerriU's East of the Jordan, 348. David an Outlaw and an Exile. 1 79 honours, which they had failed to win, while they had incurred tlie hatred of the winners ; and men whom the law, though not conscience, counted criminals, found a refuge in this no-man's zone. People from Gath and other heathen cities sought safety there — Hittites and Hebrews. Probably some of the best hearts in Palestine were sheltered in its caves and hills, and not a few of the worst. There, in all likelihood, David first met with Uriah the Hittite, Ahimelech the Hittite, and Ittai of Gath, two of whom rose to hioh honour when their leader became king. Perhaps Zelek the Ammonite, Ithmah of Moab, and Igal from Zobah, joined him at the same time. Outlaws and fugitives of many tribes, heathen as well as Hebrew, were probably in hiding in the district on David's arrival at Adullam. The means of forming a little army of broken men were thus at hand, as soon as a leader with David's great name appeared among them. David's first step was to seek a place of safety for his aged father and mother with the king of Moab. They could not follow the fortunes of adventurers, who mio-ht have to flee from fastness to fastness in deserts or on mountains. Ties of blood through Euth connected their family with the Moabites. While these could not be disregarded, the Moabite king was also in subjection to Saul, and might be called to account for harbouring those whom Saul considered his enemies. However, Moab gave David's father and mother shelter all the time he was in the hill stronghold of Adullam. But this could not have been longjer than eis^ht or nine months. Whether Moab then betrayed them to Saul, or sent them back to their son, is unknown. But the vengeance taken on that people many years after would be a blot on David's name, if there was no betrayal of trust. Saul was not so well informed of what passed on the borders, especially in the debateable land, as to know that a body of four hundred men had gathered there under the chieftainship of David. Evidently Adullam was not then i8o The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. counted part of Juclab. But he soon heard of their passing through the country to a new hiding-place. While David was uncertain what step to take. Gad the prophet, who had joined the band, delivered to him a message from heaven : ' Thou shalt not dwell in the mountain hold : go, that thou mayest come for thy good to the land of Judah.' Leaving AduUani, he stole through the country with his men to a place among the w^estern hills, called the wood of Hareth. They appear to have arrived there about the end of May. The passage of a band of four or six hundred men, with women, children, and baggage, through a peopled country, could not be kept hid from the court. Saul was told of David's march. Summoning to his presence the chief men in his service, to only a few of whom, perhaps, the reason of David's flight was known, he lays before them what he believes to be his wrongs, and asks their help in the righting of them. The assembly met on a hill (Eamah) near Gibeah ; every man was in his proper place ; and the king, like a modern Arab chief, sat with a long spear in his hand under the tamarisk tree. * Hear now, ye Benjamites ; even to all of you,' he said in irony, ' will the son of Jesse give fields and vineyards ; all of you will he make captains of thousands and captains of hundreds ; that ye have all conspired against me, and none of you is re- vealing to me my son's league with the son of Jesse, and none of you is sorry for me and revealing to me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait as at this day.' Benjamin had got a double portion a second time, when the king bribed his own tribesmen, as he evidently did, by honours and profits, which they should only have shared with their country- men. But even these large bribes failed to make the courtiers forget the free ways of their fathers. They held their peace at Saul's bitter words. But Doeg, the chief herdman,^ had not forgotten what he witnessed several months before in the ^ 1 Sam. xxii. 9 : ' Doeg, ... set over the servants of Saul. ' So tlie English ; but the Hebrew is : ' Set over servants of Saul,' that is, some servants. David an Outlaw and an Exile. 1 8 1 court of the tabernacle. He told the story of the high priest's kindness to tlie king's son-in-law, of the provision for the Avay, of the bringing forth of Goliath's sword, and of the con- sulting of Jehovah. The king's rage had now an object on which to break. Ahimelech and all the priests of Nob were sent for. The distance was about an hour's journey. For them the last sacrifice had been offered that morning. But among the reasons guessed for the summons to Saul's presence, David's visit may have been one that never occurred to Ahimelech or his companions. On their arrival at Gibeah, Saul accused Ahimelech of conspiring with David against his life and crown. With a dignity befitting his rank and character, the high priest took the part of the slandered hero. N'obly did he assert his faithfulness to Saul as the king's son-in-law, as one of his privy council, and as an honoured man in his palace. No one, he said, was trusty as David was. Then casting from himself the charge of treason, he reminded Saul that he did not then for the first time consult Jehovah at David's request ; he main- tained also his entire ignorance of any conspiracy in which the young man was engaged. But nothing could soften the heart of this gloomy prince. He had ceased to obey the voice of God : he was determined to rule as a king. ' Ahimelech,' he said, ' thou shalt surely die : thou, and all thy father's house.' He was bent on reading a lesson to the highest and the most esteemed, as well as to the humblest, of his unalterable determination to punish David and all his helpers. But can he have suspected the high priest of anointing David to be king that day Doeg saw the two together ? His mind, full of suspicion, acted on its impulses. On the instant, he ordered the runners or guards standing round ' to slay the priests of Jehovah.' But the men shrank from the deed. Doeg was more pliant. That wicked man slew on the spot eighty-five priests of God, while Saul looked on approving the crime. Nor was his vengeance appeased by these murders. Every living thing in Nob, man, woman, child, ox, sheep, and ass, fell before the 1 82 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. swords of Doeg and like-minded adventurers. According to the story, Saul made a vow of utter destruction against the priests and their city. Trom that vow there was no drawing back. He did not fail here, as he failed when sent against the Amalekites. It may seem inconsistent with the Hebrew land laws when Saul boasted of giving his chief men grants of vineyards and other estates. As the country was divided by lot among the people, and as each estate returned at the jubilee to its first owner's family, there was no room for grants, such as Saul made, if these laws existed. But the depressed state of Jesse's fortunes throws some light on the king's doings. He does not appear to have enjoyed the same affluence as his ancestor Boaz. Nor did he stand so high in the town of Bethlehem. Evidently Saul was endeavouring to humble the nobles of the land, and to exalt his own creatures at their expense. By seizing their estates and giving them to favourites, while he let the great body of the people enjoy their property in peace, he would hope to rid himself of dangerous nobles and to provide for clamorous friends. The story of Naboth is a case in point. But there is another way of accounting for these grants of estates. Saul was not the only king who had them in his gift. David also had large opportunities of amassing land, if not of bestowing it on his courtiers. In one case he got a gift from the Philistine king, Achish, which he is expressly said to have bequeathed to his successors — ' the kings of Judah.' That gift was Ziklag, with the pasture grounds in the neighbourhood — an estate of great value. But besides, the whole of Canaan was not divided by lot in Joshua's day. Many districts were held by the heathen in defiance of the conquerors ; many others, that had been won by the Hebrews, were lost by their children. In Saul's time Israel had again lifted its head. Another Joshua was making his power felt by the heathen in the land. Their num- bers were becoming less ; their estates were passing in various David an Outlaw and an Exile, i8 J ways out of their hands. A shiiilar process went on during David's reign, perhaps also during Solomon's. Large estates in many parts of the country would thus fall to the crown, or could be seized by the king and given to his favourites. Abiathar, the son of the high priest, alone escaped the fate of his kindred. As he had with him the sacred garment, called an Ephod, when he fled for safety to David, he was probably engaged in priestly duty at a distance from ISTob. There was only one place at which he might have been so engaged, the house of Abinadab, near Kirjath-jearim, which was then the resting-place of the ark. The conscience of David reproached him when he heard from Abiathar the tale of bloodshed. The harp which sang the fate of Saul and Abner, of whom one was the author and the other an approver of these cruel deeds, can scarcely be thought to have kept silence over the high priest and his kindred. Certainly the historian has not embodied in his narrative an elegy, like those composed over the less worthy men who fell on Gilboa and at the gate of Hebron. But there was a reason for his silence. An elegy on the priests could have no effect in setting the crown on David's head. Elegies on Saul and Abner, as we shall see, had a political meaning, and served a political end. But David's feelings towards the doer of these deeds found expression in a song, which has been preserved in the book of Psalms (Ps. lii.). He lays all the guilt on Doeg ; precisely as he did when Abiathar told him the story : he utters not a word against the king. The latter was no longer responsible for his acts in the same way as was the former. ' Lover of evil above good,' he calls Doeg : ' of all devouring words, of lying above the speaking of right, a sharp razor, a worker of deceit.' The word lying in this delineation means.coj^s^^i'mc?/, and is the word which describes the charge urged against Ahimelech by Saul. But the contrast drawn by the poet between himself and Doeg, brings the tabernacle scene vividly before a reader. ' God shall pluck thee out of the tabernacle, 184 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its History. and root tliee out of the land of life/ lie says (verse 5). How different is to be the poet's fate ! ' I, as a green olive tree in the house of God : I trust in the mercy of God for ever and ever. I will wait on Thy name ; for it is good before Thy saints ' (vv. 8, 9). * Thy holy ones ' was a tribute of praise paid to the murdered saints of Jehovah. He was accustomed thus to wait before ' the holy ones ; ' he believes he shall so wait in time to come. The harvest w^as gathered, and the threshing-floors were busy in Judah, while David's camp was still pitched in the wood of Hareth. It was about the middle of June. But the joys of harvest did not enliven the camp, for the outlaws were living in constant fear of discovery. Every hill-top, that gave a wide view of the country below, was a watch-tower on which sentinels were placed, who might gain early tidings of approaching danger. Scouts, looking down on the plains below, or gathering tidings from frightened Hebrews, who were seeking shelter, one day brought in the news that a marauding band of Philistines had crossed the border, shut up the men of Keilah in the city, and were feeding their cattle on the threshed corn heaped on the floors outside. The spirit of the hero awoke in David. Calling for Abiathar, he put the question : ' Shall I go and smite these Philistines ? ' The lot was drawn. Yes. But his men were afraid to move. ' Here in our own Judah,' said some of the faint-hearted, ' we are living in fear : why, then, go against the array of the Philistines ? ' Again David asked counsel, and again the answer was clear. Go. Encouraged by the fearlessness of their leader, the men no longer shrank from followinir. And their success was com- plete. The robbers were driven back ; their flocks were taken by the victors ; and the siege of Keilah was raised. Grateful for their deliverance, the citizens invited David to take up his abode among them. Xor were he and his men unwilling to comply. Wanderers as they had been for many months, it was a pleasant change for them to enjoy once more, among David an Otttlazu and an Exile. 185 their countrymen, the plenty of home. Saul was overjoyed on hearino' of David's removal with his band to the walled o city of Keilah. ' God hath cast him off/ he said ; ' if it were not so, he would not shut himself up in a city having gates and bars.' What a joy to Saul to be able to say, Jehovah is not with him ! Orders were issued summoning all the people to assemble for war. The raid of Philistian plunderers formed a reasonable excuse for thus calling out the militia ; and per- haps the real object of the expedition was known only to a few. By one stroke Saul proposed to rid himself of the dangerous outlaw. But his plans were crossed. From some one that knew, David became aware of Saul's designs. In his distress he again appealed to the Friend above, who was watching over him in all these trials. Abiathar, clothed in the sacred ephod, drew near to consult Jehovah. As the first question put was, * Will Saul come down ? ' the preparations he was making cannot have been generally known. The second question was, ' Will the chiefs of Keilah betray me and my men into his hand ? ' In the looks and words of the head men, David read the budding of a purpose to betray their guests, l^or was he mistaken. 'Yes' was the answer given to this renewed inquiry. [No resource was left to the deliverers of Keilah but to leave the place, and wander whithersoever they could. They kept to the desert, encamping on hill-tops, from which a view could be had of the surrounding country. Evidently the ingratitude of the people of Keilah had made them suspicious. At last they pitched their camp on a hill in the wilderness of Ziph, near the centre of Judah, four miles south of Hebron. The region, studded with caves and ravines, seemed favourable for hiding. Its lofty hill-tops, rising more than 2800 feet above the sea-level, also gave the fugitives a wider view of the surrounding country. But Saul allowed them no rest. For a whole year he hunted them incessantly (1 Sam. xxiii. 14). Things came to a crisis in Ziph. During a lull in the chase after David, or while some Ziphites were planning a 1 86 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. betrayal, Jonathan was able to pay liim a stolen visit. They met in a thick wood, which then furnished the outlaw with a covert. It was the last interview between the two friends. But Jonathan had no foreboding of the death that was in store for himself. He encouraged David to persevere in his course of right, and not to fear the hand of Saul. He never expected to be king himself, for even Saul's vow during the war of independence had entailed on him something like civil death. He hoped to be the second man in the kingdom, of which his friend should be the head. Saul himself was opposing this course of events, while he believed in it as an ordinance of God. But friendship, however close, could not deceive David into the desirableness of an arrangement such as Jonathan sketched, which must have led to disagreement in the end. The clouds which rested on the future of both of them, were such as Providence alone could lift without blighting the friendship which knit them together. David's reply to Jonathan is not recorded. Probably the answer of a loving heart, knoAving what it knew, and puzzled how to respond to a friend's view of futurity, is better omitted from the history. But the two renewed the covenant of mutual kindness made about a year before. Then David remained in the wood, and Jonathan returned to his own house. After this gleam of sunshine came the storm. Some Ziph- ites went up to Gibeah to offer Saul their help in catching David. Actuated by dislike of the outlaw, or by even worse motives, they described his haunts to the kincr, and nrixed him, in words which show throughout their acquaintance with the popular law-book of the country, to come down and seize his runaway servant. ' Thou shalt not deliver unto his lord the servant which is escaped from his lord unto thee,' it said (Deut. xxiii. 15). 'He shall dwell with thee, among you, where it liketh him best.' ]\Iuch more applicable was this law to a servant like David, escaped from his lord the king, than to a fugitive slave. ' Our part,' they said, ' shall be to David an OutlaiiJ and an Exile. 187 deliver him into the king's hand/ the very word wliich gives force to the law quoted. Tliese mean men went even further. At Saul's request they undertook to gain David's confidence, to find out all his secret haunts, and to betray everything to the king. As soon as they were ready, Saul would surprise him : ' I will search him out,' he said, ' throuirliout all the thousands of Judah.' They succeeded to perfection. David was deceived by their professions of friendship. When one well-planned attempt failed, they continued to be trusted by him, and even arranged a second plot for his seizure. Every- thing was at last ready. David and his men were then lurking in that part of the steppe called Midbar-Maon — the pastures of Maon. Their camp was pitched in the south of the district. AVhen Saul and his soldiers approached, friends gave David warnin^:' of their comincj. He thoudit it enouoli to shift his camp to a place difficult of access, though on lower ground. It was called the Eock or the Mountain ; and is, perhaps, the same as the conical hill of Main — a place about five or six miles south of Ziph, from which it can be seen. Lulled into security by their neighbours, they seem to have kept little watch on the surrounding waste. Their lives nearly proved the forfeit of this rashness. Guided to the spot by the Ziph- ites, Saul is on them before they are aware. While the outlaws are marchin^j off at one side of the rock, the kinc; is climbino- the other, and sending detachments of troops to the right and left, with the view of cutting off their retreat. Encumbered with women, with children, and with baggage, David and his men must almost have lost hope in that hour of danger. But again Providence checked Saul in his career. When the prey, which he had hunted so often, was fairly snared in the toils, his hand was arrested. In hot haste a messenger arrives with tidings of a Philistine raid across the border. Every hour spent in hunting David is increasing the losses and sorrow of Hebrews not twenty miles away. His soldiers are at once called in, and their faces turned westward, while the hunted 1 88 TJic Kingdom of All- Israel: its History. outlaws move eastward across the desert. From that day forward the place was called by the outlaws, ' The Slipping- away Eock.' It was a spot they should never camp in again without thinking of their narrow escape. It was a scene which should always remind them of one of those chapters in life, which vie in strangeness wdth the most unlikely passages of romance. Nor did their leader forget that narrow escape. ' The divisions or courses ' became a word famous in history. It had been used three times before in the division of the Promised Land by Joshua ; but the word assumed a world- wide character from that escape of David. It w^as used in later and more peaceful days to denote the ' courses ' or * divisions ' of David's soldiers, of priests and of Levites. Thirty-five times is it found in Hebrew literature applied in that meaning — in the book of Chronicles alone. In six other places only does it occur. ' The Eock of the Divisions ' or ' of the Courses ' was a turning-point in David's history, burned into his memory, never forgotten in his after life. After a journey of about twenty miles across a dreary waste, David reached Midbar-Engedi, where the ground rises in high limestone hills, scooped into caves of surprising extent. Deep glens and ravines, running down to the Dead Sea, part the hills one from another, and render the capture of outlaws almost an impossibility. Want of water and the poorness of the burnt soil impart to the country a look of cheerless gloom. Here and there throughout the w^aste a spring bursts forth, and rushes down to the Dead Sea on the east, or wells and cisterns are found in the desert on the west. Of these springs the best known is that of Engedi, or the ^ Fountain of the Kid,' so called from the wild goats which browsed on the scanty herbage of the rocks. Eushing forth in great volume from the limestone at a height of five hundred feet above the Dead Sea, its waters, tasting strongly of lime, leap from ledge to ledge till they reach the bottom of the hill. For more David ail Outlaw and an Exile, 189 than half a mile they then flow over a bed of rich loam, that stretches between the high ground and the beach. The channel of the brook down the face of the cliff and along the plain is thickly shaded by willows, and tamarisks, and figs. In former times it watered the vine-terraces which the art of man, taking advantage of the chances offered by nature, formed on the hill-sides. The terraces still remain, memorials of a rich past, but, excepting petrified leaves, the vine and the palm have long disappeared ! Farther down, the water, conveyed to all parts of the bed of loam, enabled the hus- bandmen of a neighbouring hamlet, known as the town of Engedi, to reap rich crops of grain and fruit. No harvests were earlier, and none more plentiful, than those gathered in the tropical climate of the Dead Sea shores. Desolation, dreariness, and poverty now reign, where the poet formerly saw ' clusters of camphire (henna) in the vineyards of Engedi ' (Song i. 14). Near this fountain David and his men sought refuge after their escape in Midbar-Maon ; but the hills of the wild goats were as unsafe as the desert of Ziph. The narrative furnishes no reason for suspecting the Engedi shepherds of betraying their fellow-tribesman. But treacherous Ziphites may have again been the informers, as the pursuit was too soon renewed to allow gossip time to carry news to Gibeah. Although the king was but returned from following the Philistines, he lost no time in again hurrying after David. With his usual body- guard of three thousand chosen men he hastened southward, entering the desert at Tekoa, and following the line of wells to Engedi. As he neared the end of his journey, he came to sheepfolds among the hills, in which flocks were penned at night. It was one of David's look-out stations, on which two or three of his men kept watch for the approach of danger. A galleried cave in the neighbourhood gave them covert from the weather, and a hiding-place from enemies. When Saul's army approached, David was on the outlook himself with a 190 TJie Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. few of his men. His little band of wanderers was probably encamped in safer quarters. The watchers withdrew into their retreat till the host should pass. But great was their surprise to see the tall figure of the king darkening the mouth of the cavern. He was alone. By those in the galleries of the cave, everything he did was clearly seen against the light of the sky outside ; while to him, even had he been looking for outlaws, nothinc^ was visible on the dark backaround. He stooped down, not far from David. A wide and flowing garment covered his body. The men whispered to David to kill Saul, reminding him as they did so of an assurance he had received, that Jehovah would one day deliver his enemy into his hand. But the hero shrank from slaying an unarmed foe ; still more so when that foe was the anointed of Jehovah. "Without answering, David crept stealthily along till he came behind the king ; then, unknown to Saul, he cuts off part of the loose robe, and steals back with liis prize, leaving the kincj unharmed. Xone of his men had time to do what their leader thus left undone. "While he was upbraiding them for their evil thoughts, Saul rose up and walked away along the road. AYhen the army had passed the cave, David followed them unseen, till they came to a spot where he could sliow himself without danger. The region in the neighbourhood of Engedi abounds in narrow ravines of great depth, — places which, from their gloomy and forbidding nature, David calls, in one of his finest poems, valleys of Death's shadow. Men can speak across them with ease, though the passage from one side to the other, even by sure-footed dalesmen, may take an hour or so of hard toil. While thus within earshot of Saul, David may have been more than an hour's march distant. Calling aloud, ' My lord, 0 king,' his voice, ringing through the silent air of the hills, caught Saul's ear. ' Why dost thou listen to a mean man's words, saying, David seeketh thy hurt ? ' he asked. ' One said to me in the cave to kill thee ; but I did David an Outlazo and an Exile, 191 not : thou art the Lord's anointed, and niy father. See tlie proof of my forbearance;' and lie hekl up the skirt of Saul's robe. ' As for me,' he continued, * I am of as little worth for the kingj of Israel to trouble himself about as a dead doLi; or a single flea. The Lord will judge between me and thee.' The words of David touclied a tender chord in Saul. His powers of body as well as of mind had become unstrung. He was haunted by fears, that grew fiercer on the nursing they got from his own gloomy heart and the suggestions of ' a mean man.' And no fears are more dreadful. But when he heard himself spoken to by the hunted outlaw with reproachful love, his better nature awoke to the wrong he had done, and he burst into tears. ' Is this thy voice, my son David ? ' he asked. ' More righteous art thou than I ; thou hast repaid me good for evil. Jehovah,' he said, using the law word for deliver which the Ziphites previously used, ' Jehovah delivered me into thy hand, and thou killedst me not. But when a man findeth his enemy, sendeth he him well on his way as thou didst to me ? Behold, I have long known that thou shalt surely be king. Swear to me, then, thou wilt not root out my name from my father's house.' Most cheerfully did the outlaw give the oath that Saul asked. Then the two parted, — Saul returning to Gibeah, David withdrawing to his stronghold among the hills. But Saul had published to the whole nation his belief in David's anointing to the throne. His words were soon known in all parts of the country. The king and his hunted son-in-law were friends again, though the latter still lived in the wilderness as chief of an outlawed band. David even ventured abroad among his countrymen. Shortly after this healing over of the quarrel, Samuel died at a great age, and David appears to have been present at his burial in Eamah. But the peace between him and the king was soon broken. "When he shifted his camp from the hill-country of Judah to the southern desert of Paran, an event happened which blew the embers of Saul's 192 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, hatred into fiercer flames than before. At that time there "was dwelling in ]\Iaon a man named Nabal, who belonged to the house of Caleb, of which the headquarters were in the ancient city of Hebron, about ten miles farther north. His name is the Hebrew word for ' fool,' which might be esteemed rather a nickname given to the man by wiser neighbours, were it not that, in all countries, some fatliers delight in bestowinn- on their children names which are outrages on common sense. He was a person of great wealth ; he owned three thousand sheep and a thousand goats. *His business/ it is said, or the pasture grounds of his flocks were in Carmel, two miles north of Maon, the place which David and his men used to haunt in the previous year till driven from it by Saul. Among the friends whom David made when encamped in that wilderness, were the shepherds who tended the flocks of Xabal. In the neighbourhood of his tents they never had cause to fear violence from his men or attacks from robbers. By day and by night they were safe themselves, and so were ISTabal's flocks. The robbers and the wild beasts in these wastes were alike kept far away by the help of David. Owing to the misrule of Saul, and the ravages of the Philistines on the borders, the country was in an unsettled state. Many servants, as ISTabal said, were then breaking away from their masters, and many robber hordes swept the wilderness pastures of flocks, which the shepherds were unable to defend. But the flocks of this churlish noble were in safe keeping tinder the guard of David's band. When Nabal Avas shearing his sheep in Carmel in spring- time, David, expecting to be rewarded for the kindness shown in autumn, sent up ten of his young men to put him in mind of the past, and to request a share in his good fortune. Had tlie outlaw been a freebooter, he would have demanded as a right what he, being an honourable man, sues for as a present or a blessing. And had his ambassadors used insolent words, Xabal would have given them all that they asked. But David an Outlaw and an Exile. 193 hearing tliein speak softly, requesting a favour of liim in the day of his good fortune, in his foolishness he believed David was afraid to use other lano-uacje. This was the man's nature : as was his name, so was he, a fool, without a spark of generous feeling. ' He was harsh and evil in his doings.' To their polite requests, to their wishes for long life and health and happiness to him and his, Nabal replied with drunken abuse : ' Who is David, and who the son of Jesse ? To-day many are the servants breaking away every man from his master. And shall I take my bread and my water and my slain beasts, which I have slain for my shearers, that I may give to men whom I know not whence they are ? ' The servants of Nabal who had introduced the messengers, and were standing by, did not dare to remonstrate. ' Such a son of Belial !' they whispered to one another, ' there is no speak- ing to him.' But the messengers terrified the shepherds by the threats which they let fall at parting. The camp of David, in the plains below, was thrown into uproar on the return of the young men. The outlaws, hoping for some of the dainties that were to be got in Nabal's halls, had sent ten of their number, designing thereby gently to remind him that a whole camp looked for a share of his blessing. But they return as empty-handed as they w^ent. Instead of David's politeness being repaid in kind, he is railed on as a runaway, and his messengers are insulted before the man's household. ' Swords on ! ' was the order at once issued to four hundred of tlie band. Two hundred remained behind in charge of the women, the children, and the baggage. David himself marched up towards Carmel at the head of the four hundred. He is bent on vengeance for the affront offered to his messen- gers. He is speaking of nothing but blood as atonement for the insult. Not even a child shall see the morning light in Nabal's house. But he has taken a step which miglit have cost him dear. In the meantime Abigail, the wife of ISTabal, a woman of 194 ^^^^ Kingdom of A 11- Israel: its History, great beauty and good sense, becomes aware of the danger with which her household is threatened. One of the shepherds told her of Nabal's surly answer to David's messengers, and of the threats which fell from them when they left the house. Aw^are, it may be, of the quarrels between this ill-matched pair, he spoke of his master in terms that few wives would have borne, however much they may have despised their husbands at heart. Being a woman of quick parts, she sees the danger, and is forward to meet it. There is no wringing of her hands, no beating on her bosom, no hurried flight from home. Whether she was an heiress w^hom Nabal had married, or was too high-spirited to regard the authority of one so foolish, she acts as if his goods were hers to deal with at her pleasure. Loading six or seven asses with country riches,^ and sending them on before her under the hands of servants, she followed, w^ithout lettincj Nabal know. ISTor did he seem to regret her absence. It was drawing towards evening when she set out. The noise and bustle of feasting were already beginning. Probably Nabal w^as better pleased at her absence from his carousals than if she had come to grace his board. David and Abigail met in a deep ravine not far from the house. It was one of the many rents by which the country in that neiohbourhood is torn. While she was ridini:^ down one side, under the shadow of the hill, he was marching down tlie other at the head of his men. On meeting the ^ The present consisted of the following : — 200 loaves of bread. 100 raisin cakes. 200 % cakes. 2 skins of wine. h sheep, dressed and ready. \\ bushel of parched corn. The first three of these items were a full load of two asses (2 Sam. xvi. 1). Other four asses at least would be required for carrying the rest of the present. As ten loaves of bread and a bushel of parched corn were deemed sufficient for three men for some time (1 Sam. xvii. 17), it is clear that the present of Abigail would keep the camp of David in good cheer for several days. David ail Otttlazv and an Exile. 195 armed array, she leaped from her ass, threw herself at David's feet, and besought his favour towards her household. The homage which this beautiful woman did not give her own husband, she bestows unasked on the champion of Israel. David's anger melted away before her words and her beauty. The sudden change bespeaks unusual tenderness of heart. Abigail has brought it about by steps which show her to have been a woman of ability, but not what a wife ought to have been. If she were sold to Nabal for a sum of money, as was then too often the case ; or if, being an heiress, she were given away by law to a man she despised, the difference between Hebrew manners and ours speaks in her behalf. And this difference may greatly affect the view we take of conduct which seems forward and unwomanly in the young wife of Nabal. ' Upon me, me, my lord,' she said, ' be the guilt : let thine handmaid now speak in thine ears, and hear thine handmaid's case.' Abigail was requesting David to make his men stand aside, while she told her story to himself alone. When all were out of hearing, she proceeded : * Regard not, I pray thee, my lord, this man of Belial, Nabal, for as his name, so is he : Fool is his name, and foolishness is with him.' Then slie thanked Jehovah for withholding David * from coming in blood,' and wished his enemies to be fools like Xabal. Briefly she dismisses the handsome present ' as a blessing for the young men who walk in my lord's foot- steps.' Her most persuasive words are reserved for the end : ' Forgive now the sin of thy handmaid, because Jehovah will certainly make to my lord a sure house. But a mean man hath risen up to pursue thee, and to seek thy soul ; but tlie soul of my lord shall be bound up in the bundle of the living with Jehovah thy God, and the soul of thine enemies it shall he sling out in the middle of the hollow of the sling.' Then she added, ' When the Lord shall have appointed thee ruler over Israel, to have shed blood causeless, and to have helped thyself, shall be no stumbling-block to thee, and 196 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its History, heaviness of heart ; but when the Lord shall deal well with my lord, then remember thine handmaid.' Words of wisdom so persuasively set forth would have touched any heart. David grants her request. He does more. ' I have accepted thee/ he adds at the end. But Abigail's words are more than proofs of her ability. They show how widespread in Israel was the belief in David's succession to the throne. All Israel knew it, as a whispered secret, which none but Saul himself dared openly to utter. She also knew, as every one in the land knew, the story of the bringing down of Goliath by a stone out of the hollow of the sling. With inimitable skill she touches it so gently but so surely, that David conld not fail again to hear the women's songs, ' Saul hath smitten by thousands, but David by ten thousands.' By the words she deftly uses, Abigail asks him to think of that victory, and to do nothing which might dim its lustre. But there are dark parts in Abigail's speech. Her description of her husband is unbecoming. And her prayer to David, ' Eemember thine handmaid,' leaves an unpleasant impression on a reader. It may refer to the thraldom in which law and custom had placed her to an unworthy husband. It may be nothing but a prayer for easement to a sorely tried woman, when David came to be king. But we are apt to judge it in the light of events w^hich shortly followed. Perhaps this is unfair. When Abigail reached the house, she found it in all the merriment of feast. Her husband was too drunk to be spoken to of the danger he had escaped : his guests and servants, copying the example set, were abandoning themselves to the royal abundance provided. But next morning, when sleep had put her husband in possession of the little sense he ever had, she laid before him, with such force as a woman of her parts easily could, the dangers of the feast, the swords of the outlaws, and his own narrow escape. His weak heart, shattered by over -drinking, became as a stone within him. David an Outlaw and an Exile. 197 Guilt and cowardice drove him perhaps to the only friend he had, the wine -cup. Carmel, where his business was, may have been as famous in Nabal's time for its vines as it became two centuries later (2 Chron. xxvi. 10). He feared the outlaws might return. Nor was Abigail at all unlikely to put this view of the case before him. If it were so, one can readily understand how hard drinking brought the man to an untimely end. In ten days he was dead. The inspired writer says, ' Jehovah smote him and he died,' of which the meaning is that he died more suddenly than was expected by those near him, especially by the revellers who gathered round him at the sheep-shearing feast. Drunkenness would do the work, without an unexpected stroke from Providence. When David heard of Kabal's death, the charms of Abigail's beauty and wit came back on his heart. He sent several of his young men to ask her to become his wife. Nor was the youthful widow unwilling to make amends for a married life of bitterness, by as brief a widowhood as possible. She rose from her seat on hearing the words of the young men ; she bowled herself before them till her forehead touched the ground ; and she called herself but a handmaiden, who would deem it an honour to wash the feet of David and his followers. Mounting her ass, and accompanied by five maidens of her household, she followed the messengers, and became David's wife. Michal had not then been given away by her father to another husband. Abigail tlius usurped Michal's place. But she found, when it was too late, that her fancy had pictured in David a singleness of heart which was not there. Soon a rival was brought in to share his affections — Ahinoam, from the neighbouring village of Jezreel in Judah, the mother of David's son Amnon. A few years after, Abigail was but one of a host of wives in his palace. These marriages brought David into trouble. They were an affectation of greatness which few but kings paraded. 198 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. But they were also a slur cast on Saul's family. The anger of the king again burst out as fiercely as ever against his son- in-law. He beo-an with divorcing^ his dauditer Michal from David, as he had right and reason to do. Then he gave her in marriacje to one of his own tribe, Phalti of Gallim, a town not far from Gibeah (Isa. x. 30). Next, breaking the peace which had been made between them, he renewed those hunts which had nearly cost the outlaw his life already, and wliich gave him endless annoyance during the rest of Saul's reign. And in this David met deserved punishment. Prompted perhaps by Saul, the same Ziphites who betrayed David a year before, again undertook to make his haunts known at court. They had soon an opportunity of showing their zeal in the king's cause. Hachilah, a hill on the south of Midbar- Ziph, had long been a favourite camping ground of David's band. Having moved northward to that place after the marriage of their chief with Abigail, they were living there in peace, fearing neither treachery nor attack. But guided by the Ziphites, Saul almost surprised their camp. With his three thousand men he made a hasty march from Gibeah to Hachilah, a distance of about thirty miles. David knew nothing of their approach till, from his own stragglers and shepherd friends, he heard of troops encamped on the hill before them. Spies were at once sent out to ascertain who they were, and whether Saul were with them, with the object of seizing David. There was evidently room for doubt. Favoured by the gathering darkness, the spies were able to survey the camp and to discover the king. But Saul's guards were soon silent in sleep. Overcome by the fatigue of a thirsty march, the soldiers cast themselves on the ground for rest. Waggons, conveying provisions for the army, were drawn up in the form of a rampart, within which Saul and his chiefs slept on the bare ground. Their upper garments furnished them with all the covering needed in that hot climate. Beyond the rampart of waggons, the trench as it is David an Outlaw and an Exile. 199 called, lay the common soldiers, scattered liere and there as tliey found places fit for repose. Before long all were sunk in an exceedingly deep sleep.^ Being encamped in a friendly country, and not aware, it may be, of the outlaw's nearness, no means were taken to guard against surprise. But they were well watched. David, with two of his men, Ahimelecli the Hittite, and his own cousin Abishai, climbed to the top of a hill opposite Saul's army. By the light of the fires or by that of the moon they saw from the higli ground everything in the camp. Wliich of you will go with me down among them ? asked David of his two companions. He did not wish both of them to risk their lives. If they that go perish, one at least will be left to warn their friends to flee. Abishai volunteered : Ahimelecli remained on the hill-top to carry back tidings should they be discovered. Accustomed to all the shifts of savage life, the two soldiers crept stealthily down into the slumbering host. The heavy breathing of men, rising in measured beat on the still night air, told of the soundness of a first sleep. But who, if suddenly awakened, would not mistake the outlaws for fellow-soldiers, whom duty or bodily wants had roused from sleep ? They reach the waggon rampart. I^ot a sound breaks the stillness of midnight but the breathing of wearied soldiers. They pass within, creeping forward till they are beside the king. They have no fear of discovery, for the deep breathing is a sure token of safety. Abishai, rejoicing at the chance, and eyeing the tall spear stuck into the ground at the king's head, whispers, as he stoops over the prostrate body of Saul, ' Let me smite him with the spear even into the earth, once only.' A second stroke from him who spoke that short speech would not have been needed. The king, who tried three times to pin his son-in-law to the wall with a spear, might now, with the same weapon, be pinned to the earth, never again to rise. ^ ' A deep sleep of Jehovah,' not 'from Jehovah,' is the correct rendering, that is, in the Hebrew language, ■ very deep sleep.' 200 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, But no feelinf? of veno-eance ruffled the heart of David. ' Destroy him not/ he said, ' for who shall stretch forth his hand on the Lord's anointed and be o'uiltless ? ' Abishai reasoned against this over-tenderness, as he deemed it. But he could not change David's purpose. * JSTo/ he said, ' either Jehovah shall smite him with a plague, or his day shall come to die, or he shall go down into the battle and be taken away. But take the spear which is at his head and the cruse of water, and let us go.' So safe did the two outlaws feel, and so accus- tomed were they to calmness when environed by danger, that they hold this conversation at the king's side. Taking with them the spear and the cruse, they crept back, as noiselessly as they entered, to the waiting-place of Ahimelech. On reaching the top of the hill, David called aloud on Abner. The first sleep of the army was wearing off. As the call rose loud in the still air of these wastes, the army, startled by the cry, sprang to their feet. ' Answerest thou not, Abner ? ' were the words then heard coming from the hill- top. ' Who art thou that criest to the king ? ' shouted Abner, unable to make out the voices of two or three calling together. ' Art not thou a man ? ' exclaimed David ; ' and who is like thee in Israel ? Wherefore, then, keepest thou not thy watch, for one of the people came to destroy the king thy lord ? Not good is this thing ; assuredly worthy of death are ye, because ye kept not watch over Jehovah's anointed. Yea, where is the king's spear and the cruse of water that were at his pillow ? ' The spear and the cruse had been taken away ; men had been in the camp who had no right to be there. Saul's heart was touched ; for David alone would have let a second chance of righting his wrongs pass unimproved. And this feeling helped him to a knowledge of the voice that was speaking from the heights. Answering for himself, he asks, ' Is this thy voice, my son David ? ' Indignant at the slanders uttered against his loyalty, David prays in the king's hearing, that, if mean men have set him on to this bootless David aii Outlazv and an Exile. 201 cliase of the guiltless, vengeance may liglit on their heads. They had driven him out from the Lord's own land. ' Go, serve other gods/ was what they said by their doings, if not in words.^ Saul felt the justice of these reproofs. Acknow- led«4ino' his sin in seekinsf David's life, he bids him return again to the haunts of men. And with this holdinc^ out of peace Saul parted from his son-in-law in the stillness of night, never again to meet him till they both stood before the Judge to whom the outlaw had appealed against the king's injustice. On thinking over this new outbreak of hatred, David became afraid of a renewal of those dangers to which he nearly fell a victim before. J^o oath could bind the king, no proof of regard for his welfare could still the malice he bore to his son-in-law. And the men who were near the throne had succeeded in keeping this malice alive. "VYith pardonable bitterness the outlaw always spoke of them by a word which was applied to designate grovellers, earthy like the earth from which they came. Fearing their power, he made overtures to Achish, king of Gath, for leave to enter his service. In no other way did it seem possible for him to save his life. He did not ask counsel of his Friend in heaven ; ' he spoke to his own heart.' When passion or fear drives men to follow counsel of doubtful prudence, the warning or displeasure of a true friend becomes irksome. The step David proposed to take was unworthy of his past history. It was sure to lead him into danger; it might even imperil his chance of ascend- ing the throne. But fear blinded his judgment ; perhaps also the temper of his men, indisposed to risk such campaigns as ^ David was quoting the popular laAV-book, Deut. xiii. 6, 7 : 'If thy brother or thy son entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods. ' The word mtice is translated stir up in Samuel. Let us keep the same rendering in both passages, since the word is the same. We then have, ' If a mean man's sons have enticed thee, cursed be they, . . . they have driven me out from the Lord's inheritance, saying, Go, serve other gods' (1 Sam. xxvi. 19). The passage is full of Deuteronomy. 'The Lord's inheritance' (Deut. ix. 26), and ' serve other gods, ' are common phrases in it. 202 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. tliey had already gone through, forced on him a policy of which he disapproved. For five or six years this struggle had continued between Providence and the king of Israel It was like many more struggles, of which the ripened fruit in man's experience is the proverb, Threatened men live long. But it differed from them in several of its leading features. David knew he was anointed to outlive Saul, and to take his place on the throne. Whatever dangers befell him, a way of escape was certain to be opened up, if the Prophet Samuel's word was a reality. The risk of death from his persecutor's hand was great ; the sweetness of his life was soured, and he could never count on a moment of rest from pursuit by the king and his guards. He lost faith in Providence ; he feared that Saul would suc- ceed some day. Loss of faith, however pardonable it may seem, led David to a line of action which caused him bitter sorrow, many mistakes, and years of waiting for the fulfilment of his hopes. Saul, on the other hand, knew he could not take David's life. The anointing was a fact of which he was probably aware, though the circumstances may have been unknown to him. But twice he publicly declared his convic- tion that David was destined to succeed him on the throne. Yet his knowledge of God's arrangements for the future did not deter him from striving to thwart them. He deliberately undertook to cross the purposes of Heaven. And while he was doing this, he expected Heaven to be on his side. Know- ing the purposes of Providence, he fought against them all these years. Madness was an almost inevitable result. Or, if the fighting against Providence was a symptom of his mad- ness, the longer he maintained the struggle, the more developed would the madness become. Achish Ben-Maoch gladly received the six hundred. In the warlike country of the Pliilistines they could do no harm, while, without risking the lives of his own soldiers, he might despatch the Hebrews on enterprises of difficulty or danger. David an Outlaw and an Exile. 203 But the people of Gatli could scarcely have relished an encampment of outlaws either within or without the city. They disliked them, as citizens dislike robbers ; and David saw the propriety of moving his camp elsewhere. Without assigning reasons for his wish to change, he asked the king for a place in one of the cities of the Field, as the district near tlie southern wilderness was called. Achish gave him the town of Ziklag. The place formerly belonged to Simeon. It was then in possession of the Philistines ; but by the gift of Achisli it probably became henceforth part of David's private estate. ISTor was it unreasonable to ask a town near the desert. The flocks and herds owned by the exiles could rancje over the wastes without cost or trouble. And Achish may have looked on Ziklag as a border fortress, which needed wise heads and strong arms for its safe keeping against enemies. David thus served himself by securing for his people's flocks as good pasture as could be found in the Field, in which they formerly grazed, while he also served Achish by throwing a garrison into a border town. Neither of them looked farther into the future, or had other ends in view. During a year and four months the exiles held the town for Achish. David had not been long in Ziklag before he began to make forays against the tribes of the southern desert, people with whom Judah was never at peace. The rovers of the wilderness \vere feared by the nations near them as thieves and cattle-lifters. Sometimes in large bands, at other times in whole encampments, they stole from their fastnesses, and threw themselves on the fields of Judah or Philistia. Corn was trampled down, flocks and herds driven off, and the people were either murdered or swept away into slavery. An efficient police force on the border of the desert alone prevented these raids. Between Israel and the rovers had grown up a feud which nothing could appease. Every man in David's band had thus a quarrel with them; from private 204 The Kingdom of All-Is7'ael: its History. reasons, perhaps, certainly from national It had been handed down from father to son with a strensjth of hatred unknow^i to nations that enjoy the blessings of good government. When looked at from our western point of view, these blood quarrels seem a scandal to the people by whom they were cherished. But this is judging others by our ways, and is setting up our own blessings as a standard for all time. Karrow-mindedness was shown in these feuds, a want of right principle also, and a disregard of the divine command that the son shall not bear the punishment of the father's crime. But we ourselves may show as much narrow-mindedness in passing severe judgment on times and ways altogether unlike our own. Standing forth as the champion of his own people, even in the land of their enemies, David found employment for his followers in avenging this ancient feud. By doing so he hoped to earn the thanks of his countrymen, and enrich his own band. ISTor were these rovers friends of Achish, for the fields of Philistia offered them a more tempting prey than the hills of Judah. They dwelt in the sandy wastes that stretch from the south of Judah to the Isthmus of Suez and the banks of the Nile. Their camping grounds, the seasons at which they shifted their abodes, the lines of road across the wastes, and the springs of water, w^ere known to many in David's band. It was therefore an easy matter for the six hundred, leaving their wives and children safe in Ziklag, to venture into tlie desert, to watch their chance, and to smite an encampment when no enemy was believed to be near. On these forays the rule was to bring neither man nor woman away alive ; no one w^as left to tell the tale. The story of the ruin that befell an unsuspecting camp was thus kept from reaching the ears of Achish. If any rovers escaped into the desert, their fate would be worse than that of their kindred who perished by the sword, unless they reached the distant camp of a friendly tribe. Sheep, oxen, asses, camels, clothing. David an Outlaw and an Exile. 205 were part of the spoil taken. Nor did David conceal these raids from Achish. After his return to Ziklag with the plunder of a desert camp, he repaired to Gath, and boasted of his success in ravaging the fields of his countrymen and their friends. Achish believed him, especially when a large share of the spoil fell to him and his captains. ' Have ye not made a road to-day?' was the usual question put when David presented himself at court. ' Yes/ was the exile's answer, varied according to his humour, ' against the south of Judah, or of the Jerahmeelites, or of the Kenites.' Achish, as simple as he was four years previously, when he thought David's acting true madness, prided himself on the thorn he had found for pricking the side of Israel. ' He is thoroughly abhorred of his own people,' he said to his courtiers ; ' he shall be my servant for ever.' The filling of their hands with gold and of their folds with flocks helped very much to make the wisest among them see as their master saw, and feel as he felt. For more than a year David was able to play this deceitful game, but not without punishment. C H A P T E E VIII. THE DEATH OF SxiUL. (1 Sam. xxviii. 1-2 Sam. ii. 4 ; 1 Chron. x. 1-xii. 22.) The quarrel between Saul and Samuel, tlie slaughter of the priests of 'Nob, and the flight of David to the Philistines' country, betoken a kingdom divided against itself. Foreign invasion was almost certain to follow. In truth, little more than a year elapsed between the flight of David and the death of Saul in a disastrous battle on Mount Gilboa. Although the guilt of the nation's ruin ought not to be laid on David, he cannot be wholly excused. A champion of the Hebrews, so distinguished as he was ; a son-in-law, too, of their kino' could not transfer his own services and those of his trained followers to a hostile race without fostering, in its leading men, the hope of speedily overcoming a weakened foe. Safety for himself and his followers cannot be pleaded in excuse for David's conduct. He had forsaken his country : his country, as it was bound to do, repaid his unworthiness by forsaking him. Seven years of humiliation were required to prove that he was still a Hebrew and a patriot. Both the anointed king and the high priest of Israel had sought refuge in the Philistines' country. Considering the time favourable for recovering their lost dominion, the Philistine lords prepared to seize the centre of the Hebrews' land with a powerful force. As soon as this resolution was taken, Achish summoned David from Ziklag to Gath. ' Know assuredly,' he said, ' that with me thou shalt go in the host, thou and thy men.' It must have been The Death of Said. 207 unwelcome tidings to the Hebrew prince. But, putting tlie best face be could on the affair, be replied, wdtb singularly cautious courtesy, ' Therefore tbou sbalt know wbat tby servant shall do.' Achish understood the words in a different sense from what was perhaps intended. He believed David to be a renegade Hebrew\ He knew also that renegades are desperate men, who expect no mercy from those they have forsaken, and who only prove their truth to those they have joined, by deeds from which other men shrink. But Achish did not consider David to be, as he was, a pretended renegade, walking on a knife edge, carrying his life in his hand almost every hour. ' Therefore,' said the befooled Philistine, ' keeper of mine head will I make thee all the time of the war.' Falsehood had brought things to a crisis with David. By pretending treason to his own people, he was lifted to honour among its enemies. To have fled from Ziklag to Judah would have been his safest course ; to have offered his sword and those of his followers to Saul w^ould have been honourable. To have plainly told Achish, I cannot fight against mine own people, would have been the most honest course of all. But he had tied his hands by the pretended raids on Judah. He preferred to dissemble, or to wait on events, in the hope of finding a loophole of escape. To his disgrace he joined the soldiers of Achish when they marched to invade the land of the Hebrew^s. The Philistines advanced aloncj the level OTound between the hills of Ephraim and the Mediterranean sea-shore, till they reached the great opening which gave them admission to the plain of Jezreel. The road was the same along which Egyptian armies had marched centuries before, and which caravans took in their trading journeys from Damascus to the Nile (Gen. xxxvii. 25). Eising by a gradual ascent through a broad valley from the Mediterranean plain, it fell as gently into the rich fields of Jezreel. Mounted archers and a chariot force secured freedom of way for the invaders. Xo 2o8 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its History, rocky passes lay on the route, such as those at Betl>-horon and Aijalon, which proved fatal to their fathers in the beginning of Saul's reign. ISTor do these passes, leading to the highlands of Benjamin, appear to have been in their keeping at this time as they were then. A cautious advance, through a country dangerous for Hebrew foot -soldiers against a strong cavalry force, implies far less confidence in the invaders at the end of Saul's reign than they showed at the beginning of it and in the middle. But their march was unopposed. They traversed the plain of Jezreel from west to east till they pitched their camp at Shunem, a town in the tribe of Issachar, with the heights of Gilboa on their right hand and Little Hermon on their left. Their progress was watched by Saul with his infantry. By short marches along the hills he kept abreast of the enemy in the plain below. But at last the two armies came within striking distance of each other, though there seems to have been no reason for Saul seeking a battle. "Had he held aloof, the tide of invasion might have spent its force in wasting the rich lands of Jezreel, and then with- drawing behind its own borders. But in those days two thunder-clouds of war seldom came into the same neighbour- hood without collision and a torrent of bloodshed. From the high ground of Gilboa, Saul looked down on the enemies' array, several hundred feet below. Its imposing appearance filled him with fear ; ' his heart greatly trembled.' Although he was close to the scene of Gideon's great exploit, when the three hundred vanquished a hundred thousand in- vaders, he felt the sinking of heart which precedes defeat. Perhaps he was camped near the same fountain Harod (Terror), at which they were chosen for the fight. But to him it was a place of terror, not of hope. Gideon felt that the Lord was with him ; Saul said the Lord was departed from him. This difference of belief explains the difference felt by the two Hebrew leaders between certainty of victory and fear of defeat. A small body of men followed Gideon ; a large The Death of SatcL 209 army — All-Israel — followed Saul ; but the strength of the Hebrews did not lie in numbers. The dream of a soldier in the enemy's camp, overheard by Gideon, gave encouragement for the attack ; but no dream came to hearten Saul or any of his advisers. Night after night passed without a revelation of the future. Prophets and sons of the prophets thronged the schools of learning in the land, or attended the patriot army in its march along the hills. But no message of warning or of guidance came from any of them. Every tongue was silent, though the king seems to have sought far and near for help. One resource remained. The high priest, Abiathar, was in David's company in the Philistine camp. But Saul had the ark in his keeping. Undoubtedly also he had chosen a successor to the high priest Ahimelech, whom he had slain. Although history is silent on the subject, the king was far too superstitious to remain without a priest as chief representative of the nation's faith. Whoever that priest may have been, — whether Jehoiada or the father of Zadok, — the lost king turned to him in his distress. He had the high priest's ephod, with Urim and Thummim, and the ark of God. But neither light nor guidance appeared from that source. All was dark save one thing. Truth was told to the king even by the hands of the priest whom he had himself appointed. Every time the light and truth of the sacred breastplate were appealed to, no light broke the dark- ness ; but the truth was plain. No answer of yes or no was returned to the king's anxious questionings. All was dark. But as often as the attempt was made to obtain an answer, the blank stone, or whatever else stood for it, came out in the priest's hand. It meant God's silence : He refused to answer. To Saul it was clear that he was forsaken of Heaven ; his advisers had the same feeling. Once before the king ex- perienced a similar sense of forsaking. A great triumph had been gained over the Philistines. A greater seemed certain ; but before the blow was struck, the high priest vainly asked 0 2IO The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, guidance from the Urim of the breastplate pocket. The king turned in great ahirm from the enemy, and was driven to condemn to death Jonathan, the best of his sons. The same shadow had again crossed Saul's path : silence in presence of the same Philistine enemy brought back to him that dreadful past, and suggested a more dismal future. ' The Lord answered him not, neither by dreams nor by the Urim, nor by the prophets.' The singular omission of Thummim, which follows Urim in other passages, shows the accuracy of the story. While Urim means light, Thummim means truth. The former was refused ; the latter was given. ' God is departed from me ' was the truth which Saul had learned ; but it brought no light to his troubled heart. Overcome with terror, haunted by the evil conscience of many a wicked deed, this sorely beset king resolves to gain by unhallowed means an insight into tlie purposes of Heaven, which he was not allowed to secure by its usual agents. What he once abhorred, he now had recourse to — the forbidden art of witchcraft. Some of his retinue appear to have been beforehand with him in the attempt thus to discover the future. Perhaps, also, they suggested to their unhappy master the means, which they themselves believed might be effectual for the purpose. A heathen like Doeg, or Saul's Amalekite slayer, though a proselyte to the Hebrew faith, w-ould retain enough of the old nature in him to find it asserting its power when life reached one of its turning- points. But if they suggested, the king only could give the order : '■ Seek ye for me a woman, mistress of a spirit, that I may inquire by her.' The servants were ready with the answer: * Behold a woman, mistress of a spirit, in Endor.'^ When night fell on the hostile armies, Saul, accompanied by ^ This story of the witch has given rise to endless controversy. * The fathers, reformers, and earlier Christian theologians, with very few exceptions, assumed that there was not a real appearance of Samuel, but only an imaginary one, ' *Saul does not appear to have seen the apparition himself.' These are the The Death of SauL 211 two of his officers, ventured on the journey to Endor. He had spent the hours of daylight in the feverish anxiety which a mind, ah-eady partly unhinged, could not but feel on taking a step which all its previous actions condemned. And he had weakened himself still more by a whole day's fast, apparently a common way with Saul of displaying his religious zeal. Endor lay high on the hill slopes, about ten miles across the valley from Gilboa. Philistine soldiers swarmed in the low grounds, and rendered the passage from the south side to the north unsafe. A toilsome night journey of several miles round the eastern edge of their camp had thus to be undertaken by the excited and weakened king. Most of it was also by difficult hill paths along rugged ground. He was not less than sixty years of age, perhaps he was nearer seventy. Even, then, though he rode to Endor and back, his constitution must have been originally of iron to have stood the strains imposed on it by the anxiety and fasting of the day, followed by the terrors of the night. It was thought advisable for Saul to disf^juise himself. He and his two companions might fall into the enemy's hands as they crossed the valley. By passing themselves off for country people fleeing before the storm of war, they might hope more readily to escape injury. A different reason may have led the king ' to put on other raiment ' — a desire to conceal his rank from the ' mistress of the spirit.' It was an inconsistent act ; but superstition is seldom logical in its conclusions. He expected to discover the future by means of a woman from whom he hoped to conceal the present, easily ascertainable though it was. This attempt at concealment shows the king to have been in some degree known to the woman, as his attendants had probably become aware. And if they arranged this meeting between their master and the words of Keil and Delitzsch, who believe Samuel really appeared. But tliey and other writers have overlooked many things which require to be considered in forming a judgment on this subject. 212 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, witch, they must have given her reason to expect a visit from a man of consequence. At least everything passes off as if all the steps had been carefully arranged beforehand. The journey across the valley was made in safety. The road to the village was not missed in the darkness, as it easily might have been ; and the discovery of the woman's abode, even * by night,' shows an acquaintance with the place on the part of Saul's attendants, which indicates a previous visit, if not preparedness in the woman to receive her visitors. Probably the witch's first sight of the tall stranger disclosed to her his rank, if she entertained any doubt of it before. He speaks for himself ; his words are words of command ; he treats his companions as of no account. A man, who had for many years spoken as a king in council and in battle, was less able in this hour of weakness to put on another mind than to put on other clothes. His rank shines through his words in the woman's hut. Even though she had never seen him before, she is too sharp not to recognise his great stature, — a head taller than the rest of the people, — to discern the ring of command in his voice, and to see for herself that the king was come to ask her help that night. The scourge of her race is now in her power. The man who had burned and slain her kindred, and had made life a constant danger to herself, is a suppliant at her feet. She knows the story of his madness, his suspicions of David, his dethronement by Samuel, his forsaking by God. People like her made it their business to wring from terrified dupes secrets which the world at large might not be familiar with, and might never come to know. And the wheel of fortune had at last brought to her feet the king, with whom she and her race were at deadly feud : ' Divine now for me by the spirit ; and bring thou up for me whom I shall name to thee.' ^ ■^ The Hebrew word for divine is unknown in the Pentateuch except in the witch-law (Deut. xviii. 10-14). It occurs twice in Samuel. Divination occurs in Num. xxii. 7, xxiii. 23 ; Deut. xviii. 10. Ex. xxii. 18 cannot have been the The Death of SauL 213 These words of the king reveal his acquaintance with the language of necromancy — its inconsistencies and its delusions. While regarding the woman as ' the mistress of a spirit/ Saul believed her or her spirit able to ' bring up ' from the abodes of the dead any one whom he wished to consult. The woman is a medium between the living and the dead. So Saul regards her. Evidently he expects the departed, whom she or her spirit shall bring up at his wish, to speak to himself directly, and to be spoken to in return by him. But this is not the witch's view ; though, with the cunning of her race, she waits the march of events, and holds her hand till circumstances shape her course. She parries his demand. ' Behold,' she says with well-affected surprise, ' thou knowest what Saul hath done, that he hath cut off the spirits and the wizards out of the land : wherefore, then, layest thou a snare for my life to cause me to die ? ' Every word she spoke must have made the king wince under her eye. She mentions his name, instead of calling him the king or our lord the king: 'Saul hath done.' She reminds him of his zeal in rooting out her kindred from the land; and she reproaches him with the meanness of seeking to entrap a lone woman, into a deed which might cause her death. By her skilful words he is drawn on to speak still more clearly, and as the king only could. Saul swears to her : ' As the Lord liveth, there shall no punishment happen to thee for this thing.' Both witch and king recognised Jehovah as far higher than any of the spirits who could be made to speak. An oath in His name was thus intended to shield from punishment the doer of deeds which His law condemned. Inconsistency and delusion run through the whole of this sorrowful business. * Whom shall I bring up for thee?' said the woman, now feel- law followed by Saul, though Colenso (vii. 140) cites it as his autliority. Again, *to lay a snare'— a word used by the witch {1 Sam. xxviii. 9)— occurs five times in all, once in Deuteronomy, once in Samuel, and three times in the Psalms. Saul and the historian were familiar with Deuteronomy. 214 '^^^^ Kingdom of All- Israel : its History, ing sure of her game. ' Bring up Samuel for me/ said the king. Shortly before the beginning of his reign, he appears to have been ignorant of the great prophet's name. At the end of it, not two years after the prophet's death, he expects this wretched woman in the lonely village of Endor to know where Samuel was in the abodes of the dead, and to bring him back to the realms of the living. The tricks and charms which preceded the great event of Samuel's appearance are supposed by some to have been managed, not in the woman's hut, but in one of the numerous caves near Endor,^ and in presence of Saul only. However, neither did the strangers require to leave her house, nor were the two followers shut out, while the divining was going on. It is quite as easy to terrify three dupes as to terrify one ; indeed, it is sometimes easier, especially when the alarm of each of them is heightened by the words and looks of the others. Perhaps a few silly tricks were at first paraded to cheat the visitors into the belief of something great coming, before she began the business which lay nearest Saul's heart. The names by which women of her mode of life went in those days were ' bottles ' and ' knowers,' words which are rendered in our version, ' having familiar spirits ' and ' soothsayers.' They may have been called * bottles ' from a custom they had of making their god seem to speak out of a skin bottle, or from the stoutness of their bodies, by which they looked like bottles swelled with wine. Their art lay in practising what is known as ventriloquism.^ By first speaking with the natural voice, and then suddenly changing its tone, they made it appear as if they were talking with a spirit underground. By such tricks this witch-woman cheated her dupes. Eeading in their faces what they wished or what they feared, or working out of them by leading questions their hopes and sorrows, she gave them back as if from a spirit, but in reality by her own ^ ^QQ Recovery of Jerusalem, 459. ^ See the Greek trauslation of 1 Chroii. x. 13. Corap. Isa. xxix. 4. The Death of Saul, 2 1 5 changed voice, what she had taken from their faces or their words. She first read their hearts by their looks ; then with a false voice, which they mistook for an unseen being's, she gave them the results of that reading. Having thus thrown a spell around her dupes, she got them to believe that, leagued with higher powers, she knew more of the future than they did. The witch of Endor was no wiser than Saul and his two men. She knew no more about their fate or the coming over- throw of the Hebrews than they did ; and she had no means of knowing. But she was able to guess what would soon happen. She saw the shadow of disaster resting on the Hebrew camp ; she believed the disaster could not be long in coming. Saul and his brave sons, looking on defeat as ruinous to their country, would dare everything to maintain its honour ; if worsted, they would likely fall in battle. These probabilities were fairly within her reach. Like all the gipsy tribe, to which she belonged, her skill had often been spent in hitting on facts by choosing the likeliest of probabilities. And on this occasion, the crowning triumph of her life, she contrived to weave them into a w^eb which turned out, in most of its threads at least, to be something better than gossamer. Looking earnestly forward, and making her visitors believe that she saw somewhat, she cried out, seemingly in the utmost distress, * Why hast thou deceived me ? for thou art Saul.' She saw nothing to make her thus afraid. Her discovery of tlie king was a pretence, as well as her terror lest he was laying a snare for her life. She had delayed till then coming out with what she knew long before. It suited her purpose to astonish the king, to throw him into confusion, and to secure a breath- ing space before making her next move. Saul, seeing nothing himself, but devoutly believing she saw something concealed from his eyes, reassures her : ' Be not afraid ; for what sawest thou ? ' ' Gods,' she said, ' I saw ascending out of the earth,' — a form of words without meanimr that nidit, and without 2i6 ' The Kingdom of All-Is7'ael : its History, bearing on the words which follow. In reading the faces of her dupes, the woman, like most others of her class, was quick-witted and ready. In venturing into the region of the unknown, she turns out to be a common cheat. But the king, thinking always of Samuel, puts a meaning on her words to suit himself. 'What form is he of?' he asked, though she had said nothing to make him put that question, or that could lead him to imagine she was speaking of only one being. Keminded of her visitor by these words, she answered, 'An old man cometh up, and he is covered with a mantle.' And then Saul, believing his wishes fulfilled, but seeing nothing all the while, is certain it is Samuel, and casts himself on the ground before the imagined prophet. ' An old man wrapped in a mantle ' was a description which held good of ten thousand old men as well as Samuel. Had the witch been dealing with men of sound reason, she could not have carried the cheat much further. But so shattered is the mind of the king, that, giving himself wholly up to the woman, he sees with her eyes and hears with her ears, instead of using his own. Saul saw nobody but the witch, and the sacred writer has recorded only what the witch said she saw or heard. It is now the woman's turn to avenge, on the persecutor of her race, the wrongs done to herself and to her kindred. With unpitying stroke does her sword cut every chord in the bosom of the king. Unseen by him as he lay prostrate on the ground, or by his cowering followers, she has now ample room for playing off her tricks. Slowly, and in the low wailing tone which was thought best suited to the spirits of the dead, the woman, casting her voice towards the imaginary spirit, begins, 'Why hast thou disquieted me to bring me up ? ' Samuel is speaking to Saul ! The bewildered king replies by the story of his distress : ' God is departed from me, and answereth me no more, neither by prophets nor by dreams ; therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make The Death of Said. 217 known unto me what I shall do.' Then the full storm of the witch's malignity bursts on Saul, bearing all the more heavily on him from its likeness to the truth. ' Wherefore, then, dcst thou ask of me,' said the Voice, ' seeing the Lord is departed from thee, and is become thine enemy ? And the Lord hath done to him [for himself] as He spake by me ; for the Lord hath rent the kingdom out of thine hand, and given it to thy neighbour, even to David : because thou obeyedst not the voice of the Lord, nor executedst His fierce wrath upon Amalek, therefore hath the Lord done this thing unto thee this day. Moreover, the Lord will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philistines : and to-morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me \ yes, the Lord shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines.' The woman has emptied her quiver into Saul's heart. In the compass of a few words she sums up a roll of griefs that strikes him with terror. Wearied with his toilsome journey, and overcome by a lengthened fast, his body cannot bear up under these tortures of the mind. Surely a groan of anguish came from him when the woman said, ' To-morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me ; ' for, as if to give it more piercing power, she repeated what she said before, ' Yes, the Lord shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines.' As these words leave her lips, Saul swoons away on the floor of the hut. And the scene ends. The words of the Voice were well fitted to fill the king with terror. They brought back to his mind that day of anguish, when the clouds began to gather thickly on his reason, his hopes, and his house. He had heard part of them before from the lips of Samuel himself in Gilgal. When the prophet was then tearing himself away in anger after the mismanaged expedition against Amalek, the king took hold of his mantle to detain him, and in the struggle rent off the ^ The Greek translators were shocked at this sentiment ; they altered it into, * Thou and thy sons with thee shall fall. ' 2 1 8 Ihe Kingdom of All-Israel : Us History, skirt : ' Jehovah/ exclaimed the angry seer, ' hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that . is better than thou,' almost the very words which were uttered in the witch's hut. She knew what Abigail knew, what all Israel had long known, the rending of the kingdom from Saul, and the giving of it to David. Eather we should say that she had access to a more accurate knowledge of what took place at that interview than most of the Hebrews. From Saul's peculiar temperament, it may be doubted if he could conceal from his servants the threats of Samuel, and the fears they had caused him. Two of these servants were then w4th him. If one or both of them had visited the witch before, on what would the con- versation more naturally turn than on the hopes and fears of the king, representing as these did the hopes and fears of the whole army ? What would the servants be more likely to repeat than the terrible words which Saul could not keep to himself? But by whatever means she got this knowledge, she could not have planted a more stinging arrow in Saul's heart. Her vengeance was taken without stint or mercy. This reference to the interview between Samuel and Saul raises suspicions of the woman's honesty. Of the rending of Samuel's garment, and of the rending of the kingdom from Saul, All-Israel soon knew, for the thing was not done, nor the words spoken, out of sight or earshot of others. But at that interview the seer had also said, ' Bebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.' Saul was guilty of the former in not obeying the voice of Jehovah ; in seeking the help of a witch, he was guilty of the latter. The pretended Samuel, while inveighing against the king for rebellion, says not one word about witch- craft, though he quotes from the memorable conversation in which these two were joined together as equally hateful to Jehovah. If Samuel was really in the hut, this passing by of the sin of witchcraft is an inexplicable feature in the story. If the woman was speaking in the prophet's name, it is only The Death of SatcL 219 what she would have done. Manifestly, the seer had no hand in what was passing in the witch's hut. It may seem strange that the woman knew of the battle on the morrow, and of the doom of Saul and his sons. But the word rendered ' to-morrow ' has a wider and less definite meaning in the Hebrew than in the English. Besides, the historian does not say that the battle was then fought. Many good men who have studied this subject regard the witch's fears and the appearance of Samuel as realities. In answer to, or on the back of her incantations, Samuel returned to this world to upbraid his fallen favourite, and to terrify this wretched woman. But it jars on our feelings of right and wrong to imagine the arts of a witch, silly as they must appear to us, answered, or seeming to be answered, by an appearance in bodily form of the sainted dead, disturbed from its peaceful rest. Or is it possible that the awakened sleeper should complain as the Voice complained, and should even use the word common in the tricks of necromancers, ' Why hast thou disquieted me, to hriiig me up .? ' Or is it to be thought that Samuel, who mourned over Saul's rejection from being king, should, in the darkest hour of that prince's life, twit him with the name of David, and utter useless taunts, while he passed by the sin of consulting a witch, which pious Hebrews shrank from as rebellion against Jehovah ? The story reads like a clever piece of vengeful trickery by the witch. There is nothing in it which bears the stamp of a message from heaven. And it would be indeed singular if God, after refusing to answer the rebel king by Urim and Thummim in His own appointed way, or by visions, or by dreams, should even seem to employ the unholy service of an artful woman. Alarmed at her success in frightening the king, the witch ran up to him where he lay stretched on the floor. Bead- ing in his haggard looks want of food as much as terror, she entreated him to partake of a morsel of bread. But the king refused. Perhaps he wished in that hour of darkness to find 2 20 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its History, a riddance from his load of sorrow in speedy death. But it is more agreeable to his character to imagine that Saul had been fasting as a means of gaining the favour of Jehovah, and that he was bent on keeping that fast for a longer time. With a stubbornness that was deeply rooted in his nature, he refused to eat in answer to all the woman's entreaties. His two followers, standing aloof at first, and looking on the witch as a superior being, whose word should have far more weight than theirs, joined in entreating him to partake of food. Perhaps they were not less faint than he ; at least they had no chance of a meal unless he should consent. With much difficulty the three prevailed. Saul rose from the ground and lay down on a bed, while the woman got ready food for her guests. A calf was sacrificed, that is, killed, broth was pre- pared, and cakes were baked. After partaking of these the king and his men set out for the camp, which they reached before daybreak. It is natural to ask how a story so extraordinary found its way into the sacred record. If we look on it as a mere piece of history, the details must have been got either from Saul or from the servants, for they did not come from the woman. The two men were thoroughly deceived. They would speak of the appearance of Samuel as a fact ; they all heard a conversation between the Voice and Saul; and if they whispered the night's adventure to their friends, it would be with the air and colouring of a real visit from the world of spirits. The story, as told in the book of Samuel, is undoubtedly such a story as the king and his servants would relate. It has a weird, unearthly air about it, as if bearing the stamp of their terror, and coined in the gloom of the witch's hut. But a story, coming direct from one of the principal actors, is pre- cisely what the sacred writer would have inserted in his history without note or comment of his own. Having satisfied himself of the accuracy of the facts (Luke i. 3), he gives them as matters of history, making no remark on them, and allowing The Death of SauL 221 his readers to draw conclusions from principles recorded in more ancient writings. The books of Samuel are written on the plan of recording facts ; and the adventure of Saul in the witch's hovel is a case in point. The historian has related all that happened, or was thought to have happened ; he has committed himself to no judgment for or against the witch's power ; he has only laid bare the sin of Saul in believing that a mortal could awake the dead in defiance of Heaven, and draw aside the veil which conceals the future. The hostile armies were only a few miles apart. The plain of Jezreel, which the Philistines entered from the south- west, is bounded on the east by two ranges of hills, Gilboa and Little Hermon, between which lies a valley, narrowing near the town of Jezreel to a mile in breadth, and sloping down a wide plain to the Jordan. Several springs, rising on the flanks of these ranges, flow eastward into that river. The largest of them, known as the Fountain of Jezreel, bubbles forth with much noise and a great rush of water at the foot of Gilboa, near the narrow neck of the valley. About four miles due north of this fountain was the town of Shunem, not far from the roots of Little Hermon. The Hebrew army, resting on the hill-sides, which rise high above the Fountain of Jezreel, could betake themselves to the loftier heights of Gilboa in their rear if they were unable to withstand the invaders. But they were so placed that the Philistines could not enter the broader valley, leading down to Bethshan and the Jordan, without fighting at a disadvantage. And it may have been the plan of the invasion to march down this pass to the ford, to cross the river, and to waste the fertile fields of Gilead. By this means the most favoured regions of Israel would have been trampled down. Saul was watching the mouth of the pass with the Hebrew army. If the enemy attempted to enter, a battle could not be avoided. Before engaging with the Hebrews, the leaders of the Philistines held a review of their forces at the town of Aphek, 222 The Ki7igdom of All-Israel: its History. in the plain of Jezreel. During the march past, the prince under whose banners those who were passing happened to be ranged, left his place among the chiefs and marched in the rear with his bodyguard. But the guardsmen of Achish were David's six hundred exiles. Abiathar, the high priest of Jehovah, was with them. A high priest of the true faith was marching to battle in the ranks of the heathen against his own countrymen ! As these exiles approached the chiefs, their equipment and their cast of countenance caught the eye. Murmurs arose at Hebrews being allowed to join the army. Renegades from Israel had filled up the Philistine ranks before this time. But the Philistines had cause to repent their rashness in trustiug traitors. As soon as disaster threatened the Philistine arms, the renegades passed over in a body to their countrymen. To the treachery of their Hebrew allies was partly due one of the most overwhelming defeats ever inflicted on the Philistines. Although ten or fifteen years had elapsed since then, many captains in the invading army were old enough to remember that day of shame, and w^th influence sufficient to prevent a like result from the same cause. With good reason the assembled chiefs murmured at the want of judgment displayed by Achish. ' What,' they say, ' do these Hebrews here ? ' Surprised, as it were, at their ignorance of the brave band he had taken into his pay, Achish replies, ' Is not this David which hath been with me this year or two, and I have found no fault in him since he fell unto me ? ' But the princes were not so easily cheated as Achish. ' Wherewith should he reconcile himself unto his master ? Should it not be with the heads of these men ? Is not this David, of whom they sang one to another in dances, saying, Saul slew by his thousands, and David by his ten thousands V They had reason to be alarmed. In David's men they saw a band of disciplined troops, trained to obey one will, to act together in battle, and who had already reaped a dowry of death from ' the heads of these men ' of the Philistines. And the The Death of SauL 223 danger of a band like his deserting, or falling on their un- guarded rear at the crisis of battle, was too great a risk to be run. A panic might seize the rude levies of which their army was mostly made up ; and with ordinary vigour on the part of Saul to second his servants' onset, this well-planned inroad would end in disaster. These fears of the princes resulted in orders for the Hebrews to return to Ziklao-. o Summoning David to his tent that night, Achish said to him, ' Surely as Jehovah liveth,' — a form of oath taught him per- haps by David, — ' thou hast been upright, and thy going out and thy coming in with me in the host is good in my sight ; nevertheless, the lords favour thee not. Wherefore now go in peace.' Glad though David was at this unlooked-for deliver- ance, he put on the air of an injured man who was kept back without cause from fighting for his ' lord the king.' Fairly understood, these words, ' my lord the king,' mean Achish ; but in his heart David may have meant Saul, king of Israel. Deceived by his forwardness, the Philistine gave fresh assur- ances of the value he set on David's services : ' I know that thou art good in my sight, as an angel of God.' Then bidding him depart as soon as it was morning, Achish dismissed the Hebrew captain, to see him no more, perhaps, till at the head of All-Israel he defeated the Philistines before the very city where Achish held his court, and where he had received the outlaw in peace. About a week or ten days after David marched southward the battle was fought. The Philistines, emboldened by the want of spirit in their opponents, climbed the heights and speedily scattered the Hebrews. Following the beaten army along the ridge of Gilboa, the invaders strewed the path with dead and wounded. Among those who fled was Saul. His three brave sons, Jonathan, Melchishua, and Abinadab, fell in battle, or in attempting to conduct their father safely from the field. No one was left with the king but his armour- bearer. Wounded by the mounted archers who, recognising 2 24 ^^^ Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, him by the crown which he wore, were pressing hard on him, the king besought the armour-bearer to draw his sword and run him through. But the young man was terrified at the request. A refusal did not change the king's mind. Leaning on his spear, he reflected for a little on the rash step despair was driving him to take. At last, wearied of a life that had become a burden, he snatched the sword from the armour- bearer. His own appears to have been lost in the battle. Planting the hilt in the ground, he fell on the point. The young man drew it out of his master's body. He could do nothing to save him. But though the king may have given himself a death-wound, he lived for some time after. To the armour-bearer it seemed a point of honour to follow where Saul had shown the way. Planting the sword again in the ground he also fell on the point, and died beside his master. A young Amalekite saw all that took place. Approaching the bodies, he found Saul still living, able, indeed, at the sound of footsteps, to raise himself partly from the ground. The terror of falling alive into the Philistines' hands had strengthened the dying man for this last effort. But he saw that it was a young Amalekite, a Hebrew slave, who was standing near him. He besought the youth to finish the half- done work. The destroyer of the young man s kindred en- treated him to destroy in turn. Knowing that Saul could not survive the deadly hurt he had given himself, the Amalekite plucked the sword out of the bosom of the armour-bearer and plunged it through the heart of Saul. He then stripped the dead body of its kingly ornaments, the crown and the bracelet ; he hid them in his dress, and hurried southward with his prize.^ When the dwellers in the fertile valleys near the battlefield 1 By combining two independent accounts of one and the same event, we thus obtain a clear view of all the circumstances. The theory of two documents, two authors, two traditions, with other modern shifts, does not require to be examined. The Death of Saul. 225 saw the day turning against their countrymen, they left their homes and fled across the Jordan. Others, living at a greater distance from the field, also abandoned their cities. Among: these were many of the villagers on the western bank of the Jordan, and the people of several towns in the tribe of Benjamin. Gibeah, Saul's own city, was thrown into terror. The royal family fled for their lives. In the flight the nurse let fall Meri-baal, or Mephibosheth,^ the son of Jonathan, then a child of five years of age. As they had no time to attend to the hurt the boy had received, he was lamed for life in body, and perhaps also in mind. Many of the places which their inhabitants thus abandoned were seized by the Philis- tines. The fortress of Bethshan, situated at the east end of the plain of Jezreel, on a height which slopes down to the Jordan, was one of these towns. The battle of Gilboa lasted till near sundown. On the following morning the Philistines, when stripping the slain, found the bodies of Saul and his three sons. Messengers were immediately despatched with the heads and armour of these princes to publish in Philistia the tidings of victory. The head of Saul was fixed in the temple of Dagon at Ashdod ; his armour was hung up in that of Ashtaroth. The four bodies were then nailed in derision to the wall of Bethshan, under the guard of a Philistine garrison. This outrage on the national honour shamed into action some of the brave men who still survived among the Hebrew^s. Within sight of the ground on which Saul gained the great battle over ISTahash, and on the wall of one of his own cities, the headless remains were exposed. And the bodies of these princes might hang there after the flesh had rotted off their bones, while, by the law of Israel, the body of the most wicked wrong-doer could not be exposed beyond sundown. No sooner were tidings of this outrage carried across the Jordan than the men of Jabesh- 1 The two words have practically the same meaning, 'Contender against Baal ' and ' Exterminator of an idol.' P ^26 The Kingdom of All-Is7^ael : its History, Gilead, in grateful remembrance of the obligations under which Saul had laid their fathers, resolved to carry off the bodies. The country on the west of the river was swarming with enemies. It was early spring, the time of barley harvest, aad the river, swelled by the melting of the snows on Lebanon, had overflowed its banks. But these Gadites of Jabesh were men ' whose faces were like the faces of lions, and who were as swift as the roes upon the mountains.'^ Travelling all night, they reached Bethshan before daybreak, took down the headless bodies, and set out on their return. But their march lay through an enemy's country, though it was in their own land. When morning broke, they had to fight their way. Success attended them, for they drove off the inhabitants of the valleys, or, it may be, the Anakim, both east and west. On reaching Jabesh they burned the bodies to prevent the Philistines repeating the outrage, and then, gathering the ashes, buried them under an oak near the town. While David was on his way to Ziklag from the Philistine camp at Aphek, several men of rank belonging to the tribe of Manasseh joined his band. The names of seven of them are given (1 Chron. xii. 19-21). It tells a tale of misrule when men, able to bear arms and esteemed brave soldiers, abandon their king, turn their back on his field of battle, and march off with one who came to take sides against him. Bidding them welcom.e to fight under his banners, David gave them a place among his captains. In two days the exiles had nearly traversed the country between Aphek and Ziklag. On the third day they reached home. But the town was silent as the grave. Not a living thing was found in it. Every house was burned to the ground. Wives, sons, and daughters ; slaves, flocks, and herds ; gold, silver, garments. ^ 1 Chron. xii, 8-15. The deeds of the Gadites mentioned in this passage may with all probability be referred to this time. The ' hold in the wilderness ' was Ziklag (1 Chron. xii. 1, 8), and ' the first month ' was the season of barley harvest. The Death of Said. 227 the gathered wealth of six years of hardship, were carried off at one swoop. A bitter cry of grief from the six hundred showed how deeply their hearts were stirred. At first they laid the blame on David, and spoke of stoning him. Certainly his want of foresight deserved punishment, for on him lay the duty of guarding the town against surprise. His forays into the southern desert had been repaid by a most successful raid on his own fortress. Some of the wandering tribes, watching their cliance, had thus aveno-ed the slaughter of their neisjh- hours or allies. In the bitterness of that hour David felt the remorse of a man whose sin has found him out. But, unless he roused himself to action, he ran greater risks than any he had yet encountered. The ruined houses and the neighbour- ing wastes showed no signs of bloodshed. Every person and thing had been carried off by the robbers ; not a single life appeared to have been taken. With good reason David saw ground for hope. Calling to Abiathar to put on the Ephod, that he might take counsel of his Friend in heaven, he asked : ' Shall I pursue after this troop ? ' ^ Yes,' was the answer. 'Shall I overtake them?' he then asked. Again he was answered, ' Yes.' Emboldened by answers so favourable, he asked, ' Shall I recover all ? ' and again ' Yes ' was drawn by the high priest. Encouraged by these answers, the exiles laid aside their purpose of stoning David. From a shoreless sea of sorrow they suddenly behold the wished-for land. They may both recover their own, and seize what belongs to the robbers. Setting out with his whole band, David tracked the robbers as far as the brook Besor. He could not miss the road. It was marked by traces of sheep and oxen and camels ; by .pieces of clothing, by footprints, and by other tokens of man's presence. The brook, on which he encamped for a little to refresh his wearied men, was perhaps fifteen or twenty miles from Ziklag. When they prepared again to start, two hundred of them, worn out with fatigue, were unable to proceed. Leaving them in charge of the baggage, David pushed forward 2 28 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. more rapidly with the other four hundred. Everything they saw showed that the rovers, unable to move quickly, and dreading no enemy, could not be far distant. At last the advanced guard stumbled on the body of a man stretched on the waste. He was not dead. Carrying him to David, who was marching with the main army, they found that he had fainted. A little water, a slice of fig-cake, and a couple of pieces of raisin-cake, brought the man round. He was soon able to answer the questions put to him. He was an Egyptian, the slave of an Amalekite chief. Falling sick, he had been left behind about three days before. As the foray had been unusually successful, it was not worth his master's while to attend to things like slaves, of which he had then such plenty. The south of Philistia, the south of Judah as far as Hebron, had been plundered ; but the vengeance of the free- booters fell especially on Ziklag. * We burned it with fire,' he said. The mishap to Ziklag was then plain. Knowing that all able-bodied men had been withdrawn from the south to the plains of Jezreel, the Amalekite bands fell on the country, meeting with no resistance, and carrying off every- thing they could lay hands on. David inquired if the reviv- ing slave could conduct them to the robbers. He said he would, if David swore neither to kill him nor to give him up to his master. In his half- opened eyes, these Hebrews seemed a band of desert robbers in haste to join their kindred, by whom he had been left behind. It was no rash promise he made, for the roads in the desert, and the camping grounds of the tribes, are nearly as well known as the streets of a great city. The Egyptian knew where the rovers were at that moment. If carried by the strong hands of the Hebrews, he would soon guide them to the camp ; and he kept his word. It was drawing towards evening when the pursuers came in sight of the robbers. Creeping forward under shelter of the sand -hillocks which break the level of these wastes, they heard the merry noises of a rejoicing camp. From the higher The Death of Saul, 2 2.9 mounds cautious spies could see groups of men eating and drinking, bands of careless dancers, and sheep, oxen, and camels. Far and wide there were riot and security. As darkness came on, and blazing fires kept off the cold of a spring night, the watchers could more freely take a view of the revellers celebrating their triumphs. About twilight the pursuers made their onset. Before the rovers were aware, Hebrew swords were in the midst of the groups. The shouts and the songs of revellers, who never won so easy a triumph before, were drowned in the war-cries of foemen, or turned into the silence of death. A surprise so sudden gave them no time to think of fighting. Many were cut down at their carousals ; none thought of dying like heroes, from whom the tide of fortune has turned. Four hundred young men, hurry- ing like cowards to the swift dromedaries in the camp, mounted and fled. The desert was a trap from which, when once caught, the robbers had no chance of escape. It was death by the sword if they faced the assailant ; it was death by hunger and thirst if they concealed themselves in the ravines of the desert. Many attempted to escape by hiding behind the sand-hills, or in the dried beds of winter torrents. But they had to deal with soldiers as thoroughly acquainted with the wilderness and its people as were they themselves. For a night and a day David and his men made a search after the rovers. None escaped except the four hundred who secured the swift dromedaries. The blood feud between Hebrew and Amalekite had again borne bitter fruit. That cry for blood had never been appeased. And it was not appeased by the streams shed that night. Judged by the standard of those times, there is no reason for crying out against the slaughter of these children of the desert as a piece of cruelty. It is not an act agreeable to the rules of war as carried on among the nations of Europe. But we are not judging Europeans, who live amid the lights of modern refinement nearly three thousand years after David's time. 230 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. Some modern writers, dissatisfied with this sharp handling of these enemies, find ground for praise to the Bedouin, as we may justly call them, in the mercy w^hich they extended towards the captive women and children : the robbers had only burned the town, and carried the people captive, but they had put none to death. The contrast between the unsparing A^engeance of the Hebrew chief and the tender mercy of the desert rovers seems well fitted to disgust the reader with the former, and to awaken sympathy for the latter. But this is a surface view of the motives that influenced both. Of the cruelty and falsehood of David we have spoken already ; the tender mercy of the rovers is a myth, especially if the Egyptian slave be called as a witness. Among all nations there are sufferings and conditions esteemed worse than death. To this state the women and children left in Ziklag had been reduced. Men, so regardless of the life of others as the Bedouin, did not spare these captives from any feeling of mercy. They had an object in view in carrying them off as booty : to sell them in neighbouring Egypt, or to glut their vengeance on them at leisure in the desert, or to retain them for drudges in their own tents. A fine imagination only can conjure up a vein of mercy throbbing in the bosoms of these robbers. It would be a simpler explanation to attribute the safety of the captives to the overruling hand of Providence, which brought into distinct view before the captors the advan- tages to themselves of saving the women and children alive, and so sheathed every sword that was thirsting for their life. However terrible the sliouts and swords of assailants might be to the robbers, they were sweetest music to the mourning slaves from Ziklag. All of them were found to be safe. After resting for a whole day, deliverers and delivered turned their faces homewards. The sheep and oxen, which the rovers had driven off from the pastures of the south, were gifted to David by the soldiery. The other spoil was restored to his The Death of SaziL 231 followers. As they approached, the brook Besor, the two hundred who had been left behind came forth to welcome their comrades and relations. The question then arose, what share of the booty they were to receive. Selfishness induced several of the four hundred to stand out against admitting to a share those who were left behind. They have no right to it, they said. If they get back their wives and children, it is as much as they can look for. . Such were the views entertained by these * sons of Belial.' But most of the band were otherwise minded. 'Who wdll listen to you?' asked their leader at the selfish faction ; and with the generosity of a high-minded soldier, he exclaimed, ' As the portion of him that goeth down into the battle, so shall be the portion of him that abideth by the baggage ; they shall share alike.' Such was the hold of David on his followers that this decision w^as at once accepted. From that hour it became law in the Hebrew armies. On the third day after their return home,^ news arrived of the battle on Gilboa. It had been fought, at the most, only three days before. The Philistines in the neighbour- hood of Ziklag had not heard the tidings ; in this case evil tidings outstripped good. The messenger w^io came to David was a young Amalekite, the same who witnessed and helped the mournful death of Saul. Picnt garments and earth upon his head told the watchers a tale of disaster. He asked for David, to whom alone he would deliver his message. Im- ^ David reached Ziklag on the third day after leaving Aphek. He was thus two whole days on the march. Then he followed the band of rovers for, say, the third and fourth days. Further, he hunted them all the fifth day. And it would take him the sixth, seventh, and eighth days at least to journey back to Ziklag with the women and spoil. On the third day after his arrival, that is, on the tenth or eleventh of our reckoning, tidings of Saul's death are brought by the young Amalekite. But this messenger lett Gilboa on the evening of the battle at the latest, for early next morning the Pliilistines stripped the dead. And as he would make all haste to carry what he thought pleasant tidings, he cannot have taken more than three days to the journey. It is clear, then, that the battle of Gilboa was fought at any rate seven days after David withdrew from the Philistines' camp. The two armies must therefore have been facing each other for more than a week. Uncertainty is thus introduced into the meaning of 'to-morrow' in 1 Sam. xxviii. 19. 232 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. patient to hear his story, they conducted him to their leader. On being admitted into David's presence, he threw himself on the ground in token of homage. Though a stranger and a slave, the young man knew from the common talk of the beaten soldiers, whose hand they missed in the battle, and whom they considered the successor of Saul. His haste to reach Ziklag showed more plainly than could be told in words to whom the eyes of the Hebrews were turned, when they saw the shadows of defeat stretchincj across their ranks. 'Whence hast thou come?' demanded the exile, half guessing his news. ' Out of tlie camp of Israel am I escaped,' he answered. The last word betokened disaster. In answer to eager inquiries, he continued, ' The people are fled from the battle ; Saul and Jonathan his son are dead.' And then the aged king was described by the young man, as seen by him lying in a sequestered dell on Gilboa, wounded by the mounted archers to the danger of his life, — so seriously that he could scarcely hope to escape from his pursuers. He had crept aside from the line of retreat ; he was alone ; his brave son was dead ; Abner and other chiefs had been parted from him in the flight. Hearing footsteps behind, he raised himself up, leaning on his spear.-^ It is a friend, not a foe, who approaches. But that friend, instead of endeavouring to save a life so precious as Saul's, takes it away. His words revealed Saul making a vain effort to lift himself from the ground by leaning on his spear. ' I stood over him and slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen ; and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brouglit them to my lord ; here they are.' The looks and manner of the speaker were those of a bringer of good tidings. A high 1 Compare with this act of Saul tlie story related by Livy (viii. 7) of the death of Geminius Metius at the hand of Titus Manlius. When the former was thrown from his horse at the second tilt, and was either stunned or hurt by the fall, the latter pinned him to the ground with his spear, cuspide parmaque innisum, attolleniem se ah gravi casu. The Death of Said. oit -JO office, a f^reat reward, were a few of the honours which danced before his eyes, as he pulled forth the diadem and bracelet. But never did the countenance of disappointed messenger undergo a greater change. The story which he told could only awaken feelings of horror. David had twice spared Saul's life even at the risk of his own. He could not become a partner in the confessed guilt of this slave by approving his deed. Tearing his garments in sign of sorrow, David demanded, 'Whence art thou?' 'The son of a stranger, an Amalekite,' he replied, discovering too late the danger of his position. But the w^ord 'stranger* was uttered in vain. However it might shield others from harm, it should not shield him. ' Thy blood be upon thy head,' exclaimed David, as if next of kin to the murdered man ; ' thy mouth hath testified against thee.' And soon the sword of one of the exiles, who was called in to act for the avenger of blood, executed judgment on the stranger. With rent garments and loud cries, the six hundred fasted for Saul and his son during the remainder of that day. At the same time David composed an elegy on the fallen heroes, which, in accordance with Hebrew custom, he called by a special name, 'The Bow.' Probably this title was taken from the words in which he celebrated the praises of his friend Jonathan, ' From the blood of the slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back.' After this mourning David sent presents from the spoil of the rovers to the elders of several cities in the south of Judah, especially to those who were likely to influence the course of events. But the Hebrews had lost faith in David from the time he entered the service of Achish, and especially when he marched to the plain of Jezreel. Few of them would be at first aware of his return to Ziklag more than a week before the battle. In most places it w^ould be told with horror, how the hope of Israel fought against his own folk in the most disastrous fight their history had known. The blunder of 2 34 T^^^ Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, which he was guilty bore fruit in seven long years of waiting. Had he been only an outlaw in the desert when Saul fell, he might have passed at one step from an outlaw's tent to a king's palace. But David the exile, living at Ziklag under the protection of a Philistine lord, and serving as the captain of his bodyguard, was looked on with suspicions which did not cleave to David the outlaw, who spared Saul's life, and watched the flocks and herds of Hebrews. That unhappy blunder was a source of much trouble to David. Some of the chief men in Israel gave their voices in favour of his elevation to the throne, and miglit have carried his election, had not Abner, aspiring to the office of king-maker, turned the scale against him. But notwithstanding that captain's great name, brave men from all parts of the land, losing hope of delivering their country by other means, flocked to David at Ziklag. Among the first to come was a band of skilful slingers and archers from Saul's own tribe. Several brave Gadites from Jabesh, who had distinguished themselves by rescuing the bodies of Saul and his sons, next joined him in the wilderness stronghold. But the greatest addition to his little army was made by a body of soldiers from Judah and Benjamin, more numerous, it would seem, than the defenders of Ziklao^. Amasa, the cousin of David, was their leader. Uncertain whether they meant peace or war, David met them outside the walls : ' If ye be come peaceably unto me to help me,' he said, ' mine heart shall be knit unto you ; but if ye be come to betray me to mine enemies, seeing there is no wrong in mine hands, the God of our fathers look thereon, and rebuke it.' Amasa assured him of their help, ' Thine are we, David, and on thy side, thou son of Jesse.' After that time, scarcely a day passed without new-comers hastening to rally round the banner of David. When things seemed ripe for shifting his headquarters to a place of greater name than Ziklag, David summoned Abiathar to ask counsel of God. ' Shall I go up to one of the cities of Judah ? ' was the question put The Death of Smd. 235 for decision. The answer was, ' Yes.' ' To Hebron ? ' was the next question, and again the answer was ' Yes.' ' And there they anointed David king over the house of Judah.' It was his first public anointing. The second took place in the same city amid greater pomp and higher hopes. (2 Sam. V. 3.) CHAPTER IX. LITERATURE AND WORSHIP OF THE PEOPLE. (Reign of Saul.) Ox turning from the home and foreign policy of King Saul to consider the literature of the people over whom he ruled, we find ourselves embarking on an inquiry from which little fruit seems likely to be reaped. Our sources of information are hints scattered here and there in a treatise of sixty pages, which contains, besides the story of his reign, an account of Eli's and Samuel's administration, along with David's rise and early adventures. Even though both the books of Samuel be used for this purpose, there are only 106 pages of Hebrew to glean information from. But the poverty of these sources is not so great as it seems. Much more is told regarding the people and their ways than a surface view of the history permits us to expect. When we read, for example, that ' Samuel told the people the manner of the kingdom, and wrote it in a book, and laid it up before the Lord' (1 Sam. x. 25), the brevity of the statement is out of all relation to the importance of the infer- ences which may be drawn from it. In no other passage of the first book of Samuel is the word vrrite or ivriting found.^ ^ Other two words in Hebrew have the sense of to write. One of them, to count (2 Sam. xxiv. 10), or to recount (1 Sam. xi. 5), as if from a book, occurs twice in Samuel. The other verb is not found. A scribe (or recounter) is found twice (2 Sam. viii. 17, xx. 25). These are few examples compared w'ith the number found in other books, such as the Pentateuch and Kings, but they are all expressive. Even the word for counting or number occurs but eight times in Samuel. Literature and Worship of the People. 237 And in the second book of Samuel it may be said to occur but twice, also under circumstances still more singular : ' David wrote a letter to Joab ' (2 Sam. xi. 14, 15 ; also i. 18). The word hook occurs in the same passages as write. From the way in which Samuel's writing of a book and David's letter to Joab are mentioned in the history, books and letters were evidently matters of everyday life in the eyes of the writer. Although he uses the word for write in these two passages only, he regards ability to write not as an accomplishment which deserves special mention, but as an ordinary thing which might be looked for in any Hebrew. Joab was, and always had been, a soldier, bred in camps, trained to war from his youth, but he could both read and write. David also had been engaged in war and adventure nearly all his life. His boyhood and youth were spent on the uplands of Bethlehem as a shepherd, his early manhood was devoted to court and camp, his after years to the busiest work of a conqueror and a statesman. He was the youngest and the least esteemed of a large family ; notwithstanding, he too, like Joab, could write and read. In that letter he told the soldier to make provision for having Uriah slain. Neither the king nor the general could allow so dangerous a message to be written or read by a secretary. Both of them could read and write. A man so wise and learned as Samuel would be able to conduct business of state by reading and writing quite as well as these two soldiers. He wrote a book. But he did more, he placed that book where it could be seen and read by the people, in whose interest it had been written. There was a recognised place for its safe keeping. And the words used to denote that place, as well as the laying up of the book in it, imply a familiarity with books and with the custody of them, which naturally points to other books treasured there under the care of those, to whom Samuel committed this writing of the kingdom. A state paper called a book, a place for its safe keeping, guardians to whose trust it could 238 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Literature. be securely given, and free access to it by the people when any of them wished to read the engagements entered into, are all clearly implied in a dozen Hebrew words. And this laying up of books, and giving the peo2:)le access to them, was a custom which had prevailed before Samuel's time. He found the writing of books existing in his day, the laying of them in a recognised place, the committing of them to known guardians. He followed the custom of an earlier age, when he handed his book of the kingdom to the keeping of the same men.^ With these clues in our hand, we can now advance some steps farther, bringing together things which lie considerably apart. Saul is said to have taken ' a yoke of oxen, and hewed them in pieces, and sent throughout all the coasts of Israel by messengers' hand, saying. Whosoever cometh not forth after Saul and after Samuel, so shall it be done unto his oxen.' By an unhappy addition, our English version makes Saul send the hewed oxen throughout the land, a mistake too clear to deserve refutation, even though it is accepted by critics of all shades of opinion. What did he send by the messengers' hand ? David again, when despatched to the army by his father, was told : ' Look how thy brethren fare, and receive their 'pledge! a word which occurs but twice in ^ Judging from the customs of other nations in the ancient worki, there is much to favour the idea of Moses having taken the lirst steps to found a national library for the Hebrews. Of Egypt, long before the time of Samuel, or even of Moses, it is said: 'Every temple had a library attached to it, in Avhich the records were preserved by the priests. No doubt, Thothmes caused the history of the wars, in which he and his ancestors had distinguished themselves, and the treaties and lists of tributes he had imposed upon conquered peoples, to be inscribed upon papyrus and stowed away here. Here, too, no doubt were records of his peaceful triumphs, the temples he had built, the canals and other public works he had executed, the provisions for the endowment of the temples and its staff of priests, the local regulations for the government of the surround- ing district, family genealogies, and many other things. Would that those precious papyri had survived, what a light they might have thrown upon that . remote period ; but alas ! there is evidence that they perished on the spot in some accidental conflagration, or perhaps in some invasion of the Ethiopians, for the Avails of the library are all blackened- with smoke and covered with a .tarry deposit.' — Villiers Stuart, Nile Gleanings, 148. Literatitre and WorsJnp of the People. 239 the Old Testament (1 Sam. xvii. 18; Prov. xvii. 18). What could their pledge have been but a letter to assure Jesse of their health and safety ? If David could write, and if Joab could write, David's elder brothers could also both read and write. Again, when David wrote an elegy, called The Bow, on Saul and Jonathan, it is said : ' He bade them teach the children of Judah The Bow ; behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.' Here, then, we have another writing, if not a collection of writings, referred to as having been committed to the custody of certain men for a definite purpose. Samuel's Law of the Kingdom, the Book of Jasher, the Song of the Bow, are under these men's charge. They taught the people ; they took orders in this matter from the government ; they had books in their hands for the discharge of their duties. There was thus a well-known class of men, to whom writings like The Bow, or the book of Jasher, were committed for safe keeping, and by wliom they were also taught to the people. Brief though the information given regarding them be, we recognise their existence as a class, their functions as public teachers and guardians of the nation's state papers. Closely connected with this view of these men and their office, is a statement made in Deuteronomy. Moses did what Samuel is known to have done ; he ' connnanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying. Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God' (Deut. xxxi. 25). Evidently in this, as in other things, Samuel followed the example set to him by Moses some centuries before. But, without dwelling on that point, we are not justified in regarding the messages, sent by kings and others in ancient times, as always sent by word of mouth, and not more frequently in writing. When Jehoram, king of Israel, says of the king of Syria : 'Ami God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy?' (2 Kings v. 7), we would not seek to explain the sending otherwise than by supposing a 240 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature, messenger or herald had come, did we not know of the letter which was presented by Naaman the leper. It is well, therefore, to exercise caution in this matter. Saul's mes- sengers, referred to above, may have taken letters with them from the king and Samuel ; and in other cases written papers may have been sent, of which we have no knowledge and no suspicion. A people devoted to literature, as the Hebrews are known to have been, trained also to read and write, as we have reason to believe they generally were, have left scarcely any monumental records of their acquaintance with letters. Still there may have been a reason for this want of inscriptions in and about Jerusalem. Carving of flowers and animals in public places was practised in the generation after Samuel. But written inscriptions on walls and smooth rocks are not mentioned then, nor were they mentioned save once in former times. For a practice so different from the custom which prevailed in Babylon and Egypt, no reason is given. If one is sought for, it is easily found. Hebrew literature, like our own, was book- writing, not stone-writing. Time and accident, which often spared the latter, frequently destroyed the former. Hence the records of the Pharaohs remain, in part at least, while those of David and Solomon are lost, except the few pages which, under the guidance of divine wisdom, have escaped the fire and the rage of enemies.^ The view of Saul's subjects presented in the books of Samuel is that of a people who enjoyed the blessings of reading and writing. But other arts were cultivated. David, a shepherd lad, the son of a father in circumstances which were not wealthy, was renowned for his skill as a player on the harp. Before he was born, the psaltery, the drum, the pipe, and the harp were in use among the people. The existence of these musical instruments indicates also the ^ On the art of writing among the ancient Greeks, see Mure, Hist, of Grec, Lit. iii. 397-490. Literatttre and Worship of the People. 241 existence of a poetic literature. Mucli of it may have perished; but evidently the collection of national songs was contained in the work already referred to as the book of Jasher. How many of these songs remain scattered through- out the sacred writings it is impossible now to discover. But the guardians of the national literature — the members of the tribe of Levi — were not likely to leave the collecting and preserving of such poems to chance. At the tabernacle, and in the schools of the prophets, the power of the hymns to meet the wants of men was tested in practical life. From these centres they spread to the whole nation. And sacred songs formed only part of the literature cultivated in the prophetic schools ; for it is impossible to exclude from the studies carried on in them the history and legislation of the country. AVherever a school of the prophets flourished, literature and law must have flourished also. But the period of greatest activity in these schools, so far as is known to history, falls long after the reign of Saul. Other things call for attention here ; the hymns of the people ran a course in some respects similar to that of Grecian poetry. Three or four centuries after the reign of David, Greek poets began to write lyrics and elegies as he did. As he w^as a singer, so were tliey; and as he accompanied his songs with the harp, so did they. We may even say that as he improved the instruments of music, so did they. But the parallel can be carried farther. Of the ancient Greek lyric poets it is said : ' In scarcely an instance, if indeed one can be found, has a lyric composition of any note been transmitted to posterity anonymously.' ^ In the same way David has left his mark on the Ij^ics and elegies which he wrote. He could not do otherwise in many cases. In some he might escape detection if he were not distinctly named as the WTiter. The bearing of this curious law of author- ship in lyric compositions ought to be recognised, in determining the genuineness of psalm headings in the Hebrew Psalter. 1 Mure, Gr. Lit. iii. 4. Q 242 The Kmgdom of All-Is7^ael: its Literature. Besides the popular literature, there appears to have also been in existence a scientific or professional literature, of whicli traces from time to time make their appearance in the history. A feast at the tabernacle is mentioned ; a custom of vowing vows ; a law of the Nazarite ; certain dues given to the priests from every sacrifice ; the burning of fat and incense by the priests ; the eminent holiness of the ark ; a law of tithing ; meat-offerings, burnt-offerings, peace-offerings, and trespass- offerings ; the sacredness of the oath called chermi, or utter destruction ; the sin of eating blood with the flesh of an animal ; a feast of the new moon ; the law of fugitives escaped from their masters ; the law against enticing to serve other gods ; the law of the shewbread, with one at least of the ceremonies observed on the Sabbath morning ; week or work day as opposed to the Sabbath ; ceremonial purity and impurity ; laws against witches ; and a law which seems to be a shortened expression of the first and second commandments (1 Sam. xxvi. 19). All these and other customs or laws are distinctly referred to in the sixty pages of the first book of Samuel. Men had been appointed to high office in the state, whose duty it was to see to the right observance of these customs. But the same men had charge of Samuel's book of the Kingdom, of the book of Jasher, and of David's ' Bow.' If, then, the three last required written papers for their safe keeping and right transmission to after ages, it is asking too much of us to believe that the large and important body of laws, briefly hinted at above, was not in waiting, but was transmitted by word of mouth from one age to another. A supposition so incredible for a people who were taught to read and write, and who knew by whom and where their state papers were kept, cannot be received. It is a device to evade the force of facts, not an explanation of history. The existence of other law books, then, besides Deuteronomy, follows as a matter of course from the views stated above. That they Literatitre and IVoj^s/iip of the People. 243 ^vere tlie middle books of the rentateuch is the ouly con- clusion we can come to. And that conclusion is strengthened by many undesigned coincidences between Samuel and the ritual of the Pentateuch, which now fall to be examined. The worship of the people in Saul's reign was the worship prescribed in the books of Moses. Although this is strongly denied by many writers, the proof is convincing. Allowance has to be made on one point, the destruction of the Central Altar at Shiloh. But whether that allowance be made or not, the identity of the ritual in Saul's time with the ritual of the wilderness wanderings can be sustained by proofs which are a surprise from their number and clearness, when we con- sider the few pages of Hebrew from which they are drawn. The subject wall be better understood if the case of those who deny this identity be stated first. Practically, then, their view is this : There was a small temple at Shiloh or Nob. There was also a sacred ark. Both inside and outside everything was on an insignificant scale. The child Samuel slept in the one room which formed tlie temple. He even opened the doors of it in the morning. As Eli the high priest sat at the doorpost of the temple, it cannot have been a tent. Sacri- fices were offered there ; but the laws observed in offering them were unlike the laws laid down by Moses. Xor was the sacred dress worn by the high priest in later times regarded with the reverence, which is accorded to it by the ]\Iosaic law. Hence inferences are drawn against the antiquity of that law. Even Samuel's little coat was an infringement of one of its precepts. Such, then, is the view sometimes taken of the ritual as presented to a reader in the book of Samuel. The case is wdiolly different. But, for the sake of clearness, we shall arrange the proof under different heads. First, The, Tcmijle at Shiloh ivas a large flacc. (1) The pan used at Shiloh for boiling the flesh of peace- offerings goes by the same name as the laver used for washing in the wilderness tabernacle. But the laver was made out of 244 T^^^ Kingdom of All- Israel : its Literature. the looking-glasses ' of the women which assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation ' (Ex. xxxviii. 8), words which are repeated in the story of Eli and his sons (1 Sam. ii. 22). As the word assemUe indicates apparently an organized service, w^e get from it a glimpse of duties requir- ing numbers and space for their right discharge at Shiloh as well as in the wilderness. And when Hannah left her child with Eli, her acquaintance with these women enabled her to choose from among them those, who were best fitted to act as guardians for a child of his tender years. Precisely, also, as the site of Jerusalem still bears witness to the extent of its temple courts, so the site of Shiloh warrants a belief in the large space occupied by the tabernacle. Only one spot on the hill-top, anciently occupied by that city, could have received the Mosaic tent with its surrounding court. At that place the hill slopes down to a broad shoulder, across which has been cut a sort of level court, 77- feet wide and 412 feet long. In some places the rock ' is scarped to a height of 5 feet, and along the sides are several excavations and a few small cisterns.' ^ (2) The space at the door of the tabernacle of the con- gregation was of considerable extent. Close by the entrance was the throne of the high priest, the lordly seat of the judge of the land. Unfortunately our English translators have twice missed the idea conveyed in the Hebrew word here used. ^ Eli the priest,' they say, ' sat upon a seat by a doorpost of the temple of tlie Lord ; ' and again, ' Eli sat upon a seat by the wayside watching.' They mistook the meaning of the word. Often as the word occurs in the historical books from Genesis onward, it never means aught but a seat of honour. In about seventy cases it denotes a royal throne, such as the throne of Pharaoh, or of the Persian emperor, or of kings of Israel It is found three times in the story of Eli, always with the definite article, the throne on which the judge of the 1 Pal. Exp. Q. S., January 1873, p. 83. Literature and WorsJiip of the People, 245 nation sat. As lie watched by the wayside for tidings of battle, he sat in this chair of state. He was not watching by the doorpost of the temple ; for its rock-cut court was on the north side of Shiloh, and the road he sat by was on the south side, with the houses of the town between them. At- tendants were about him, for he asked them the meaning of the noise inside the city when the messenger who had come was telling to the people his story of defeat and ruin. Clearly, therefore, the space in front of the door of the tabernacle, in which the judge's throne was placed, close beside a doorpost of the temple entrance, was of considerable size. As in many Eastern cities, it was at once a public square and a court of justice. (3) The words, ' Temple of the Lord where the ark was,' have been turned to a strange use. ' Samuel, as a servant of the sanctuary, who had special charge of the doors, actually slept " in the temple of Jehovah, where the ark of God was." To our English translators this statement seemed so incredible that they have ventured to change the sense against the rules of the language.' ^ On this showing, the sleeping-place of the boy was beside the ark, or, as would now be said, in the holy of holies. Bishop Colenso goes farther : he makes the taber- nacle of the congregation Joshua's sleeping-place. But the translators of our version have neither changed the sense nor broken the rules of the Hebrew tongue. They have strictly kept to both. The sleeping-place of Samuel proves, according to Graf and his followers, that there was nothing common to the Shiloh temple and the tabernacle, or that there was no holy place, no holy of holies, no day of atonement, no Levitical law in Eli's time ; while the sleeping-place of Joshua is equally full of proof, though it is recorded in the very heart of the Levitical law-books ! With as much force may most singular conclusions be drawn from Luke's statements regard- ^ Graf, G. B. p. 56. Colenso, Tart vii. 116. The quotation is from Smith, Old Testament, 258. Colenso says, * Samuel seems to have slept in this building.' 246 Tlic Kingdom of All-Israel : its Literahtre. incr Paul : ' The Jews, wliicli were of Asia, when thev saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, crying out, Men of Israel, help : this is the man that teacheth all men everywhere against the people, and the law, and this place ; and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.' Paul was neither priest nor Levite. He could not have been in the temple. If the criticism, which has been employed in proving the impossible in Samuel's case, were applied in Paul's, the world would lauo-h. Accordinsj to the theorists, there could not have been a Levitical system in Paul's days.^ The words of the passage under review run thus in the Hebrew : ' ISTot yet had a lamp of God gone out (and Samuel was asleep) in the temple of the Lord where the ark of God was.' Samuel was sleeping in the temple, where the ark of God was, but he was not sleeping in the most holy place, where the ark was. To sleep at the side of the ark is the meaning forced on the words by Graf: to sleep in the same temple with the ark is the inference most people would draw, although the historian merely says, Samuel was asleep, without mentioning or even hinting at the precise place. Graf and his friends invent an additional theory to keep themselves right. There was only one room in this temple. Samuel slept there ; the ark was kept there, and the Levitical system was unknown. Our translators required no crutch of the kind to keep them in motion. Trusting to common sense, and in thorough agreement with the genius of the Hebrew tongue, they regarded ' and Samuel was asleep ' as a parenthetic clause, standing by itself, and severed from the context. Failure to see the parenthesis in a passage has frequently caused per- plexity in interpretation.^ It has done so here. Eli and the priests must therefore have resided in outbuildings round the temple. In the smaller and less esteemed place at Nob more ^ The temple included the courts as well as tlie buildings. 2 Compare a similar clause, 2 Sam. iv. 5. See also 2 Sam. viii. 13. Literahtre and Worship of the People, 247 than eighty priests waited, at the altar, and must have had houses close by. In similar outbuildings at Shiloh, Samuel was lodged, evidently close to the high priest. (4) But, it is said, the temple at Shiloh must have been small, for Samuel opened the doors of it in the morning. The elaborate arrangements for opening the doors of the temple on Moriah, in our Lord's time, seem to make this inference clear. But there is no clearness about the proof. Samuel the child was Eli's favourite page. He carried the old man's orders to priests and Levites in waiting. When he got the revelation about Eli's house, he ' lay until morning, and opened the doors of the house of the Lord. And Samuel feared to show Eli the vision. Then Eli called Samuel,' etc. (1 Sam. iii. 15, 16). Eli expected the boy to tell him what had happened over- night as soon as he came to the high priest's room in the morning. But he was disappointed. The child came as usual for instructions, and went away to deliver them, for ' he feared to show Eli the vision.' Then the high priest broke the silence himself, by afterwards sunmioning his page, and requesting him to tell all that he heard. Second, TJie ritual at Shiloh was the same as the ritual in the wilderness. (1) The sacrifices were the same in both cases, and regulated by the same laws. The first passage which shows distinct traces of this same- ness is the following : ' The sons of Eli were sons of Belial : they knew not the Lord. And the priests' custom with the people was, when any man offered sacrifice, the priest's servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand ; and he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot ; all that the flesh-hook brought up, the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither' (1 Sam. ii. 12). The words which introduce this tale of wrong-doing show clearly how deeply these actings were resented by the people. * Sons of 248 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature. Belial/ or worthless fellows, is the name applied to the high priest's sons. The phrase had not occurred much in literature before this time. Moses appears to have been the first who used it, and that only towards the end of his life (Deut. xiii. 14); in Judges, it is found twice; but in Samuel, where it next appears, it occurs ten times. Here, then, we have a manifest reference to Deuteronomy, besides a warning that the things done by Eli's sons were not according to law or custom. If, now, we set down the story of Eli's sons side by side with the law of the Levite in Deuteronomy, we shall have no difficulty in seeing the indebtedness of the former to the popular law-book. Unfortunately our translators did not observe that the writer of Samuel was quoting from it word for word. Deut. xviii. 3. 1 Sam. ii. 13. ^ And the due of the priests from the And the due of the priests from the people people from the sacrificers of a sacrifice : every man sacrificing a sacrifice. — he shall give unto the priest the The priest's servant came, while the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the flesh was in seething, with a flesh-hook maw. in his hand : all that the flesh-hook brought up, the priest took for himself. Wellhausen imagines he has discovered that ten verses of the chapter, from which this quotation is made (1 Sam. ii. 27-36), were inserted after Josiah's reign by some one who had then read Deuteronomy. But there is at present no taint of sus- pected tampering with the passage under review. It is believed specially to bear a character of unquestionable originality. The law in Deuteronomy begins with ]priests, and ends with priest ; in like manner the story in Samuel's life begins and ends. But in both books, ' the priests' due from the people ' is spoken of, not ' the heave-offerings of the holy things which the children of Israel offer unto the Lord.' Animals slain for food, or popular sacrifices (Deut. xii. 20, 21), are referred to, not ^ Bishop Colenso, failing to see the quotation here, pronounces the two passages 'quite at variance,' which is true enough of the illegality of the priest's conduct. Literature and Worship of the People, 249 victims meant for the altar. Instead of being content with their legal dues from the former, Eli's sons sent a servant, that is, a young man or a Levite, to take better pieces than the law allowed. The priest, then, is seen wdth an attendant, a helper in sacred things. There is no reason for regarding that servant as other than an attendant Levite. He conies with a flesh-hook in his hand, a word of rare occurrence, but named three times among the furniture of the tabernacle (Ex. xxvii. 3). As it is here called three-pronged, it was probably of unusual size, and well fitted for the wicked purpose of the priests. He then strikes it into the pot which the sacrificer w^as using to cook the pieces of the slain beast. Here, then, we have a commentary on the way the Deuteronomic law was broken by these priests. But everything about the story brings before us the altar of the wilderness, or such a sacri- ficial feast as would be celebrated on the plains of Moab. We come now to the second class of wrongful deeds done by the sons of Eli. It was their duty to offer priestly or atoning sacrifices. Their share of the flesh, in such cases, was also fixed by law. But they were not content with it. Lev. vii. 31, 32. 1 Sam. ii. 15. And the priest shall burn the fat Before they burnt the fat, the priest's upon the altar ; but the breast shall be servant came and said to the man that Aaron's and his sons'. And the right sacrificed, Give flesh to roast for the shoulder shall ye give unto the priest priest : for he will not have sodden for an heave- offering of the sacrifices of flesh of thee, but raw. And if any your peace-ofl"erings. man said unto him. Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, and take as thy soul desireth ; then he would answer him, Nay ; but thou shalt give it me now : and if not, I will take it by force. The burning of the fat ^ was here a priestly duty of sacred obligation, like the draining of all blood from an animal slain ^ To hum the fat is literally to incense the fat, or to make it smoke away like incense. The writer of Samuel agrees with Leviticus in this use of the word. But in Kings and Chronicles it has the meaning, to offer incense, or simply to offer. 250 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its L iterahtre, for food. Offerers knew tliis duty of the priests. But in Sliiloh they were suspicious of Eli's sons : ' Let them burn the fat at once,' they said. The eagerness of tlie priests to get flesh to roast evidently filled the sacrificers with apprehen- sions of sacrilege. Part of the fat might be kept back by the priests to use for the roast (Lev. iii. 1 7). The sin of Eli's sons, in these peace-offerings, did not lie in asking more than their rightful share. The law commanded the people to make the Levites sharers in the feasts, which followed the sacrifices. And, probably, the favour of receiving a share had come to be regarded as a right. But the sin of the priests lay both in delaying, for reasons unrecorded, to burn the fat, and in usim? or threatenincj to use force. (2) The offering of incense may be placed after this head of offering sacrifice. ' Did I choose thy father,' said the prophet to Eli, ' out of all the tribes of Israel to me for priest, for to offer upon mine altar, for to burn incense, for to wear an ephod before me ? and did I give unto the house of thy father all the fire- offerings of the children of Israel ? Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice and at mine offering, which I have commanded in my habitation?' (1 Sam. ii. 28, 29). The tone, the words, and the ideas in this extract are the same as in the Penta- teuch. The outstanding duty, which distinguished priest from Levite and layman, was to burn incense before the golden altar, in a part of the tabernacle open to priests only. ISTow this duty is expressed in two ways, either by the simple verb, or by the verb and its noun, to incense incense, or to offer incense. In the books of Samuel it is spoken of as the priests' work in the only passage in which the two words occur. Samuel sacrifices, which even the law allowed him to do in one sense at least ; but nowhere does Samuel appear offering incense. In the books of Kings, again, princes and people are repeatedly found usurping this purely priestly office. Sacrificing was too small a thing for them ; they LiteratiLre and Worship of the People. 2^1 burned incense on the high ph^ces. The offering of incense was thus specially a priestly duty. But the phrase quoted above from Samuel, ' for to offer incense before me,' contain- ing as it does both the verb and the noun, occurs in only one other passage of the Old Testament. When the rebels who followed the counsels of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, were struck dead, their censers were made into ' a covering for the altar, to be a memorial unto the children of Israel, that no stranger, which is not of the seed of Aaron, come near io offer incense before the Lord' (Num. xvi. 40). The passage in Samuel points a reader back to the story of these rebels. The ri^ht of offerini^ incense was then vindicated for the Levitical priesthood, and for it alone ; and when, in these later ages, this right is again set forth as a special privilege of Aaron's sons, the doom of the rebels and the events of that terrible day were evidently before the mind of the prophet who spake, and of the priest who heard the message. (3) The law of feasts in Samuel's time was the same as the Mosaic law. Elkanah, Samuel's father, was accustomed to visit Shiloh yearly, ' to worship and to sacrifice.' This visit is generally supposed to have been paid at the feast of tabernacles. But to infer from the brief narrative that this was the only feast then known at Shiloh is too sweeping a con- clusion ; while to affirm, as Graf does, that Elkanah went to Shiloh ' only once a year ' is a reading into the story of his own w^ish that it had so spoken. If these inferences hold good for the distant days of Samuel, they are equally good for the better known days of our Lord. His parents, too, were accustomed to visit the Central Altar. Like Samuel's, they seem to have paid a yearly visit only : they ' went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.' Either, therefore, the argument built on Elkanah's custom is wrong, or only one feast was observed in the 252 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its Literatur time of Joseph and Mary. So dangerous is it to draw an argument from a historian's silence ! But the story of Elkanah's visit to Shiloh contains no mention of a yearly feast. The business he went on may have been entirely different. He was a Levite. Duty may have taken him to the Central Altar every year as a priest's assistant, not as an Israelite observing a feast; and the one supposition is as probable as the other. ' He went up to sacrifice and to worship; expresses a Levite's duties as well as it does a visit paid in observance of a feast. However, in the history in Samuel, the weekly festival of the Sabbath is recognised, with some at least of the ceremonies prescribed in the Mosaic law. Even the word for a week-day (work-day) is once found. Nor does it occur again till the time of EzekieL A monthly or new moon feast is also observed. But festivals of a week's duration are twice implied in the directions given by Samuel to Saul : ' Seven days shalt thou tarry ; ' and the phrase for seven days is exactly the same as in the law of the feasts in Leviticus. (4) The furniture of the temple in Shiloh was the same as the furniture of the Mosaic tabernacle. The holy place in the latter contained the golden candle- stick, the table of shewbread, and the altar of incense, or the golden altar. We find the same furnishings at Shiloh. From the upright stem of the candlestick branched out three golden curves on each side, rising to a level with the main stem. There were thus seven lamps, which were probably all kept burning during the night. Only two or three may have remained lighted during the day. But the going out of a lamp of the candlestick in the night would thus indicate the approach of morning. Eegarded in this way, we can under- stand the incident referred to in the words, * Not yet had a lamp ^ gone out (and Samuel was asleep) in the temple of ^ Gesenius is puzzled with this word in the Hebrew. ' Once used of the candlestick, ' he says, for which he has no authority whatever. Liter atitre and Worship of the People. 253 Jehovali, where was the ark of God.' ^ According to the experience of Jewish priests many ages afterwards, all the lamps of the candlestick did not go out at the same time. Not one of them had gone out when the vision came to the child Samuel. The incident did not take place immediately after Samuel lay down to sleep. It was long past midnight ; but the first streaks of dawn had not yet touched the sky ; not a lamp of the candlestick was gone out. Again we have in few words a picture of things at Shiloh, which differs in no respect from the picture painted of things in the wilder- ness. Let the words be looked at more closely. The ' candle- stick ' is not mentioned in the life of Samuel ; the lamps of it are not mentioned ; only a lam'p is mentioned, but in such a connection as to prove the existence of the other six, and the candlestick too. This idea of the ever-burning lamps of the golden candlestick had sunk deeply into Hebrew thought. At a later period it is seen in historical fact and in popular proverb. When David's men, alarmed at the danger he once encountered in fighting with a giant, refused to let him run like risks again, they assigned as their reason almost the very words here used, ' Thou shalt go no more out with us to battle, that thou quench not the (light) lamp of Israel ' (2 Sam. xxi. 17 ; Prov. xx. 27). The table of shewbread existed at Nob, and may reasonably be supposed to have existed also in Shiloh, while the purpose to which it was applied and the rules that were followed are unmistakeably the same as are set down in the Mosaic law (Lev. xxiv. 5-9). Another piece of furniture in Shiloh, as in the wilderness, was the golden altar or the altar of incense, which ^ 1 Sam. iii. 3, 7. The words here translated not yet and xoas asleep are obviously used in these meanings in the passage. The word temple occurs for the first time in three passages of this book, 1 Sam. i. 9, iii. 3 ; 2 Sam. xxii. 7. It is used by the historian and by David. We may therefore assume that it came into use after David formed the purpose of building a house or temple (2 Sam. vii.), and began to collect materials. At an early period, it also meant a king's palace, Ps. xlv. 8, 15 ; Prov. xxx. 28. Both these signiticatious it continued to retain. 2 54 ^^^^ King dom of A II -Israel : its L iteratitre. is referred to in the prophet's message to Eli (1 Sam. ii. 28). Outside of the tabernacle was another altar, called the brazen altar or altar of bnrnt-offerings. Its existence in Shiloh is placed beyond doubt by the doings of Eli's sons, although the names brazen altar and golden altar do not reappear till we come to the book of Kino's. There are other singular coinci- deuces with tlie Pentateuch in this passage of Samuel. The prophet, who speaks to Eli, calls the priests' portions tlic. fire- offerings of the cliildren of Israel. But the general grant of these offerings is found first in Deut. xviii. 1, where they are called the fire- offerings of Jehovah, a form of speech which a reviser or improver of Samuel would certainly not have changed. Besides, the use of the words hiek and dioelling shows what book was in the speaker's mind. He asks, ' Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice ? ' He was thinking of the first and only other use of the word, in ' Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked' (Deut. xxxii. 15). And the term cliuelling is unusual in the Pentateuch as well as Samuel. While it occurs twice in the latter, used in both cases by this prophet, it occurs but once in the former (Deut. xxvi. 15). A sacred dwelling, such as heaven itself, is meant. Borrowing is thus proved beyond doubt. But inserting words and verses in the book of Samuel is neither proved nor rendered probable. Amonfy the furniture of the tabernacle at Shiloh w^as another and most holy symbol of the faith, ' the ark of the covenant of the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth (between) the cherubim ' (1 Sam. iv. 4). Although the phrase 'which dwelleth (be- tween) the cherubim ' occurs here for the first time in this dress, the original passage was undoubtedly Ex. xxv. 22, or ISTum. vii. 89. No other part of the Pentateuch contains the words. Isaiah borrowed the form of them in Samuel, not that in jSTum- bers, when he used the figure in the prayer of King Hezekiah. Other writers followed the same model.^ The ancient phrase, ^ Isa. xxxvii. 16 (2 Kings xix. 15). See also 2 Sara. vi. 2 ; 1 Chron. xiii. 6 ; Ps. Ixxx. 1, xcix. 1. Litei'atin^e and Worship of the People, OD as found in lumbers, requires the word leiwccn to be used. But the writer of Samuel, adopting a mode of speech which may have been common in his day, as it certainly was com- mon afterwards, shortened the phrase by leaving out hehueen. Our own English tongue has words and phrases shortened in the same way. But we are expected to believe that the verse in Numbers was written during the Babylonian captivity, and the phrase in Samuel inserted by a reviser, no one knows when. Even the cherubim on the mercy-seat have come under suspicion. Graf sneers at the idea of them having ever been there. The holiness of the ark is borne witness to in the life of Samuel in a way which suggests an intimate acquaintance with the Pentateuch and the book of Joshua. "When the priests removed it from one place to another in the wilder- ness, they were said to hear it by the lifting staves. They themselves were called ' bearers of the ark.' These, then, were professional words. At the close of Eli's administration the w^ord hear is used to describe the way in which his sons brought the ark to the camp of Israel at Aphek (1 Sam. iv. 4). But after it fell into the Philistines' hands, the word was not used. Other six verbs express their dealings with it. A careful avoidance of the proper term during this time of captivity, combined with a return to the use of it in David's reign (2 Sam. vi. 13), is not an accident. It indicates acquaintance with the legal language of the priests in their WTitten books. But when Eli's sons bore the ark from Shiloh to Aphek, it was not exposed to public gaze in its passage through the country and in the camp of Israel. The tone of the story proves this. Eli did what Aaron and his sons did, ' took down the covering veil, and covered the ark of testi- mony with it ' (Num. iv. 5). This covering over requires to be borne in mind. After its seven months' captivity the Philis- tines sent the ark back * to its place ' on a new cart. They expected the kine to take the road to Bethshemesli, upwards 256 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its Literahcre, of twelve miles to the south-east of Ekron (1 Sam. vi. 9). But this was not the way to ' its place ' at Shiloh, nor was Beth- shemesh the nearest city of Israel. Aijalon was as near to Ekron, and was also on the road to Shiloh ; Timnah and Zorah were nearer. There must have been a reason for the Philis- tine priests speaking as they did of Bethshemesh. And that reason is plain. They knew it to be the nearest city inha- bited by Hebrew priests (Josh. xxi. 16). But Aijalon, though a Levitical, was not a priestly city, nor Zorah, nor Timnah. The choice of the Philistine priests or diviners thus clearly implies the existence of priestly and Levitical cities in Israel. But the Philistines were also aware of the propriety of send- ing a trespass-offering back with the ark. Pour times is the word used under circumstances which suggest an acquaintance with the book of the law on the part of the author of SamueL^ Quite in keeping with this choice of a city and a trespass- offering, the historian records what happened as soon as the oxen stood still in the fields of the city : ' The Levites took down the ark of the Lord, and the men of Bethshemesh offered burnt-offerings and sacrificed sacrifices the same day unto the Lord.' These men of Bethshemesh were priests. They were entitled to handle the ark by its lifting staves, which they did when they took it down from the cart. But the story proceeds : ' He smote the men of Bethshemesh because they looked on the ark of the Lord' (1 Sam. vi. 19). Our English version makes the men ' look into the ark.' ^ But the mean- ing seems different. The priests lifted the covering veil off the ark, perhaps from no motive of curiosity, but to make sure that everything was right. * To look ' was a thing forbidden on pain of death to the Levites not priests (Num. iv. 20). Aaron and his sons took down the covering veil, and put it on ^ It occurs in Leviticus and Numbers thirty-three times ; Samuel four times ; Ps. Ixviii. 21 ; Isa. liii, 10 ; Pro v. xiv. 9 ; and 2 Kings xii. 16. ^ The Septuagint has, ' The sons of Jeconiah among the men of Bethshemesh were not glad {i.e. had cause to grieve) because they looked on the ark.' Litei^ature and Wo7'sh{p of the People. 257 the ark in the most holy place ; here his sons toolz doivn the ark (the word is the same) and lifted the covering in the fields of Betlishemesh, and before a gathering crowd (Num. iv. 5). A great disaster was the result. Frightened by the havoc caused, the priests resolve to get quit of their treasure : ' Who/ they ask, ' is able to stand before this holy Lord God ? ' These also were professional words. In another passage in which they specially occur (Deut. X. 8), Levi is said to have been ' separated to stand before the Lord to minister unto him ;' but in similar circumstances David says, ' How shall the ark of the Lord come to me ' (2 Sam. vi. 9) ? These priests of Bethshemesh believed they were discharging a duty of their office when the disaster liappened. Acting like their heathen neighbours, they hastened to get the ark out of their hands. But the plan they took was different. They do as men would do who have the right to command the services of others. They do not request, but they order ' the dwellers in Kirjath-jearim to come down from their heights and fetch it up.' These ' dwellers ' were priests' ser- vants, made temple slaves by Joshua (Josh. ix. 17), and bound to obey their masters' orders. The writer of Samuel afterwards lets his readers know how well he was acquainted with the lineage and position of these people (2 Sam. xxi. 2). ' Even Beeroth,' one of their cities, ' was counted to Benjamin' (2 Sam. iv. 2). As their town lay on the road to Shiloh, this may have been the pretence used by the priests of Bethshemesh in sending them the order. But the servants were nobler than the masters. Wliether they horc the ark by a hill path now unknown in that desolate district, or carried it round past Zorah, they went no farther than Abinadab's house on a hill on the mountain spur which was crowned by their own city. Orders of some sort were given to them to stop there. As the Levites were the supe- riors of their town, and entitled to exact service from them, one or more of the class may have been resident in the place. E 258 The Kingdom of All-Isi^ael : its Liter ahcre. While there is nothing to identify Abinadab and his son Eleazar, who was set apart ' to the charge of the ark/ with the descendants of the ancient heathen in Kirjath, there is much in the narrative to identify them with the Levitical tribe. At a later period, too, Zadok the high priest officiated at Gibeon, another city a few miles distant, inhabited by temple slaves. This narrative of the captivity of the ark is therefore in keeping w^th the recorded worship and ritual of the Penta- teuch. All the coincidences discovered are contained in less than two pages of Hebrew. They are also intimately bound up with the story ; indeed, they run through it like threads of life, uniting all the parts into one whole. A reviser's hand or an interpolator's would have made several points clear, which the ancient author, writing for people who had as correct a knowledge of the ritual and customs as he had, did not dwell on so fully as we could desire. But there is no revision here. There is a narrative of facts resting on the same Pentateuch and the same book of Joshua which are in our hands to-day. (5) The garments of the high priest were the same at Shiloh and Nob as in the wilderness. Not only is this denied, but the wearing of a linen ephod or vest and of a mdil or coat by Samuel has been turned into an argu- ment against the existence of the Pentateuch in his time : ' Samuel ministered before the Lord, a child, girded wdth a linen ephod. Moreover, his mother made him a little coat {meil), and brought it to him from year to year' (1 Sam. ii. 18, 19). According to some writers, the Mosaic law forbade the wearing of an ephod (or vest) and a meil (or long mantle) by any Hebrew but the high priest. Starting with this idea, they have built on Samuel's clothes a formidable battery against the antiquity of the Pentateuch. Had his mother known the Mosaic law, she never would have made for him clothes which only a high priest could wear. Hence the Pentateuch was unknown to Eli, to Samuel, and to the priests Liter atttre and Wars hip of the People. 259 and people of Sliiloh. But two epliods are mentioned in Hebrew history ; one is called The Epliod, far excelling in glory and honourable use; another is called an eiiliod, or a linen ephod. The former was a splendid vest with shoulder pieces made of precious stones set in gold, and a double breastplate having a pocket behind and twelve stones graven with the tribal names in front. The meil or robe of this Ephod, Avas a mantle 'of woven work, all blue,' having upon its hems ' pomegranates of blue, and purple, and scarlet, twined, and bells of pure gold, ... a bell and a pomegranate round about the hem of the robe to minister in.' Such, then, were Tlio, Epliod, the glorious ephod, and the mcil, with which the high priest entered the holy of holies once a year. He alone could wear these magnificent robes ; others could not. But a linen ephod was a different thing. It w^as worn by ordinary priests, as by the eighty-five slain at Nob ; it was worn also by David, '^oi a word is ever said about the use of this robe being confined to the priests, far less to the high priest. Our knowledge of the meil or mantle, again, is fuller than our knowledge of the ephod. Jonathan wore one, which David got in a present. Tamar also wore a meHl ; Job and his three friends had that article of dress ; and Ezra also, on his coming from Babylon, was clothed in the same upper robe. The glorious me'il of the Ephod belonged to the high priest alone ; but the common robe of that name was worn by men and women of other classes and of all ages. To say that Samuel's mother set the Mosaic law aside, or rather acted in such a way as to show the law did not exist in her day, because year by year she brought a me'il for her little son, is to affirm what is in direct opposition to known facts. Ezra, whose knowledge of the law is universally allowed, must then have broken it as well as Samuel's mother, for he tells us twice of the mcil which he wore. Although he was a priest, he was no more the high priest than Samuel, and no more entitled than he to wear a kind of 26o J he Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Literature. mantle, which it is now maintained Aaron and his successors alone had a ridit to wear. We cannot fail, then, to give its proper meaning to the word ephod w^hen it suddenly bursts upon us in the story of David. ' Is there not here under thine hand spear or sword ? ' he asks of the high priest at Nob. ' And the priest said, The sword of Goliath the Philistine, wliom thou slewest in the valley of Elah, behold it, wrapped in the garment behind the E-[)liocV (1 Sam. xxi. 9). For eighteen pages of Hebrew the word ephod had not occurred in Samuel. Where it is last mentioned, it so slips in as to make it plain that an ordinary ephod is meant (1 Sam. xiv. 3). But there is no doubt in David's case. Tlu Ephod, with splendid shoulder pieces and dazzling breastplate, was before him and the high priest, in some repository of the new temple at Nob. Behind it was Goliath's sword, and apparently Goliath's garment, for the words run, ' wrapped in the garment,' not ' wrapped in a cloth.' A picture so distinct needs no explaining. The sword of Goliath, the garment, the Ephod, are definite ideas familiar to David as well as to the high priest. What the two first were to the soldier, the third was to the priest ; his own, and yet not his own, but God's. The M&il and the Ephod of the high priest went by a special name. Along with his inner tunic, they were called Tlu Garments. A correct use of words might require that phrase in many cases, without reference to the high priest and his robes. In point of fact it occurs only seven times in the Old Testament. Five of them refer to the high priest. Of these five three are used in a way which leaves no doubt on the appropriation of The, Garments, or Tlie very Garments, to the high priests' robes of office (Ex. xxix. 5 ; Lev. viii. 2, xxi. 10). Other two require no discussion (Ex. xxviii. 4; Zech. iii. 4), Two passages remain to be examined (2 Kings xxii. 14; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 22). In reality they are the same. * Huldah the prophetess, wife of Shallum, son of Tikvah, son Lite7^atit7^e and Worship of the People. 261 of Harhas, keeper of The Garments! It is difficult to avoid the conclusion here : as there was a wardrobe chamber in Nob for the state robes, so there was one in Jerusalem, of whicli Shallum was keeper. But the proof is not complete. A link is still wanting. If the ephod mentioned in the history of David was truly the ephod made in the wilderness, some hint might be expected of its glorious appointments, — either the shoulder pieces with their precious adornment, or the breastplate, with its pocket containing unknown but curious things. Shoulder pieces are not mentioned in the book of Samuel, nor the splendid front of the breastplate. But at a later stage of the history, and in the most incidental way, that which was behind the front, and which implies the whole breastplate, is mentioned in one word, once and once only : ' When Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets' (1 Sam. xxviii. 6, 15). All three methods were known in his time. If the Urim was connnon in his day, it is seldom mentioned. What it was we do not even know. In only seven places altogether is it found ; two of these have to be at once dismissed as telling lis nothing, one of the others is now before us, and the remaining four are these — all of them from the Pentateuch : — Ex. xxviii. 30. Lev. viii. 8. And thou shalt put in the breast- And he put the breastplate upon plate of judgment the Urim and the him ; also he put in the breastplate the Thummim ; and they shall be upon Urim and the Thummim. Aaron's heart, when he goeth in before the Lord. Num. xxvii. 18-21. Deut. xxxiii. 8. Joshua shall stand before Eleazar And of Levi he said, Let thy Urim the priest, who shall ask for him after and thy Thummim be with thy holy the manner (custom or judgment) of one. the Urim before the Lord. The source, from which the custom in Samuel was borrowed, is now clear. As Joshua stood before Eleazar, so Saul stood before a high priest of his own making. 262 TJie Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Liter atur^e. As Joshua asked at Jehovali by the custom of the Urim, so Saul asked at Jehovah. If a coincidence of fact and phrase so singular as this between ISTumbers and Samuel be but the touch of a reviser's vanished hand, the least sceptical may well doubt all results of modern criticism. Whatever the Urim may really have been, it was certainly something put in the pocket of the high priest's breastplate. But this something could not be consulted till the priest applied his hand to the breastplate and drew it out, or examined it other- wise. ' Withdraw thine hand,' Saul cried to the high priest, when he wished the consulting stopped. If, then, the chapter in Numbers, which first shows this use of the Urim, was not w^ritten till one hundred, or perhaps six hundred, years after Saul's death, both history and criticism may be pronounced arts in which it is hopeless to look for fixed principles. But, besides, the breastplate, though not mentioned in the book of Samuel, is hinted at. It contained the names of the twelve tribes, graven on twelve precious stones. Levi was one ; Joseph was another; but Ephraim and Manasseh did not appear. When the fierce debate was proceeding at Gilgal between Israel and Judah, the speakers for Israel said, ' We have ten parts in the king ' (2 Sam. xix. 43). They referred to the arrangement of the precious stones on the breast- plate. Levi, as a tribe scattered over the country, was common to all the others. Eleven remained, of which ten stood out against Judah. The reference to the breastplate names in this dispute is not doubtful. (6) The law of vows was the same at Shiloh as in the Pentateuch. Thus, at the very beginning of the book of Samuel, we read, Hannah ' vowed a vow ;' but when the time came for thinking of fulfilling that vow, she delays, and allows her husband, Elkanah, to visit Shiloli without her, ' to offer unto the Lord the yearly sacrifice and his vow.' Without doubt, the oath to dedicate the child Samuel to the sanctuary, which was binding on her, had become binding on him too. Literahtre and Worship of the People. 26 o The vow was hers ; not spoken loud out so as to he heard hy him. But the vow was his also : ' Do what seemeth thee good ; tarry until thou have weaned him ; only the Lord establish his word.' A glance at the law of vows in Numbers (xxx. 13) makes the whole matter clear. ' Every vow,' it says, ' and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may cstaUish it, or her husband may make it void.' We cannot help falling back on this law when we read of Hannah's vow, which was hers, and yet was his, her husband's, also ; and of which he used the very word used in Numbers to mark out a husband's right, 'The Lord establish His word.' The law of vows at Shiloh was the same as the law of vows in the wilder- ness. But it was a special vow that the mother made, first, of service to the Lord all the days of the child's life ; and second, ' there shall no razor come upon his head.' The second part of the vow is borrowed, word for word, from the instructions given about the rearing of Samson (Judg. xiii. 5). The mere words of the law, again, are different, for they run, ' No razor shall pass over his head.' We shall find a freedom of treat- ment in the writer of Samuel when borrowing from the books of Moses, as well as an exactness of quotation : the one is as useful as the other in the sure but delicate tests we have repeatedly to apply for the discovery of truth. Other examples of the law of vows occur in the history. Saul was commissioned to carry out the vow of utter destruc- tion against Amalek. He even made the same vow against his own people, and to the danger of his own son, Jonathan. At a later period Absalom professed to have uttered a vow during his exile at Geshur in Syria : ' If the Lord shall bring me again unto Jerusalem, then I will serve the Lord.' He asked his father's leave to discharge this duty, as the spirit, if not the letter, of the law in Numbers required him to do : ' Let me go and pay my vow (which I have vowed unto the Lord) in Hebron ' (2 Sam. xv. 7, 8). Whatever this vow may have been, a great feast was in some way part of it, for 264 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its Literature, he was allowed by David to invite two hundred men to go with him from Jerusalem. One thing is plain. When Absalom fled to Geshur for vindicating the majesty of the law by killing Amnon, he offered a slight to his own birthplace, Hebron, the city of refuge for manslayers belonging to Judah. Amnon deserved death by the law. David allowed him to escape. Absalom, as next of kin to his sister Tamar, then became the law's minister of vengeance. But Geshur was not the place he ought to have fled to. Hebron was the place provided for him by the law of Moses till the authorities made inquisition into blood. Was this vow a making of amends to his birth- place for the wrong he thus did the city and its people ? Was the great feast he proposed to hold, with his father's know- ledge and countenance, a reparation to the citizens for his dis- trust of their protection ? ' He sacrificed sacrifices,' it is said ; just as his imitator, Adonijah, 'sacrificed (not slew) sheep and oxen and fat cattle' (1 Kings i. 9, 25). He held a popular feast in Hebron, as the law of the central altar allowed ; he was not offering priestly sacrifices. CHAP TEE X. RECOXSTRUCTION OF ALL-ISEAEL. (2 Sam. ii. 4-xi. 27 ; 1 Cheon. xi. 1-xix. 19.) Kingly government had now been tried among the Hebrews for more than a generation. To all appearance it had failed to attain the ends for which it was established. It had not united the people successfully to make head against foreign foes. On the contrary, it had broken the nation into pieces Avhich could scarcely ever be brought together again by the genius of man. The high-priesthood, the most abiding symbol of the oneness of the twelve tribes, could scarcely be said to exist. Jealousies and heartburnings had been freely sown among the leading men by the king. High offices, important trusts, wide estates, w^ere given to aliens and unworthy flatterers, while men of mark in the country were passed over. All the high hopes with which Saul was greeted shortly after his accession had come to nothing. The strands of national life, which he once had it in his power to plait into the strong cord of national unity, had one by one slipped from his grasp, until they became hopelessly broken or entangled. He had reigned to little purpose. He had shown the Hebrews what they could do; but by not doing it, he had turned their strength into weakness. After showing them the power of union under one head, he had split the nation into factions. After repeatedly leading them to victory, he first broke their spirit and then involved them in ruinous defeat. At the end of his reign the twelve tribes were farther from union than at its commencement. An attempt was made to secure unity 2 66 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. and strength under Saul. It succeeded at first, but its ultimate failure quenched the hopes and well-nigh the attempts of patriotism. One of David's first steps, after taking up his abode in Hebron, was the issuing of an order to the learned men of the tribe of Judah to teach the people under their charge the lament he made on Saul and Jonathan. His object in this appears to have been to show how truly he mourned over the princes, who fell fighting for their native land. He was imitating the lawgiver in thus ordering a song to be taught to the people. His next step was to send a message of thanks to the men of Jabesh for their gallantry in rescuing the bodies of Saul and his three sons. But this show of zeal was not enough to gain the confidence he had forfeited. Abner had escaped from the battle of Gilboa. He had earned the gratitude of his countrymen by hazarding his life for their independence, while David was eating the bread of the enemy in the enemy's land. When, therefore, he pronounced against receiving David as king, most of the people followed his leading. Probably, in taking this step, Abner was really afraid of losing the power he had in Saul's time. At least it was evident that he might retain all power in his own hands, by placing Saul's surviving son on the throne. The name of this prince was Ishbaal. He was forty years of age, a circumstance which might induce us to believe him Saul's eldest son. He was not a man of much vigour of mind ; like other weak men, he was prone to suspicion and ready for a quarrel. He was satisfied to wear a crown, and to enjoy the pleasures of a throne, while another thought and acted for him. But he was held in little esteem by his subjects, who changed his name Ishbaal, 'Lordly man,' into Ishbosheth, ' Man of shame ' (bashful) ; by the latter he is known in history. He was only a king in name. The tribes on the west bank of the Jordan either stood in awe of the Philistines, or were unwilling to receive him among them ; for he chose Rcconstrttction of A II- Israel, 267 Mahanaim, a city on the fertile plain of Gad, as his capital. That region had good cause to be grateful to the house of Saul. But, had it not been for Abner s influence and David's unhappy alliance with the heathen, Ishbosheth would never have been thought of for the kingdom. David seems to have kept up friendly relations with Achish during his stay in Hebron ; he was then a tributary of the Philistines. Ishbosheth, on the other hand, was at war with these tramplers on his country. The position of his capital city and the wrongs of his house preclude the idea tliat he would wear a crown as their vassal. But at that time neither David nor his rival enjoyed the confidence of the Hebrews. They were merely the chiefs of two parties at feud, on whose purposeless strife the nation looked without interest. In the first place, Ishbosheth reigned only two years in Mahanaim, while David reigned seven and a half in Hebron. Assuming that they began to reign at nearly the same time, there was thus a period of five years and a half, during which no king ruled the eleven tribes, and no desire was manifested to unite with the kingdom of Judah. These years of waiting were spent in bringing round Israel again to place confidence in David. But, further, the Hebrews regarded the quarrel of Ishbosheth and David as a matter of small concern. Perhaps they had no longer the same desire as of old for a king ; or they may have had little confidence in either of the two princes. Whatever the reason of it may have been, the indif- ference of the people is unquestionable. Only one battle was fought between the two parties in seven years. If not the only battle fought, it was at least the only one deemed worth recording. And it was more like a faction fight between two petty clans than a battle between two kingdoms. It was fought under the following circumstances: — An agreement appears to have been entered into between the chiefs of the two parties to appeal to arms ; but, with the view of avoiding bloodshed, twelve champions were chosen on each side, by 2 68 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, Avliose prowess the quarrel should be settled. Gibeon, the common sanctuary of both, was fixed on for the fight. Ac- cordingly, Joab met Abner at the large water tank, near the foot of the hill on which the town was built. Each of them Avas accompanied by a band of soldiers. They were separated by the long broad tank. When everything was ready, Abner called across to Joab, ' Let the young men now stand forth and play before us.' ' Let them stand forth,' was the reply. The champions from each side at once marched into the space between tlie two bands. The battle was over in a few minutes. The w\arlike play which the captains called for was not decisive. Animated by hatred of their rivals, and upholding the honour of their tribe, each of them, selecting an opponent, gave and received a mortal thrust. The ghastly 5 ^ight of twenty-four strong men, stretched in a moment bleeding and dead on the ground, awoke in the onlookers a thirst for blood. A fierce battle between the two bands at once began. Abner's men gave way before the onset of the w^ell-trained soldiers of Joab. Broken and scattered, they fled along the pasture grounds known as Midbar-Gibeon. Abner, like the others, sought safety in flight, running for some distance alone, but keeping the rest of his force in sight. Both he and they were making for a hill on which they could rall}^ But there was a youthful pursuer behind the chief. As the latter cast a look now and again over his shoulder, he saw the space between them gradually growing less. The pursuer passed others of the fugitives without turning aside. He was bent on making up with Abner. And he gained his wish. ' Is this thou, Asahel ? ' asked the fugitive, as he recognised Joab's youngest brother. ' It is,' he answers, the fewness of his words showing the eagerness of his purpose. ' Turn for thy good,' added Abner ; ' lay hold on one of the young men, and take thou his armour.' But the rash youth gave no heed to this advice. With sword uplifted and ready to strike, he pushed heedlessly forward. Abner Reconstruction of A II- Israel. 269 saw there was no danger so long as Asaliel was behind the long and powerful spear which he was carrying by the middle. ' Turn aside for thy good/ Abner repeated ; ' wherefore should I smite thee to the ground ? How then should I hold up my face to Joab thy brother ? ' But these appeals were thrown away. A few strides more, and the sword of Asahel would have smitten Abner. But he was on his guard. Taking careful aim, he delivered a back thrust with his heavy spear at the unwary pursuer. The pointed end was shod with iron, for the purpose of catching firm hold of the ground when tlie warrior encamped for the night. Asahel was regardless of this iron end. It was on him, it was forced past his uplifted arm, and through his flank before he was aware. Turning- round to withdraw the spear, Abner stood for a little over the fallen runner. The shadow of death was already resting on his features, and in his looks Abner read a blood feud between himself and the two brothers of the slain hero. The fall of Asahel stopped the pursuit. On coming up to the dying soldier, the men of Judah stood still, awed, as it were, by the greatness of the disaster. Drawn to the place by the crowd, Joab and Abishai discovered their loss. They marked the spot in which the spear pierced their brother's side, to pay the slayer like for like at a future day. A passionate desire for vengeance seized them. Tlie chase was resumed. But the respite gained by the fall of Asahel gave Abner time to gather his followers on the top of a hill called Ammah, near the border of Midbar-Gibeon. Joab and his men reached the foot of it towards sunset. They appear to have formed in a long line in the hope of outflanking those on the top. But the voice of Abner calling out : ' Shall the sword devour for ever ? Knowest thou not that it will be bitterness in the latter end ? ' warned Joab not to be too eager. Unwilling to confess that the position of the beaten army was too strong for him, Joab, pretending a desire to save the shedding of blood, answered that his men would not 270 The Kingdom of Ail- Israel: its History. have withdrawn from the attack and pursuit till daybreak had Abner not spoken. The trumpet called a halt to the assailants. Eetiring from the hill, they turned their faces homewards. Both the Hebrew chiefs marched all night, the one to Mahanaim, along the banks of Jordan ; the other to Hebron, the distance in each case being under thirty miles. The dead body of Asahel was carried to Bethlehem, and laid in his father's tomb. In the war between the two kings, all other forays and fights which took place were thought unworthy of mention by the sacred writer. Passing them over with the brief remark, ' There was long war between the houses of David and Saul/ he goes on to show how the former increased in greatness, while the latter fell from causes unconnected with the war. David was becoming known to the petty kings of Palestine. Talmai, whose kingdom of Geshur lay not far from Damascus, gave him his daughter Maachah in marriage, though he was well aware she would be but one of a large band of wives dwelling in the palace. This prince was probably a member of the Hittite confederacy of kings who, when guided by a skilful chief, were able to defy Assyria on the east and Egypt on the south. But these numerous marriages are one of the greatest blots on David's good name. It may have been otherwise in those days, for when the sacred writer speaks of him as ' going on and growing stronger,' the first proof given is the number of sons born to him by his wives. But a man so enlightened as David must have felt that he was stretching the mere per- mission of the divine law to breaking point, when he gave himself up through passion or pride to this savage morality. Knowing that it was not so from the beginning, knowing, too, that his people, if not forbidden in the law to have more wives than one, were at least discouraged from this custom of the heathen, he put a stumblingblock before the well- disposed, and he gave the enemies of Jehovah cause to Reconsti^tcction of A II- Israel, 271 blaspheme. The blots which stained his kingly greatness, the griefs which cankered his happiness when all things seemed going well with him, and the terrible blows which fell on his house, took their birth in this multitude of wives. The pride of Abner, to which Ishbosheth owed his throne, proved also the cause of his own death and of the overthrow of Saul's house. The king, lending a willing ear to the scandal of servants regarding visits paid by Abner to the women's apartments, resented an insult which Eastern despots consider the most heinous that can be cast on their greatness. But he was afraid to do more than charge his minister with cjuilt. A storm of answer burst from Abner on hearing^ the accusation. The helpless prince w^as struck witli terror. He could neither speak nor act when Abner, reproaching him with his baseness, threatened to undo all he had done by handing the kingdom over to David, its rightful sovereign. If Ishbosheth was a mean man, unworthy to reign, Abner showed himself to be a haughty aspirant to the office of king-maker, who might, if he pleased, make David king. When it suited his own end, Abner proposed to carry Jehovah's purposes into effect. He believed himself necessary for their fulfilment. Pride went before a fall ; the boaster was doomed to shame. It is not likely that he set about executing his threat openly, and with the knowledge of Ishbosheth. The first step he took was to send trusty messengers to Hebron. On arriving, they had an interview with David, at which they asked him, ' Whose is the land ? ' They discovered that he regarded Abner as the real ruler of Israel. Before the nation could again be brought under the sway of one prince, it was clearly his opinion that an engage- ment must be entered into with that chief Emboldened by this discovery, they opened out their master's message more fully : ' Make thy league with me, and behold my hand shall be with thee, to brincj about all Israel unto thee.' A meetin<:]j was also proposed between David and Abner, at which 2/2 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its History. arrangements could be made for settling the business. David ^villingly agreed to this arrangement, if his wife Michal were first restored to him by Abner. The messengers reported this condition to their master. He w^as ready enough to comply ; but, as he wished things to be managed quietly at first, he seems to have sent other messengers, requesting David himself to demand Michal from Ishbosheth. In the meantime Abner w^as busy preparing for a revolu- tion. He represented to princes and elders the hopelessness of strucralin^ with the Philistines so lonc^ as Ishbosheth was on the throne. He reminded them of their desire after Saul's death to have David for king, and of the assurance given long before that David was chosen to deliver Israel from all enemies. But he dealt most earnestly wdth the chiefs of Benjamin in favour of a new order of things. With them his word carried most w^eight, and to them a change of allegiance would bring the greatest loss. When affairs had thus been managed so far well for the intended change, messengers arrived from David demanding back his wife Michal. Abner gave his voice in favour of yielding. He did more ; he undertook to escort her to Hebron himself, though his real object was to make David aware of the revolt, w^hich was swiftly coming to a head. Twenty men accom- panied him to Hebron ; an insufficient guard through a hostile country, had not David's messengers gone back with them. Knowing when they would reach Hebron, or forewarned that they were already on the road, David despatched Joab with a band of soldiers against some raiders who had plundered the south of Judah. He did not intend to make him aware of what was on foot. Abner was received with open arms at Hebron. A great feast, at which he was entertained in the place of honour, proclaimed to the city the approaching end of civil war. But tidings of Joab's return hastened the close of these rejoicings. Without delay Abner w^as hurried off to collect the tribes of Israel for the purpose of making David Reconstruction of All-Israel, 273 king. Scarcely had he left the city for the north, when Joab entered with much spoil from the south. The coming of Abner was soon made known to him, not with any evil design, but only as the gossip of the town. Given to trickery and deceit himself, he could not believe that the only reason for his coming was to restore Michal to her husband. Furious also at the king for concealing the matter from him, Joab hastened to the palace, and with a scorning which showed the mastery he had already acquired over David, he demanded an explanation of this sending away of Abner. His only object in coming, he said, was to spy out the land. Unhappily, Joab was to David almost as imperious and as useful as was Abner to Ishbosheth. On leaving the palace, Joab sent messengers to recall Abner to Hebron ; perhaps some of the very men who had gone to Mahanaim for Michal, and whom Abner knew. Joab's audacity would not shrink from giving the order as if it came from the king. Nor would the messengers sent suspect evil. Abner was only a little way from the city. Tearing no danger, he turned on receiving the message. Joab is appeased, he thought; the king has bought up the blood feud, or the two brothers are as wishful of peace as David himself. When he drew near to the city gate, Joab and Abishai met him and his men. There were no signs of danger. Everything boded peace. Kindly greetings passed between the rival chiefs. Joab then turned Abner aside towards the middle of the gate to a retired spot where they could talk over matters in private. He was not allowed to enter the city of refuge. Abner, having no fear, followed the two brothers, leaving his own men to wait his return. He was snared in the toils. Suddenly turning on him, Joab threw off the mask of friendship, and stabbed him in the very part where his spear had given Asahel the death- wound. Tidings of the treacherous murder soon spread to the palace. With horror at the deed, David hastened to clear S 2 74 ^^^^ Kingdom of All-Isi'ael : its History. himself from guilt. Almost every man in the eleven tribes, on hearing of it, would suspect the king's hand, as well as Joab's. Every one knew that the death of Abner removed the mainstay of Ishbosheth's throne ; but only a few could be aware of his real design in visiting Hebron. The deed would seem black in the eyes of men at a distance. They would hear of the friendly visit, the bringing back of Michal, and the message of recall. Alarmed at the appearance things might wear, David hastened to make his innocence known to his own people, as well as to Abner' s. While invoking the vengeance of heaven on the murderers, he issued orders to his courtiers and soldiers, and especially to Joab, to rend their garments, to clothe themselves with sackcloth, and to follow the bier on which Abner was borne to the grave. David himself headed the procession. And as the loud wail of grief arose from the mourners, the king also wept aloud. And well might he weep, for the murder of Abner awoke suspicions which were not easily allayed. David gave further proof of his grief for the death of Abner by composing a brief but beautiful elegy on his mournful end. In substance it was as follows : — As dies the fool, did Abner die ? Thy hands, they were not bound, And brazen bands did not thy feet surround. Not so, — as brave men falling die Before the wicked, so did Abner falling lie. A general fast for the remainder of the day was the third token of David's sorrow. But he was unable to do more to the murderer than deprive him of the office of commander- in-chief. The blood feud between Joab and Abner gave a colour of right to the crime, which Joab could plead in his own defence (Num. xxxv. 26, 27). For five years, if not for a longer period, David's unscrupulous nephew was in disgrace. From the day on which he delivered that fatal sword-thrust, to that other day on which he carried the stronghold of Zion at the head of his men, he ceased to hold the highest place Reconstrnction of A II- Israel, 275 among the soldiers of Jiidali. But the king was not able to go farther. At a meeting of those whom he could trust, David, in view of all the difficulties of his position, was forced to say : * I am this day weak though an anointed king, and these men, the sons of Zeruiah, are stronger than I.' The murder of Abner was followed by another as base at Mahanaim. Among the captains of Ishbosheth were two brothers, named Baanah and Eechab, who, though natives of Beeroth, one of the heathen cities spared by Joshua, were, with their fellow-citizens, reckoned members of Saul's own tribe. One of their townsmen, Kaharai, was armour-bearer to Joab, and a chief man in the army of Judah. If they were aware of this, the hope of similar, or even greater honours, may have had no small influence in determining their course of action. At noon on a hot summer day, when Ishbosheth was taking a mid-day sleep, they entered the palace, getting past the guards on pretence of fetching wheat from the king's stores.^ Gliding into the chamber, they stabbed him to the heart as he lay on his bed. To ensure a speedy reward by convincing David of the service they had done, they cut off their master's head, they hid it in the bag of wheat, and made their escape from the palace. Hurrying towards the Jordan, they travel all night down the dreary Arabah, cheered by the hope of being numbered among David's chiefest favourites. Bitterly were they disappointed. Next morning they reach the capital of Judah ; like the Amalekite who brought the new^s of Saul's death, they have tidings for the king and for him alone. They are admitted to an audience. After recounting to David their tale of blood, tliey draw forth from the wheat-bag the head of his murdered rival, ghastly, covered with blood, and blood-stained grains of wheat. It 1 Instead of this, the LXX. have: 'And the porteress of the palace was cleaning wheat, and was nodding and sleeping, and Rechab and Baanah escaped notice ' (2 Sam. iv. 6). Such translating as this is sometimes preferred to the Hebrew^ version ! See also their verse 7. 276 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, was a horrid present. But tlie murderers hoped to make David a partner in their guilt, for one of them, holding up the head, exclaimed: 'Jehovah hath given to my lord the king vengeance this day on Saul and his seed.' The great heart of David swelled with rage at this wickedness. It was not worldly policy only, not a cunning stroke to turn aside suspicion from himself. A noble nature awoke within him at the sight of the blood-stained head, and the effrontery of murderers almost asking him to become a sharer in their guilt. Orders were at once issued to some of the guard standing round to put the men to death. And that there might be no doubt of their fate, or of the reason why they suffered, their hands and feet were cut off and suspended on poles beside the great tank, to which the people of Hebron repaired for water. These instruments of the murder and the flight were left swinging on poles for some time. According to the law, bodies could not remain exposed after sundown. The putting up of the hands and feet was thus a politic evasion of the Mosaic law. The head of Ishbosheth was buried in the tomb of Abner. But all the precautions taken by David did not prevent his enemies from fastening on him the charge of a guilty complicity in the murders of Abner and Ishbosheth. Nearly twenty years after the overthrow of Saul's dynasty, that feeling probably found expression in the invectives hurled at David by Shimei, the Benjamite. ' Thou man of blood,' ' Thou man of Belial,' shedder of ' all the blood of the house of Saul,' were some of the charges uttered against the king, when his power to punish appeared to have passed away altogether. Although the anointing of David as king of All-Israel follows close on the death of his rival in the written record, there was really an interval of five years. No account has been preserved of the means taken for winning over the eleven tribes to David, or of the chiefs by whom that was managed. But judging from the lists of armed men sent ' to Reconstruction of All-IsracL 277 turn tlie kingdom of Saul to David,' it is plain that tlie priests had a leading hand in the change. Their prince, Jehoiada, and their brave captain, Zadok, are the only men named on these lists. From this circumstance, as well as from the horror with which the whole priestly caste would naturally regard the house of Saul, we may reasonably conclude that these two took the lead in bringing tlie eleven tribes to acknowledge David as king. At a later period, after the rebellion of Absalom, the high priests, Zadok and Abiathar, persuaded the men of Judah to invite David back to Jerusalem. From all parts of the land came Israel in thousands to set the crown on David's head. Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin, the tribes nearest to Hebron, sent but a small number of representatives to this general assembly. From Issachar came only two hundred chief men. But the other tribes sent armies varying in number from eighteen to fifty thousand. The tribes on the east of Jordan, which furnished only 40,000 men for the conquest of Canaan under Joshua, were now able to send 120,000 to Hebron. Peace and union had increased their prosperity after Saul saved them from ruin. They now repaid their debt to the rest of Israel. Altogether, nearly 340,000 men were under arms in and around Hebron in honour of the new king. * Thy bone and thy flesh are we,' were the terms in which these free-born Israelites made their submission to David. They were his brethren, not his slaves. Perhaps a greater number of unarmed men, of women, and of children, were lookers-on. For three days the rejoicings and feastings continued. Strings of camels, asses, and oxen brought dried fruits, wines, olive oil, and bread from a district of country stretching at least seventy miles to the north of Hebron, while flocks of sheep and oxen from the south country furnished the vast assembly with animal food during their stay at the town. Before the soldiers returned home, David turned their enthusiasm to account by proposing to capture the stronghold 278 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its History. of Jebus.-^ Although formerly in possession of the Hebrews, it had been retaken by the heathen. But David had re- marked its natural strength, and its fitness for becoming the capital of a kingdom. Having often passed the Hill of Zion, having lived within a few miles of it for most of his life, and knowing thoroughly the sacred traditions which had gathered round the neighbourhood, he was led to desire it for a metro- polis. It was one of the strongest places in the country ; art might make it impregnable. From it also he could fall back on his own tribe of Judah should disaffection break out in the north. It was, besides, a centre from which he could •most easily guide the course of war against the Philistine, the Edomite, the Ammonite, and the Moabite. Although not the natural centre of the country, Zion was the centre of the district within which had been wrought out the life and history of the twelve tribes. The great events of patriarchal times, nearly all the battles of the conquest under Joshua, and most of the wars in the times of the Judoes, were grouped round Jerusalem. A circle of thirty miles radius, with that town for a centre, embraced almost every enemy and almost every achievement in Hebrew annals. Poetry, piety, and policy combined to make it a fitting metropolis for the new kingdom. When David summoned the ejarrison to surrender, his demand was treated with contempt. They told him the blind and the lame could hold the fortress against all his efforts. The Israelites themselves came to entertain a similar opinion of it : ' The kings of the earth, and all the inhabitants of the world, would not have believed that the adversary and the enemy should have entered into the gates of Jerusalem' (Lam. iv. 12). But if the confidence of the Jebusites was great, David's determination was greater. His name and ^ 2 Sam. V. 6 : * The king and his men went to Jerusalem unto the Jehusite inhabiting the land. ' The words in italics are unintelligible, except they be a quotation of a well-known phrase from the Pentateuch and Joshua. Reconstrttction of A II- Israel, 279 throne were pledged to success. A failure would break the spell gathering soldiers round him ; success w^ould bind the people closer to their sovereign and to each other. Impressed with a deep sense of the greatness of the crisis, David issued a proclamation/ assuring to the first who should gain the wall in the forthcoming assault, the office of commander-in-chief. It was discovered that the only pathway up the rugged sides of Zion was by a w^atercourse leading down to the valley two or three hundred feet below. Great changes have been made on the ground since that time. As Joab himself might fail to recognise it could he return to tlie scene of bis exploit, modern inquirers are not justified in attempting to determine his exact path up the rocks. Perhaps the danger of an assault at any otlier point w^as too great to be risked. But the v/atercourse, being deemed secure against an enemy from its steepness, may have been left unguarded, an omission far from uncommon in ancient siesres. If so, the besiei^ed had reason to repent of the oversight. Favoured by the darkness of the night, or in the dim light of the early morning, Joab effected a lodgment on the wall by climbing up the w^atercourse. Only a small force could follow him on this rugged path. The stronghold was soon in the hands of the Hebrew troops ; and Joab regained by his daring the post which he forfeited some years before by the murder of Abner. There seem to have been two fortresses taken, * a stronghold of Zion,' as the Hebrew reads (2 Sam. v. 7), and Zion itself. One w^as a castle, the other was the towai. Apparently they correspond to the northern and southern ends of the hill of Zion, the northern and smaller height being separated from the higher and larger by a narrow neck of land. We are not ^ The substance only of the proclamation is given in 1 Chron. xi. 6 ; tlie \vords are given in 2 Sam. v. 8, but the sentence is not complete, which may be owing to the carelessness of some ancient transcriber, but is more probably due to the Hebrews not having a word for Qt cetera. ' Whosoever smiting the Jebusite reacheth by the watercourse both the lame and the blind, the hated of David's soul, ' etc. 2 8o The Kingdom of All-Isi^ael: its History, told the fate of the vanquished. But as the heights of Moriah, between Zion and the Mount of Olives, were in possession of a Jebusite thirty years after this time, and David, when wishful to secure the hill as a site for the temple, paid the full price for it, the vanquished were evi- dently treated with a kindness uncommon in ancient warfare. Zion, or 'the Sunny,' was a hill of about sixty acres in extent on the top, and rose at its highest point 2520 feet above the sea. Its length lay north and south. At its north end a narrow saddle, fifty yards across, connected it with a smaller and a slightly lower hill called Acra. But on every other side it was defended by ravines or sharply sloping ground, descending to valley bottoms more than one hundred and in some places more than three hundred feet below. Across the valley to the east of Zion was another hill, parallel to Zion, somewhat lower, and less fitted at that time for building on. Moriah, as this hill was called, sloped rapidly towards the south for about half a mile. Its narrow, southern tongue, or part of it, is believed to have been the Ophel of David's time, and perhaps the site of Solomon's palace, while its centre, higher, broader, and perhaps longer, became the site of the temple. Still farther to the east, and separated from Moriah by the deep cleft of the Kedron or Blackwater, was the triple-topped mountain called Olivet, higher than Moriah and Zion, of much greater area, but less defensible in war. The valleys or ravines, parting these hills from one another and from the country on the west of Zion, all met about three hundred yards beyond the famous pool of Siloam, at the south-western end of Moriah. This meeting- point is 460 feet lower than its summit, and 100 feet below its southern end. As central Moriah is known to have been used for a threshing-floor till near the end of David's reign, it cannot have been the fortress which he took from the heathen. Mount Olivet is also excluded by universal consent. There Reconstrttction of A II- Israel. 2 8 1 seem to remain only two hills which could have justified the boasts of the enemy, Zion and Acra. The former is generally regarded as the place. But by several writers both heights are made to play a part in the story. Acra is believed to have been, what it certainly became many centuries after- wards, a strong castle, which David took before he carried the stronger fortress of Zion. As the two hills may tlien have passed under the one name of Zion, the theory may possibly be correct. But changes have taken place since tliat time by lowering the high ground and filling up hollows or valleys, which render a verdict on these points of comparatively little value. Eecently, however, an attempt has been made to revive a different theory. Dr. Birch, followed by several others, has identified Zion with Ophel, or the southern tongue of Moriah.^ David's palace and David's city thus become the same thing. The ground on which it was built could not have exceeded twenty acres, if even so much space was available. As a fortress, the Ophel slope would be of little worth. At a distance of a hundred yards, it was completely commanded by the higher ground up the hill. Besides, on this view David's capital was only as large as a good-sized castle ; the stories given of crowds of soldiers, priests, Levites, and citizens thronging its streets, can be nothing better than romantic inventions of a later age. Were it not for the support which some details of the theory seem to derive from the writings of Nehemiah, it would not be looked at. The names Zion and City of David are applied sometimes to the whole of Jerusalem, and sometimes to a part of it, but usually in a way sufficient to puzzle those wlio are wedded to a theory. If Zion was a town or castle built by David on the narrow tongue of Moriah, the description of it in the Psalms is most misleading. * On the sides of the north ' (Ps. xlviii. 2) con- 1 Birch, Pal. Exp. Q. S., Jan. 1882. Wellhausen's view is the same, and is advocated in Eucyc. Brit. xiii. 639 a. See also Lewin, Sketch of Jerumhm. 282 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, veys no meaning whatever if the southern slope of Ophel was in the writer's thoughts. To Zion and Acra, again, the words were strictly applicable, as the general slope of the ground there was towards the north. The fame of David soon spread beyond Palestine. But his neighbours, the Philistines, were the first to take alarm. A nnion of the twelve tribes under one kinfj boded evil to them. Although David might be content to remain their tributary so long as he reigned over Judah only in Hebron, he would endeavour to throw off their yoke as soon as he became king of the whole country in Jerusalem. But while they were preparing for war with David, Hiram, king of Tyre, was seeking ]iis friendship. A sincere peace could not exist between the Tyrians and the Philistines. Livino- on the same seaboard, and, in the period of the Philistines' greatest power, having almost the same border at Dor, there must have been rivalry, if not war, between them. A common enemy thus became the bond of union, at lirst perhaps, between David and Hiram. Tlie independence of the one would be a guarantee for that of the other, and the fortifying of Jeru- salem may have seemed to Hiram an effectual means of fortifying Tyre. Accordingly, his messengers to David were followed by a body of carpenters and masons to assist in building the walls of the new capital Cedar-wood also was sent from Lebanon for the beautifying of David's own palace. But before the City of David, as the town was then called, became entitled to rank as the chief stronghold of Palestine, the Philistine armies came to seek the new king. Spreading over the fertile plain of Eephaim, in the neighbourhood of Zion, they plundered the open country. On hearing of their approach, David went down for safety to a place called the ' Hold,' which it is difficult to avoid identifying with Adullam. Bethlehem was seized by the invaders, who even threw a garrison into the town. Sick at heart, David appears to have also fallen sick in body. A longing came over him such as ReconstriLction of All-Israel. 28 J men often feel when illness lias struck them down, and a fancy takes possession of them for something they used to get but can get no longer : ' Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem, wliich is by the gate ! ' It was harvest time, the hot season of the year. Three of his Mighties had come down from the highlands to consult with their stricken chief. They heard his prayer. Without delay they fell on the enemy, broke their array, and returned with a skin of water from the gate well of Bethlehem. An achievement so brilliant brought back life to the sick man more than the water he prayed for. Pouring it out on the ground as a drink-offering, ' Forbid, 0 Lord,' he said, ' that I should do this. Is it not the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives ? ' The longing for the water had passed away: 'he desired not to drink' their blood. An incident like this shows the power exercised by David over the men who gathered round him. Probably it roused him to action. But before hazarding an attack, he inquired, through the liigh priest, whether Jehovah would give him success. ' Go up,' said the high priest, ' for I will certainly deliver the Philistines into thine hand.' Whether David suddenly fell on their camp with his six hundred, or engaged them in a pitched battle, is uncertain. The scene of the fight was the high grounds afterwards called Baal Perazim, in memory of their discomliture. Their defeat was as thorough as when the side of a water tank, giving way, allows the hurrying waters to rush forth over the neighbouring valley. In their headlong retreat they left behind them the w^ooden images wdiich they carried with the army. The sacred writer records the contempt of the victor for these vanities — he carried them off and burned them in the fire. This display of force on David's part, far from terrifying the Philistines, determined them to make a greater effort to seize the new king. Again they spread themselves over the plain of Rephaim, as if defying him to repeat the blow which 284 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. he had ah'eady delivered. They were more watchful and in greater numbers. An attack in front and a pitched battle were forbidden : ' Thou shalt not go up : fetch a compass to their rear, and come upon them over against the mulberry trees.' The plan of attack took David towards the great north road, probably to the valley of Baca (Ps. Ixxxiv. 6). The Hebrews forbore to move till their king heard the sign of victory, tlie * sound of a going ' in the tree-tops, intimating that Jehovah had gone before him to the battle. This sound of a going may have been caused by the morning wind touching the tree-tops with its first soft breathings, or by some other cause equally natural. But the sound, foretold and waited for, encouraged the Hebrew soldiers, even while it filled them with awe, especially if its solemn murmur were heard amid the deep stillness of earliest morning. Complete success crowned the attack. The final stand of the enemy was made between Gibeon and Geba, on the southern bank of the ravine wdiich witnessed their ruinous defeat in the first war of independence. From that town they were driven westward down the pass of Beth-horon, as far as Gezer, a stronghold on the southern border of the plain of Sharon. In that second war of independence the power of the Philistines was broken. The sceptre of Israel, which they had wielded for generations, was wrested for ever from their grasp. David showed his oratitude to Jehovah for thus delivering" o o the kingdom from bondage, by proposing to bring the ark of God from Kirjath-jearim to Zion. The time chosen w^as probably the feast of passover or of tabernacles, as All-Israel, from the river of Egypt in the south to the pass of Hamath in the north, assembled for the purpose. Priests, Levites, prophets, and soldiers were present in vast numbers ; but to so low an ebb had the study of sacred learning fallen among the twelve tribes, that none of those in power seem to have known the only allowable way of removing the ark from place to place. Seventy years before, it came from the Philistines* Reconstrtictioii of A II- Israel. 285 country on a new cart, drawn by two milch kine unbroken to the yoke. Traditions of that coming were rife in the neigh- bourhood ; what better plan of taking it away could be de- vised ? Accordingly a new cart was prepared, oxen were got to draw it, and Uzzah and Ahio, the two sons or descendants of Abinadab, in whose house the ark lay, were appointed over the oxen. A great host of harpers, musicians, priests, and soldiers accompanied the cart. All went well till they reached a place called Nachon's or Chidon's threshing-floor. For some reason the oxen stumbled and became restive. Afraid of the ark rolling off, Uzzah, who was walking behind, tried to steady it with his hand. It was a rash act. No one but the priests was allowed to handle that sacred symbol of God's presence, and even they could only put their hands to the carrying staves provided for the purpose. * The sons of Kohath shall not touch any holy thing, lest they die,' was the law and the penalty (Num. iv. 15). In sight of all the people, Uzzah was struck dead beside the ark. Swiftly as the rumour of his sad end ran among the assembled thousands, as swiftly would course after it the remembrance of the multitude who perished at Bethshemesh seventy years before for looking on the ark. The rejoicings of the day were turned into mourning, its glad- some praise into the silence of a terrible dread. Even David w^as afraid. He was not aware of any wrong for which Uzzah had paid so heavy a penalty. And in the midst of most sincere endeavours to honour Jehovah, this terrible blow dashes his hopes and plans to the ground. ' How,' he said, ' shall the ark of God come to me V In the terror wrought by the untoward doom of Uzzah, he had the ark placed in the house of a Levite named Obed-edom, belonging to the town of Gath Eimrnon, hard by. A few weeks sufficed to discover the true cause of this failure. Uzzah committed an ' error ' — a word not used else- where in the Hebrew Bible. He was a victim of the sin of others in their long neglect of the ark. The fallings away of 286 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its Histo7y. former generations brought down punishment on liis head. But the writer in Samuel does not stay the narrative to give his readers an insic^ht into the nature of that error. He did not need. At the beginning of his book he described, in the professional language of the priests, the proper way of carrying the ark, and he indicates it twice here and twice also after David discovered the mistake committed.^ But the Chronicler records the ignorance of the priests in allowing the ark to be placed on a cart, their violation of the Mosaic law, their neglect in not using the carrying staves, and the sin of touching the ark, precisely as might be expected from one to whom the law of Moses was familiar. These two writers were separated by an interval of more than five hundred years. Events, which took place during that interval, explain the comparative silence of the one and the free speaking of the other ; and in this view of the matter there is one thing left out which it is advisable to bear in mind. The writer of the books of Samuel had not the same reason to refer to the law of Moses as the writer of the books of Chronicles. While the writer in Samuel regarded the Mosaic law as a national heirloom familiar to all, the Chronicler had been taught by persecution and by national captivity to regard it also as the test of happiness or misery to the Hebrews. Exile, famine, sword, unheard-of privations, had stamped it so deeply on the mind of the one that his whole heart was full of it to the exclusion of other things, while the older writer had not had like experience of the same horrors and calamities flowing from its neglect. The one lived at a time when the sun of the Hebrew faith and powder shone with its greatest splendour ; 1 See above, p. 255. The repetition in 2 Sam. vi. 3, 4 is often ascribed to the blundering of a transcriber. It seems rather an emphatic calling of attention to the error committed, ' They set the ark of God on a new cart (for they bore it out of the house of Abinadab that was on the hill), and Uzzah and Ahio drave the new cart (for they bore it out of the house of Abinadab that was on the hill) with the ark of God, and Ahio went before the ark.' See similar repetitions, 2 Sam. iv. 5-7 ; xxiv. 21, 25 : 1 Kings vi. 9, 14. Reconstruction of All-Israel. 287 the other when that sun seemed sunk in the shades of nio-ht. With good reason, therefore, does the writer of the Chronicles look on the law of Moses as the only means of bringing back light and glory to the nation. He feels a terrible want ; the law may supply that want to him and his people. The writer of the books of Samuel did not feel the same want of national life and glory. A bright day of prosperity was shining on him and his readers. It would therefore have been contrary to nature had he and the writer of the books of Chronicles written in like terms of the law of Moses. It must also be allowed that the law was not carefully studied in the end of Saul's reign and for the first seven years of David's. The slaughter of the priests of ISTob, more than anything else, caused a break in the continuity of sacred customs which, though fully preserved in writing, acquired additional force by passing from mouth to mouth as the ages rolled on. The murder of the high priest, and of the most trusted officials about the holy place, left a gap between the past and the future which Abiathar, the only survivor of the priests of ^NTob, may not have been able to bridge across. The wandering life, which he led after his escape from Saul, was not fitted for gathering again together the scattered threads of that broken cord. With all justice, then, might we look for ignorance of the law of Moses at this period of David's history, and for blundering in the minute details of sacred things. Twenty years' intermission of study or practice will, in most cases, efface from the memory the less outstanding details of a man's professional knowledge.^ The discovery of the error committed in setting the ark on a cart, and the blessings bestowed on Obed-edom, emboldened ^ Within the past five years, a singnhar iUustration of these views happened in the church history of Europe. It is well known that the smoke arising from the burning of the voting papers is a signal to the watchers on the piazza of St Peter's, that the cardinals, to whom belongs the duty of filling up a vacancy in the popedom, have failed to elect a new pope. At the last election in 1878, two burnings of the papers, on February 18 and 19, indicated two 288 The Kingdom of All-Isi-ael: its Histoiy, the king to a renewal of the enterprise. A tent was pitched in Zion, similar to the Mosaic tabernacle ; or rather a large uncovered court was curtained off, and within it a wooden house, richly ornamented, was built for the ark of God. When the procession of priests, Levites, and people entered the city, David w^as with them, clothed in a robe of line linen similar to that worn by the sons of Aaron. As they climbed the steep and narrow streets, the outpoured blood of a host of victims, slain before the advancing ark, sought reconciliation with God. When six paces had been stepped by the bearers, — the professional word is now used, — oxen and fatlings fell beneath the sacrificial knife. Evidently the way to the holy place was a way of blood. The stained streets of Zion, the rivers of blood, the slaughtered heaps, and the blaze of altar fires formed a strange contrast to tlie dancing, the sing- ing, and the harping of the multitudes who crowded the city. It may not have seemed wonderful to them. Custom, which familiarizes the eye to the strangest sights, if they do not outrage conscience, had led them to consider blood and death two of the essential elements of worship. But no one now can think of the blood-stained way, along which the ark of mercy was borne, without seeing in these red rivers the fore- shadowing of a hidden power in blood to cleanse what it touched, altogether unlike its power to defile. As the ark passed along the streets, David showed his joy by engaging before it in a kind of sacred dance. Among the Hebrews sacred dances are sometimes mentioned, especially in the book of Psalms, as acts of divine worship. But they were not common in David's time. Like other ancient customs, the dance had fallen into decay during the troublous age which preceded. But the revived study of ancient failures. On the following morning the smoke was again seen, but an election had been made. ' This third burning of the papers seems to have been a mistake ; perhaps the lapse of thirty-one years [the reign of Pius ix.Jhad sufficed to cause some important points of the traditional routine to be forgotten.' — Edinburgh Jievieu', No. 316, p. 438. Reconstrtcction of A I I- Israel. 289 literature appears to have taught David the lawfulness of the practice. As Miriam, in the hour of Israel's triumph over Pharaoh, led the Hebrew women when, with ' timbrels and dances,' they replied to Moses' song of thanks, so it was not unbecoming in David to join in the sacred song and in tlie sacred dance, in commemoration of an event which, consider- ing the overthrow of the Philistines that preceded, seemed not unlike another triumphant marching forth from bondage. To complete the parallel, David, following the example of Moses, handed to Asaph, the leader of the song, a hymn of praise similar to that composed on the overthrow of the Egyptians.^ But all the Hebrews did not share in the pious fervour of their king. Some of them, unread in the holy books, and with little warmth of heart, despised him for this display of feelino-. Amono- these was his wife Michal. From a window of the palace she saw the part he took in the rejoic- ings. With the same boldness of speech which characterized her in the first years of their married life, she welcomed him on his return to the palace with words of bitter scorn. Several hours had elapsed, giving her time to reflect on her speech of welcome. The ark had been lodged within the taber- nacle ; bread and raisin-cake and wine distributed to the multitude, and the final sacrifices offered. Before David can bless his own house, as a fitting close to the solemnities of the day, Michal comes forth to meet him. Wives, concubines, children, servants are assembled in the court of the palace to receive the blessing of their lord. But Michal mars the happiness of the meeting by likening him to one of the ' vain fellows,' the w^orthless men who were found in Zion as they 1 1 Chron. xvi. 7-36. This hymn now exists in the Psalter as Ps. cv. 1-15, the whole of Ps. xcvL, besides 2 Chron. v. 13, and Ps. cvi. 47, 48. No one with the Psalter in his hands would have joined two psalms together in this fashion, unless he had authority to do so from the history he was consulting. Still less would he have made changes on the words. The Chronicler has evidently preserved the first version of the hymn, and we know from Psalm xviii. and 2 Sam. xxii. tliat David did publish two editions of a poem. T 290 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, are found in all towns. * Eaca ' is the name with which she scorns her king and husband — Eaca, that word which the mouth utters when the heart is breaking the sixth command- ment. And it was uttered, too, in presence of the women who, like her, had come forth to meet David. It may have been a stroke of policy on Michal's part, an attempt to intimi- date her many rivals in the palace, and to cast once more round David the chains of a submission which he may have worn in former years. If so, it was a fatal blunder. David at once deposed her from the office of queen, a place to which both her rank and the fact that she was his first wife may have entitled her. But he also condemned her to banish- ment from his presence. Perhaps, indeed, she was imprisoned for life in some corner of the palace, where there might be but one or two handmaidens to wait on her, and to hear her freely-expressed contempt for the man whose life she saved at the risk of her own, and whose honour she valued more than her place as his wife and queen. When David sat in his own house, admiring the white stones and the polished cedar work which skilled workmen from Tyre had prepared for him, he became alarmed lest, in lodging himself so splendidly, he had forgotten what was due to the Giver of all honour. ' I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains,' he said to Nathan the prophet, one of his chief counsellors. And then he detailed to him the plan of building a gorgeous temple for the ark. Nathan encouraged him in his purpose. But the prophet's advice was given without warrant from Heaven. That very night he was commanded to forbid the w\arrior king to build a temple. The honour was reserved for a son not yet born, who should rule the land in peace. But in return for the desire which he felt to honour God, the promise was given him of an endless line of princes, who should succeed him in the kingdom. The message of Nathan and the prayer of David (2 Sam. vii. 1-29) are frequently referred to in the ReconstriLction of A II- Israel, 291 history wliicli follows, while they are themselves allowed to be distinct echoes of the Pentateuch as the foundation of Hebrew thought and worship. This interweaving of the pre- sent with the past and the future is an irrefragable proof of the writer's truthfulness. The practice also of quoting himself as well as others, is a peculiarity of style which has not met with the attention it deserves. But though David was for- bidden to build a temple, he was inspired to write the hymns for use in its worship. Before the necessity for these new songs of praise was felt, David had distinguished himself as much by depth of feeling and sweetness of song in poetry, as by skill in arms. His ' Dumb-dove-among-strangers,'^ and the sacred sonojs which he wrote * in the wilderness and in the cave ' during his banishment from court," show a passion and a tenderness which lift them to the highest place among lyric poems. While they let us into the inmost heart of this wandering harper, they inspire us with the feeling that never was poet more worthy to be employed in writing sacred songs, not for a splendid ritual in Jerusalem, but for mortal hearts in all ages and in all lands. From the time of the bringing up of the ark to Zion, down almost to the end of his life, David seems to have found delisjht in this most honourable work. Well had it been if that loved employment had saved him from crimes which stain his name. Many of his com- positions are headed with the simple words, ^ A psalm of David.' Others of them, if they are his work, name the chief singer, for whom they were at first intended ; or by whom they were written (2 Chron. xxix. 30). Asaph, who then superintended the music in Zion, is mentioned in twelve psalms ;^ Jeduthun, whose duty it was to serve in the taber- nacle of Moses at Gibeon, is mentioned in three ;^ the sons of Korah, a branch of the family of the Kohathites, to which the chief singers themselves belonged, are mentioned in eleven.^ 1 Psalms 56 and 34. 2 Psalms 52, 54, 57, 59, 63, 142. 3 Psalms 50. 73-83. " Psalms 39, 62, 77. ^ Psalms 42, 44-49, 84, 85, ^1 , 88. 292 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Histoiy. We may pause at this stage of David's career to mark the change which the genius of one man had, with the blessing of God, wrought in the condition of Israel. Towards the end of Saul's reign the nation resembled a stranded ship going to pieces. Although still outwardly bound together under one head, its spirit was gone, its confidence in the king was lost. The defeat and death of Saul on Gilboa brought to light, what had formerly been concealed, the miserable wreck of Hebrew unity. Man ceased to have confidence in man ; a once united people was broken up into a number of little fragments, which floated hither and tliither, and were even dashed against each other by events, precisely as the masts and boards of a wrecked ship are dashed against each other by the waves. It was reserved for David to build up in unity and strength this shattered kingdom. For ten or twelve years he laboured at the work. Sometimes, when the end seemed almost attained, an unlooked-for disappointment tlirew things back into wreck and confusion. But after much weary waiting, the glory of uniting the scattered fragments of Hebrew nationality became David's. The reorganized state was assailed from without by the Philistines, who read their own fate in David's success. Every failure of the enemy to regain their former footing among the twelve tribes was, as it were, a fresh rivet driven in to fasten the new-made kingdom more firmly together. But success against enemies without was not enough. There must be somewhat to bind together friends within. And he sought what Saul had recklessly thrown away, the bond of a common faith to strengthen that of a common king. Internal union he justly regarded as the surest bulwark against foreign foes. By bringing up the ark to Zion, and by restoring the priests to their former place in the state, he brought back the nation to that point from which it had gone aside in Saul's reign. And he brought it back, purified by suffering, to run a career of glory such as has fallen to the lot of no other kingdom. At the beginning of this period David proposed to Reconstritction of All- Israel. 293 build a temple for the ark. Had he been allowed to carry out his purpose, the energies of king and people would have been spent for years on a work which the nation was not prepared to undertake. The enemies of the Hebrews were nearly as strong as ever. If a weaker hand than David's swayed the sceptre, they might be able to undo all that he had done in uniting his people. It was most impolitic to turn his mind to the building of a temple, a work on which the best of his years would be spent, while the power of neighbouring nations was still unbroken. David's work was to prepare for a lasting peace by waging successful war. A true view of his position would lead him to think of humbling thoroughly the many invaders who had often trampled on the Hebrews. Were he to spend several years in mere works of building, he might leave to his son a legacy of war and blood- shed. But by putting himself at the head of the warlike spirit awakened among his people, he might effectually vindi- cate the freedom of the Hebrews, and give them, what they greatly needed, many years of prosperity and peace. The future of the kingdom would then depend on the observance of the laws, by which David had united it into a mighty God- fearing empire. But while he appears, in the next chapter of his life, as the great securer of his country's freedom, there is also the beoinninsj of a falling awav, which threatened to undo the work he had laboriously accomplished. During the early part of his reign, David is presented to us consulting Jehovah in every season of danger. He had that confidence in the uprightness of his policy, which warranted him to repair with a true heart to this heavenly Friend. Even his proposal to build a palace for Jehovah is followed by success in every war undertaken for the safety of his people, as if that success were a direct reward for his pious purpose. But in the years which follow, Jehovah is seen sending angry messages to David, and not David asking counsel of Jehovah. The contrast is too marked to be without meaning. The 2 94 ^'^^ Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, sunny side of David's life is past ; we begin to enter on days of cloud and darkness. Having cleared the soil of Palestine of enemies who had lorded it there for many years, David now prepared to secure the liberty of his country by seeking the enemies in their own strongholds. A reckoning for the past was first sought from the Philistines. They appear to have been defeated in battle not far from Gath. That city, with the villages aroimd it, was then taken and garrisoned by David.^ The man who had once slunk into the city, who was seized by the king's officers as a dangerous inmate, and was let go by the king as a harmless madman, — the man who was afterwards received within its walls as a renegade from his own people, and was promoted to be captain of its sovereign's guard, now holds it as a conqueror. But he did not abuse his power. David, instead of being tributary to Achish, has become master of him and of all that he had. He allowed the humbled prince to retain his throne and to govern his people. David was recog- nised as lord paramount of the country. In this campaign, Philistia, to use the expressive phrase of the sacred writer, was brought to her knees. She was not entirely prostrated. After tasting the bitter fruits of bondage for a few years, she gathered strength once more to stand on her feet and defy her oppressor. But the blow inflicted in this campaign made her powerless to do much harm to the Hebrews. The hand of David next fell on Moab, an ancient foe of the Hebrews. But it was no longer the bringing of a nation to its knees ; it was now the smiting of it down to the ground. Like the Philistines, the Moabites had befriended David when he was an outlaw. But on them, as well as on the Philistines, the hand of the conqueror fell with crushing weight. The nations, first attacked by David in his day of ^ Metheg-Ammah, the bridle of Ammah, or the bridle of the mother city. Gath is called the metropolis or mother city of the Philistines. Having gained its bridle, David, like a rider on horseback, had it completely in hand. Reco7istrnction of A II- Is rael. 295 power, were those which had shown him kindness in Ids day of weakness. The reason of this in the case of the Philistines is phiin. Had not David thrown off their yoke, his kingdom could not have held together. Sound policy required the Hebrew king either to crush Philistia or to become its tribu- tary. But from Moab he had little or nothing to dread. And if the independence of jVIoab was not a source of danger to him, its subjection could be of small advantage. None of the great commercial roads of those times, the source of toll and tax to Eastern princes, were controlled by its kings or passed through its territories. From the hills of Moab a tribute of several thousand sheep might be brought every year to Jerusalem ; but, apart from this tax, there does not appear to have been public advantage or private gain likely to accrue from conquering the country. The cause of the invasion of Moab, or Sheth, as it is also called, lies much deeper. Not- withstanding the hilly nature of the country, it was overrun and subdued. The people were not soldiers to be despised. One of the great achievements of David's Mighties was the slaying, by Benaiah from Kabzeel, of two Moabite soldiers, evidently in this campaign. They are called Aricls, God's lions (2 Sam. xxiii. 20). A terrible slaughter seems to have struck terror into the people, for David's orders were to put two to death for every one who was allowed to live. To what extent these orders were carried out,-^whether they applied only to those who offered resistance, or to the whole nation, — and for what reason they were given, are points involved in darkness. History has furnished the simple record of the fact, without even indicating the numbers who perished. But David was not a remorseless shedder of blood. Nor was he given to striking down vanquished foes. He had good grounds for deal- ing thus sharply with the hill-men of Moab. And we shall see presently that these grounds may not be altogether beyond the reach of discovery. But of the thoroughness of the con- quest, the events of tlie following years furnish convincing 296 The Kingdom of A I I- Israel: its History. proof. When the Ammonite war broke out, and David's forces were compelled to return to Jerusalem from a drawn battle, the highlanders of Moab never lifted a hand to expel their conquerors. From the far north-east came a mighty gathering of men and horse to help the enemies of David ; but the ]\Ioabites, though commanding from their hills a view of the plains, in which opposing armies wrestled for supre- macy in the East, never descended from the heights to join in the conflict. Generations passed away before prostrated Moab gave signs of returning life. Whoever believes that the book of the Law was studied by David as a genuine heirloom of the Hebrew race, can feel no surprise at this conquest of Moab. He may deplore the rule of slaying and sparing followed by the conqueror, but he can account for the overthrow of the Moabite power. Feuds between nations were handed down from ao;e to ac^e in those days, as they still are in the East. Such was the custom, such it continues to be. We may regret it, we may also condemn it, even though we be not wholly free from it our- selves ; but we cannot shut our eyes to the fact of its exist- ence among the Hebrews. Although the lawgiver, at the entrance of Israel into Canaan, forbade the people to meddle with Moab or Edom, David could not study the book of the Law without being impressed by its predictions of Israel's ultimate triumph over Moab, Edom, and Amalek. The smiter of Moab is called ' a star out of Jacob,' ' a sceptre out of Israel.' In the prediction of these events (Num. xxiv. 17-20) this great smiter is not spoken of as also the destroyer of Amalek. A crown of glory is thrown on the brows of the former by the ancient seer which is withheld from the latter. But when sacred learning bloomed into the freshness of a second youth in David's days, Amalek, as the seer foretold, had been ' for ever ' blotted out from the roll of nations. Saul had fulfilled that part of the prediction. But no smiter of Moab and no possessor of Edom had yet arisen. Saul had waged RecoJistnictioii of A II- Israel, 297 successful war with both nations, but he neither destroyed ' all the children of Shetli,' nor made Edom a possession of Israel. A prince of David's poetic temperament and religious fire could not read these predictions without seeing in himself, what he really was, the star of Jacob, the sceptre of Israel, by whom these nations were destined to be struck down. ' Smite the corners of Moab,' ' Destroy the children of Sheth ' (warlike tumult), * Destroy him that remaineth of the city ' (Petra), were the rules which the smiter of Moab and Edom may have thought himself bound to follow. After the fate of Saul, after the more recent death of Uzzah, David would fulfil them to the letter. Viewed in this light, the fierce war on Moab and the thoroughness of the conquest are susceptible of a natural explanation. The misjht of the Hebrew kini^, and the attitude he had taken up towards his neighbours, seem to have awakened the fears of Hadadezer, the powerful king of Zobah, a country on the north-east frontier of Palestine. He belonged to the great confederacy called ' The kings of the Hittites,' — perhaps he was then its head. A dispute had arisen between him and David regarding a district near the Euphrates. According to the books of Samuel and Chronicles, the boundary had been marked by a pillar or hand, a practice which was common in Egypt, Assyria, and the neighbouring countries. That land- mark had been thrown down ; and the object of Hadadezer was to set it up again in defiance of the Hebrew forces, which were in the neighbourhood. Evidently the Hebrews had taken possession of lands which he claimed for Zobah. Piaising a large army, he marched into the district to assert his rights. Bat David was j^repared to meet force with force. He engaged the Syrian in battle, defeated him with great loss, and captured many chariots, horsemen, and foot-soldiers.^ The Syrians of Damascus hastened to succour Zobah. But ^ The number of the captives is thus given, perhaps from different points of view ; — 298 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, the Hebrews were again victorious. Twenty-two thousand of the allies fell in battle, and the power of Damascus was broken for more than a generation. The city was taken by the conqueror, and Hebrew garrisons were left in its strong- holds. Great spoil rewarded the victors in these two battles. Erom the pillage of the camp of Hadadezer David received as his share, the golden arms or shields, which the guards of that prince carried when on duty. Some of his chief cities also were captured, and furnished the Hebrews with a vast weight of copper, which was afterw^ards used in furnishing the courts of Solomon's temple. But the Syrians of Zobah and Damascus, though beaten in the field, were not subdued. David found himself unable to follow up his victories. Tidings of disasters which had befallen his armies in tlie south recalled him from his career of triumpli. Edom, taking advantage of these entanglements in the north, had given no small trouble to the Hebrew^ officers on the frontier. Although the history is silent, David's vexation on receiving news of the losses suffered by his generals in that quarter has been preserved in one of his sacred songs : ' 0 God,' it runs, ' Thou hast cast us off, Thou hast scattered us, Thou hast been displeased ; . . . Thou hast showed Thy people hard things ; Thou hast made us to drink the wine of astonishment.' A song of sorrow such as this, following hard on the victories in the north, reveals the 2 Sam. viii. 4, 1700 horsemen, 20,000 footmen, 1 Chron. xviii. 4, 1000 chariots (recheb), 7000 horsemen, 20,000 footmen. The word chariot means both that which was used for riding in and the men or horses employed. 'David houghed all the chariot,' that is, horses. Among the tribes of Gaul there were six men about every chariot. These might be foot- men or horsemen. If there was something similar in Syria, it would explain the difference between 1700 horsemen in the book of Samuel and 7000 in the book of Chronicles, without having recourse to errors of transcribers. Our own word artillery has also a twofold meaning, denoting either the guns or the soldiers and horses who serve them. At the review of British troops in Cairo (Oct. 1, 1882), ' the heavy Field Artillery brought up the rear of this division, consisting of 4320 horses and 60 guns.' According to 1 Mace. vi. 35, an elephant in the Syrian army was supported by 1000 footmen and 500 cavalry. Comp. 2 Sam. x. 18 and 1 Chron. xix. 18. Reconstritction of All- Israel. 299 unfortunate issue of the campaign against Edom ; for the Psalmist continues : * Who will bring me into the strong city ? Who will lead me into Edom ? Wilt not Thou, 0 God, which hadst cast us off? Even Thou, 0 God, which didst not go out with our armies ? ' (Ps. Ix.). Serious disasters only could have wrung from him these bitter words. David's presence was required in the south of Palestine before he could thoroughly crush his enemies in the north. But the report of his coming seems to have filled the Edomites with alarm. Abishai, the brother of Joab, defeated them in the Valley of Salt, that narrow plain at the southern end of the Dead Sea, wdiere miles of lofty salt cliffs, with pillars of salt and limpid streams of bitterest brine, give a fitting name to the barren waste.^ Eighteen thousand of the enemy fell in an eno-ao-ement in wdiich Abishai commanded the Hebrews ; in another battle David himself or Joab commanded, and twelve thousand Edomites were slain. The honours of the war fell to David only : ' He gat him a name (when he returned from smiting of the Syrians) in the Valley of Salt.' Selah, the strong capital of Edom, became the prey of the Hebrews. For six months Joab, fierce and relentless, slaughtered every man and boy whom he could lay hands on in the country. A few escaped into tlie pasture-grounds of Midian, carrying with them a child named Hadad, the only member of the royal family saved from the slaughter. The oases, the pas- tures, and the wastes of Edom ceased to be the abode of an independent race. Hebrew garrisons held all the strongholds ; Hebrew tax-gatherers collected tribute ; and Hebrew soldiers were soon watchincj the erreat commercial roads from India by ^ • Jebel Usdom is a solid mass of rock salt ; ' * we walked for three miles along its eastern face in the hope of finding some means of ascending it, bnt it was q^uite impracticable. ' ' In several places we found the ground hollow, and in some a laden camel has suddenly disappeared and been salted to death below. ' ' The height of the pinnacle which I climbed was 347 feet above the level of the Dead Sea.' 'The Sebkha, or salt flat, is a large flat at least six by ten miles, occasionally flooded, but now dr3^ '—Tristram, Land of Isi'ael, .322-332. 300 The Kingdom of AH- Israel : its History. the Eed Sea to Damascus or Tyre, which this conquest put in David's power. Edom, like Moab, was thoroughly crushed. These victories of David gained him the respect oi' neigh- bouring princes. Nahash, king of Amnion, was his friend and ally. Toi, king of Hamath, whose dominions included the narrow pass by which the Promised Land might be invaded from the north, sought his friendship. Joram or Hadoram, the son of Toi, came to congratulate him on the triumph over Hadadezer, their common foe. Probably Toi, as well as Hadadezer, was a member of the Hittite con- federacy. He also requested from David a treaty of peace. As a pledge of the Syrian king's sincerity, the embassy brought to Jerusalem a tribute of gold, silver, and brass. But while the Hebrew kingdom was thus acquiring power abroad, it was also settling into a regular political system at home. A body of guardsmen, known as Cherethites and Pelethites, took the place of the three thousand in Saul's court. It was their duty to watch over the king's person, and to perform his commands. They were messengers of state as well as executioners of justice. Probably the words mean ' Cutters and runners,' that is, ' Executioners and messengers.' A body of soldiers, who either followed David from Gath, or for some other reason received the name of Gittites, were also held in hidi honour at court. Whether they had any connection with the Cherethites and Pelethites, it is impossible to determine. No explanation is given of the duties, the organization, or the origin of the Runners. The author of the book of Samuel was evidently writing for readers, who lived so near David's time as not to require information on these points. He always mentions them as one who knew that his readers had a general acquaintance with the regiment.^ An officer of the highest rank, Benaiah, ^ In a somewliat similar manner the Apostle John makes mention of the * Twelve,' taking it for granted that his readers had other means of ascertaining uho these twelve were. Rcconstrtiction of A II- Israel. 301 the son of Jelioiacla, was their captain. A fifth part of all the men of Israel able to bear arms was under the conmiand of Joab. The whole of this large force, numbering 288,000, w^as seldom called out at the same time. It was divided into twelve brigades of 24,000 men each, officered by the boldest soldiers whom David's eventful life had brought into public regard. Once a year each of them did duty for a month at a time in Jerusalem, a system which, without pressing heavily on the people, or withdrawing them from the ordinary duties of life, was a sure safeguard against invasion. In five years every man able to bear arms had spent a month at least in this militia force. The administration of justice remained in the king's own hands. Inferior judges throughout the provinces heard com- plaints in the first instance, although an appeal was always allowed to the king himself in the capital. But the people had cause to complain of the king's disregard of his duty as chief judge in the land. The high-priesthood was no longer held by Abiathar, the companion of David in his wanderings, the sufferer for David's sin. Zadok, the brave priest who took the lead in raising David to the throne of All-Israel, was joined with Abiathar in discharging the duties of that office. The two high priests were the heads of rival houses. Zadok was descended from Eleazar, the third son of Aaron ; Abiathar, or, as he is also called, Ahimelech (1 Chron. xxiv. 3, 31), from Ithamar, the fourth son. By what means or for what reason the family of Eleazar lost the priesthood has not been recorded. But the honour was not destined to remain in the house of Aaron's youngest son. Many years before, judgment had been passed on that branch of Aaron's family. The pre- diction then made was fulfilled. The Ithamar household were losing their hold on the nation, while the family of Eleazar was growing in numbers and in influence. Zadok, the repre- sentative of the latter house, was the prince of the Aaronites, the chief man of the tribe of Levi. And when the roll of 302 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. the Levitical families was made np by David and liis officers, sixteen were found tracing their origin to Eleazar and only eight to Itliamar. The right of the Eleazar house to the high- priesthood also could not be gainsaid. Zadok was thus able to plead in support of his claims great services to David, great influence as the real leader of the tribe of Levi, and birthright as the representative of Aaron. But Abiathar was the tried companion of all David's dangers, and the man whom he swore to befriend through life. He could not be deprived of his office. By associating Zadok with him in the high -priest- hood, a middle way was found for reconciling these conflicting claims. As the Mosaic altar and tabernacle were at Gibeon, while the ark was in Zion, the divided worship seemed to require two high priests. Zadok presided in Gibeon, though he did not always live there ; Abiathar was priest on Zion. David thus exerted his sovereign power by retaining for Abiathar the moiety of a high office to which another had a better right. He inherited the doom uttered against his ancestor, Eli. Events were slowly working out that doom. But David never proved false to the oath of friendship which he sware. Had he been as regardless of oaths and promises as many princes have been, he would have bowed to the times, and have left Abiathar to his fate. But he acted a nobler part. After the death of Ahithophel, Abiathar was even raised to the office of king's counsellor, a post of honour which he shared evidently with Benaiah (1 Chron. xxvii. 34). Among the great officers of state there appear to have been a number of dignitaries who, though not belonging to the tribe of Levi, went by the name commonly given to the sons of Aaron, Priests {Cohanim). They neither served at the altar nor shared in its honours and profits. But as the Hebrew word for priest anciently meant prince also, that name was retained to designate these dignitaries. The writer of the first book of Chronicles, aware of this difficulty, calls them ' chiefs,' and not ' priests.' Among these Cohanim were Reconstr7tction of All- Israel. 303 the princes of the hkiod. Benaiah, the captain of the guard, is called the chief Cohen.^ Ira the Jairite is also mentioned as one of the body of Cohanim. On liigh days of festival or pageant they stood beside the king (1 Ohron. xviii. 17). But this use of the word Cohanim was becoming obsolete. As public business increased by the growth of David's empire, the necessity of employing several secretaries of state was forced upon him. Such we may call Jehoshaphat, the son of Ahilud, who filled the ofhce of recorder, to relate the achieve- ments of his master in war, and his decisions on the judgment- seat in peace. Shavsha, or, as he is also called, Sheva, became scribe ; and Adoram w^as appointed over the tribute, which now began to come in from subject states. The duties which the latter discharged varied with the nature of the tribute imposed on conquered people. Sometimes it was gold and silver; at other times sheep, cattle, and country produce were demanded ; but, during many years of Solomon's reign, the tribute seems to have been also labour from slaves, furnished by the wealthy and the noble in Israel. In course of time David gathered round him a few wise men, in whom he put more confidence than in the officers of state already mentioned. Among those, to whose counsel he usually had resort, is mentioned Ahithophel the Gilonite. He belonged to David's own tribe of Judah. His power of seeing what men ought to do in trying times seemed to his contemporaries almost divine. All his counsel to David bore this stamp. Hushai, though less gifted with this power than Ahithophel, was more a man after David's own heart. If w^e may judge from tlie name applied to him, the Archite, he belonged to tlie tribe of Ephraim (Josh. xvi. 2). He was called the king's friend. Jonathan, a son of David's uncle (Jer. xxxii. 0, 12), was ^ 1 Chron. xxvii. 5. The English version has * a chief priest ' b}' a wrong rendering for 'the chief priest.' He belonged to Kabzeel, which was not a priestly city, and his father Jehoiada must not be confounded with Jehoiada, the prince of the Aaronites (1 Chron. xii. 27). 304 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. another of tlie wise men whom the king admitted into his cabinet council. And with such care did David watch over the training of his young sons for the high offices they might he called on to fill, that he appointed another counsellor, Jeliiel, the son of Hachmoui, to guide them by his advice. For the better ordering of the kingdom, David had recourse to a plan which formerly prevailed among the Hebrews. During the sojourn in the wilderness, each tribe had a head or leader called its prince. David revived this office. Among the names mentioned on the list of princes are Eliliu, who became prince of Judah, and Jaasiel, son of Abner, who became prince of Benjamin. In the former we probably recognise Eliab, David's ill-natured brother. The great- hearted king had forgotten past wrongs. He could say of his brethren what Joseph had said of his : what they meant for evil, God had overruled for good. The name of Jaasiel is proof both of the innocence of David and of the sincerity of his grief, when Abner fell under the assassin's sword. There was much in Abner's history on which David might have fastened to j ustify neglect of Abner's children ; but the great chief of Benjamin died in his service and for his sake. Whatever may have been the evil points in David's character, the goodness of heart shown in these appointments of Jaasiel and Elihu ought to be mentioned to his honour. Among the neighbours of David who still retained their independence was JSTahash, king of Amnion. He may have been the same prince who besieged Jabesh Gilead in the befrinning of Saul's reign. When neighbouring nations were conquered, this prince enjoyed his throne in peace, not because he was too strong to be meddled with, but for a reason which may be got from the ancient literature of the Hebrews. While the wandering Israelites were advancing from the desert towards Edom, Moab, and Amnion, four centuries before, Moses gave them strict orders to avoid injuring these kingdoms : ' Distress them not, nor meddle with them, for I ReconsU'uction of All-Isi-acl. 305 will not give thee of their land a possession' (Deut. ii. 5, 9, 19).^ Xotwithstanding these orders by the lawgiver, David had taken possession of Edom and Moab ; he acted in fultilment of prophecy. But Annnon was not mentioned in that ancient prediction. Hence the distinction drawn in observing, or not observing, the commands of tlie lawgiver. The prophecy of Balaam was fulfilled, and the orders of Moses were kept. Private reasons also existed for David's forbearance. In ways unknown to us, ISTahash had befriended David in less prosperous days. When he died, leaving a prince named Hanun (Gracious) to succeed him, the remembrance of kindness, formerly received from the father, prompted David to repay it by kindness to the son ; especially as the oreatness of David's kino-dom was castinc^ a danojerous shadow on the lesser kingdom of Amnion. Accordingly, he sent an embassy to Eabbah for that purpose. But his officers were received with suspicion and treated with insult. The Ammonite chiefs persuaded their prince that David's real object was to spy out the city. Acting on that idea, he had the Hebrews seized and so disfigured that their appear- ance woidd excite ridicule. He then sent them away from Itabbah. Tidings of the disgrace done to the ambassadors soon reached David. Men of high standing, the representa- tives of his own dignity, had been so outraged when in the discharge of a commission of kindness, that they could not return to the capital till time had repaired the injuries done. They were ordered to remain at Jericho. David lost no time in avenging this outrage. His zeal was quickened by news from Amnion. An army of 33,000 mercenaries, principally chariot-men and cavalry from Zobah, * If tlie book of Deuteronomy represented, as is often said, the feelings common in the time of Isaiah, its orders regardini^ these three nations are in flagrant opposition to his words. All-Israel ' shall lly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west ; they shall spoil them of the east together ; they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab ; and the children of Ammon shall obey them' (Isa. xi. 14) — words not explained by Deut. xxiii. 3-6. U 3o6 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its History. Maachah, and Islitob, were on their march to defend Eabbah. A thousand talents of silver was the price paid for their services. On their arrival, they were posted at Medeba, a town south-w^est of the Ammonite capital, perhaps as an incentive to Moab to revolt. The Hebrew army, intended to act against the allies, was probably the division of 24,000 \vhich happened to be on duty in Jerusalem. But along with it wTre sent the tried soldiers and captains of David, known as the ' Mighties,' in themselves a tower of strength to an army. On their approach the Syrians marched to the neighbourhood of Eabbah, while the Ammonites kept within the city. Joab was thus placed in a position of great danger. He could not bring the mounted Syrians to battle, for the Hebrews, according to the custom of their nation, fought on foot ; and he could not assault Eabbah without exposing his troops to an attack in front and rear at the same time. Fortunately, however, the allies, trusting to superior numbers, offered battle. The Ammonites drew up before the walls of the city ; the Syrians hung off, waiting to fall on the rear of the Hebrews. Joab adopted the best means of meeting the danger. Arraying the Mighties and the choicest of his troops against the Syrians, he put himself at their head, while he committed the rest of the army to Abishai to watch, rather than to engage the Ammonites. Joab knew he would have to fight for safety : victory he could not hope to win. Fierce and bad though he was, he felt a glow of enthusiasm in view of the dangers which hung over the Hebrew kingdom at that moment. The kings of the Hittites had come in force to fight David, as their fathers fought Eameses of Egypt, and as their sons fought Sargon of Assyria. ' Be of good courage,' he said, 'and let us play the men for our people, and for the cities of our God ; and the Lord do that which seemeth Him good.' He expected defeat for himself or Abishai. Hope had not sunk lower in his breast, but many in the Hebrew army must have feared worse things. In the event of disaster Reconstruction of A II- Israel. 307 befalling the one general, the other would detach succours for his help. With his usual skill, Joab infused courage into his men by leading them against the Syrian horsemen and chariots. He did not wait, as others mic^ht have done, till they chose to attack him. He feared the withering influence on his men of hanoino: back from offered battle. Success crowned his efforts : the Syrians fled from the Hebrew infantry. It may have been their design to draw Joab away from the division of Abishai, or to weary out the pursuing army by fleeing at one time, and turning to fight at another. But on seeing the retreat of their allies, the Ammonites with- drew into the city, a movement not free from danger, if the enemy felt strong enough to attack. Whatever the cause of these movements may have been, Joab, feeling himself not only outnumbered, but in serious danger, took advantage of his apparent triumph to return to Jerusalem, probably by night. Though the allies do not appear to have ha.d the worst in this combat, they saw the necessity of preparing to meet a more numerous force. The thunder-cloud, which had passed over them without doing damage, was but the forerunner of a fiercer storm. Anticipating the danger, the Syrians summoned to their aid their Hittite brethren from the eastern bank of the Euphrates. Hadadezer, smarting under his previous defeat, was the head of this alliance : his commander-in-chief, Shobach, led the army. David received tidings of the advancing tide of war, before it deluged his dominion on the farther bank of Jordan, and surged around the walls of Eabbah. Gathering the whole forces of his empire, he led them in person across the Jordan, and met the enemy at Helam, a town not far from the borders of Syria. The battle that ensued was bloody and decisive, a fitting close to the long line of campaigns, in which David took part. Shobach w^as killed ; forty thousand of his foot-soldiers and seven thousand of his chariot-men fell in the combat or in the pursuit. The power of Hadadezer and 3o8 The Kingdom of All-Is7^ael : its History. the Hittite confederacy was broken ; but David appears to liave felt the greatness of the danger his kingdom would encounter, if he forced the tribes of Mesopotamia to band together against his arms. Accordingly, peace was at once granted to ambassadors sent from the tributary princes of Zobah. A barren profession of homage was their only acknowledgment of defeat ; Zobah was seized, and Eabbah was left to its fate. The wars of David occupy but a small space in the history of his reign. An act of kindness towards the son of his early friend, Jonathan, is told at greater length than the battles and triumphs of these numerous wars. Of his own accord, and in remembrance of his vows of friendship, he caused inquiries to be made for any of the house of Saul to whom he could show kindness. That house was sunk so low as to be lost to sight. Even the estates of the family had been seized by its servant or slave. No fear could thus be entertained of any of its sons contending with David for the crown. Neither Jonathan's son, Mephibosheth, nor Merab's children, had the courage to claim their father's property from his unworthy retainer, Ziba. Michal, who could have done them service, had probably caused them fear by her foolish acting and her subsequent disgrace. David had allowed ten years to elapse without thinking of his early vows of friendship. Cares of state may have interfered with the discharge of this duty. But at last it asserted its power. Ziba was summoned to the palace. From him the king learned Mephibosheth's place of abode : ' he is in the house of Machir, the son of Ammiel, in Lo-debar,' not far from Mahanaim. The cripple, who was then about twenty-five years of age, and a dependent on the bounty of Machir, was sent for to Zion. Apparently the message filled him with apprehensions. ' Fear not,' the king said, ' I will restore to thee all the land of Saul thy father ; and thou shalt eat bread at my table continually.' David, as chief judge of the nation, was entitled to give this decision Reconstrtidion of A II- Israel, 309 regarding Saul's estates. But he did more. Calling in Ziba, he announced to him the change in his condition : * I have given unto thy master's son all that pertained to Saul, and to all his house ; ' thou and thy sons and thy servants go with the land. Ziba bowed low on hearing these unwelcome tidings : fifteen sons and twenty servants handed over with himself to this fugitive cripple! He submitted, but resolved to bide his time. Mephibosheth became the king s guest in the palace ; the landowner, Ziba, became the slave of Mephibosheth ; and David's kindness to the cripple was remembered for his good by Machir of Lo-debar a few years after. The sacred writer's object is to show us the man David in his greatness of soul, more than the king in his majesty of power. And the same purpose guides his pen in reviewing the wars, which brought David's career of conquest to an end. It is not his object to shower praises at random on the head of a hero. I^OY does he mislead us by enshrining in history a prince laurelled with unfadinsj flowers of ojoodness. If he delights in presenting the king of All-Israel in this light, he is not slack to portray him for us with these flowers withering or dead. He shows us the triumph of right over might ; the majesty of uprightness, not the tinsel of a court ; the doings of God, not the doings of an earthly king. Ammon offered but a feeble resistance to the Hebrews after the battle of Helam. All their cities except Eabbah were taken in the beginning of the following year. Eabbah itself was closely beleaguered. Its strong position, the existence of a w^ater supply within its walls, and the inability of the Hebrews to conduct siege operations, gave the survivors of the nation a respite from destruction. But the war yields in importance to events which were then taking place at Jerusalem. It was a hot day in the beginning of summer. The army, the Mighties, the chief captains, and the, priests with the ark of God were before Ptabbah. After his noon- tide sleep, David was walking on the flat roof of the palace. 3IO TJie Kingdom of All-Israel : its History, So closely packed were the houses around, that he could see distinctly from the roof what was passing in neighbouring dwellings. It was reckoned a breach of good manners to be curious in these matters. But as the roofs were guarded by parapet walls, no one could look down on the houses beneath, unless prompted by curiosity or unlawful ends. There was one house close by of which David seems to have heard. In a moment of weakness that evening he looked over the parapet wall of the palace roof. An open lattice showed what was passing within. He was near enough to see a woman of singular beauty bathing beside the window. He calls to his attendants who were on the roof. Evidently they had told him of the woman, of her beauty, and of the time when she bathed — those wretched hangers-on about a palace, who live by corruption and vice. ' Is not this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite ? ' he asks of them : for the question is David's, and not information given by a messenger. They had laid the train of unlawful passion ; the fire is stealing on to an explosion ; and instead of stamping it out, they speed it on its way. By David's orders, some of them invite Bathsheba to the palace. She does not refuse. Her brave husband is disregarded. To be the paramour of a king is better in her eyes than to be the honest wife of a brave soldier. Death by burning was the doom she merited according to the Hebrew custom ; death by stoning was the doom incurred by her seducer. More lingering, painful punishments befell that guilty pair.^ A few weeks pass away ; Eabbah is still holding out ; there is no prospect of a home-coming of the army. Bath- sheba sends to inform David that their sin cannot long be hid from her relatives. He is greatly alarmed. Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba, belonc^ed to the order of the Miohties. Every one of these brave men would feel the wrong done to ^ Those who disparage the book of Kings accuse the author, for a purpose of his own, of deliberately omitting this foul story from his book. But it is they who deserve disparagement. He does not conceal it : 1 Kings xv. 5. Reconstruction of A II- Israel, 311 Uriah to be a violation of the sacredness of their own homes. But Bathsheba was the daughter of Eliam, a name which is also found on the roll of David's Mighties. If Uriah were married to a daughter of another of the Mighties, the diffi- culties and fears of David would be greatly increased. And this Eliam was the son of Ahithophel, the king's chief counsellor. Disaffection among his bravest soldiers and best advisers would be the result of a discovery of the intrigue T/i'ith Bathsheba. Fear took away good sense : one great sin led to another and a greater, till the end of the whole was livelong misery to the king. Driven to desperation, David sends for Uriah from the army. The king and his servants who were in the plot, men who would all the while ridicule the terror of their sovereign, in vain advise him to repair to his own house. Unsuspicious and straightforward, or knowing too much of his wife's un- faithfulness to be deceived, the brave soldier sleeps in the palace court, out in the open air, as Joab and the army were doing. A more touching tale than the simple honesty of Uriah and the incredible meanness of David was never written. At last the king must send the soldier away. But he sent along with him orders for his death. In a despatch which Uriah carried to Joab, David directed the general to place him at a point of danger, to provoke a sally from the town, to retire without withdrawing Uriah, and to make sure of his death in battle. Joab acted up to these orders, aware, perhaps, of the reason for them, since some of the king's favourite servants may have kept him informed of the most secret gossip of the palace. A small body of Hebrews, led by Uriah, attacked one of the best-defended gates of Piabbah. Shooters discharged stones and arrows from the wall; soldiers rushed out of the town. A fierce fight ensued. No supports were sent to strengthen the handful of Hebrews in front of the gate. Uriah, with several of his soldiers, fell in battle ; the rest of the assailants were repulsed. Their king had 3 1 2 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, murdered those who fell. Tidings of the death of the wronged soldier were immediately sent to Jerusalem. David pretended to look on it as one of the ordinary chances of war. Bathsheba, too, pretended to mourn for the husband she had dishonoured and killed. When the usual days of mourning were passed, David took her into his palace as one of his wives. Their iniquity seemed to be covered over from the public gaze. Two or three of the servants knew one-half of the story ; Joab was aware of another half at least ; and the relations of Bathsheba, her father and grandfather especially, may have suspected something wrong. But the dreadful story was buried out of sight in the almost impenetrable recesses of an Eastern palace. Only the faintest whisper of the scandal could at first have reached the outside world. Vileness had triumphed, blood had been shed, and in the grave of a brave soldier the guilty king hoped all this wicked- ness was buried and forgotten. It was not so. There was an Avenger of blood looking on, who had seen the w^hole from beginning to end : ' The thing that David had done displeased the Lord.' CHAPTEE XI. THE AVENGEK OF BLOOD. (2 Sam. xii. 1-xxi. 22; 1 Ciikon. xix. 1-xx. 8.) The sharp edge of David's fears lest the intrigue with Bath- sheba should be discovered has worn off; the clouds have cleared away ; the sky is again bright for the Hebrew king. A child is born to Bathsheba. But in reality judgment against an evil work had been delayed only for a few months. One day David's friend Nathan presents himself in the king's private chamber, and demands justice. He relates a touching tale of woeful wrong-doing in a city under David's sway. A wealthy landowner, rejoicing in numerous herds and flocks, sees with envious eyes the one ewe lamb which forms his poor but honest neighbour's sole possession. It w^as the delight of the poor man's children, it was his own solace in hours of afterwork, in short, it ' was unto him as a dauQ-hter.' But when a traveller came to the rich man one day, the host grudged, to entertain his guest with kid or lamb from his own numerous flocks ; he sent and with violent hand reft away the ewe lamb that was as the poor man's daughter. With kindling anger David listens to this tale of wrong. Believing some of his great men had done the deed, and that ISTathan was keeping back the offender's name, lest justice should be robbed of its due, the king at first passes sentence of death, and then, remembering the award of the law in such cases, ordains a fourfold restitution by the robber. But anger gave place to other feelings, when, perhaps in reply to his demand for the rich man's name, Nathan sternly 314 1^^^^ Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. replied, ' Thou art the man.' Then followed a terrible tearing aside of the veil which David hoped was thrown over his crimes. ISTor was punishment concealed. A shadow fell over the king's whole future life. Evil was to rise against him out of his own household ; his wives should be dishonoured, not with the knowledge of two or three servants, but in the sight of the sun ; in short, the sword should never depart from his house. David and Bathsheba were forgiven by the real King of Israel ; sentence of death was not passed by Him whose grace could pardon. But Jehovah exacted vengeance. And as a foretaste of coming woes, a warning, too, not to set lightly by these predictions, Nathan informed him that Bathsheba's infant son should not live.-^ The awakening of David from his dream of security found expression in song. Every time his heart was deeply stirred by joy, or grief, or fear, he seems to have sought an outlet for his feelings in the companionship of his harp, that pure delight which cheered him amid the cares of empire, the dangers of exile, and the quiet of a shepherd's life. The agony of sorrow, after Nathan left him to his own thoughts, wrung from him the exquisite elegy over his fall from virtue which we read in the book of Psalms (Ps. li.). Suddenly, the child of Bathsheba, the darling, as it is called, fell sick. Nathan's words were not words of course. They were growing into things of terrible reality. As the sickness increased, the alarm of David at a dreadful Something hanging over his 1 The reason assigned by Nathan is that David ' had given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme.' There were thus doubters or sceptics in Jerusalem in those times. But the existence of a party of philosophic inquirers into the dealings of Jehovah with His chosen people is of too much consequence to be passed over without remark. With doubters or philosophers watching the course of human thought in those times, the quiet addition of new laws to the existing IMosaic code, and much more the first introduction of that code under the name of Moses, were feats of invention impossible to David or any of the sages in his court. They who were ready to blaspheme the suspicious doings of the king towards Uriah, would not allow to pass an attempt at cheating the nation into the belief, that Moses wrote what every one knew Moses had nothing to do with. The Avenger of Blood. 315 house increased also. IS'ight and day lie fasted, lying on tlie ground. The elders of his palace stood round him, unable to divine the causes of this sorrow. But they could not persuade him to rise, or to partake of food. He fasted, he prayed, to turn aside an unseen hand raised to strike the first of many blows. Should that blow not fall, the others might be turned aside too, or might lose much of their weight. For the first time he was facing the reality of punishment. Judgment at last awoke, after slumbering for nearly twelve months. If its first strokes were so hard to bear, and if bitterest regret could bring to David no withdrawing of the rod, the next stroke might be tenfold more heavy. All these fears passed through the king's heart. An avenger of blood was on his track — an avenger, too, from whom there was no escaping, and against whom no city of refuge had been provided. But the elders and servants of the palace saw nothing save the illness of a child and the excessive grief of a father. And they were unable to connect the latter with the former. For six days the sickness lasted. All that time David struggled to hold the hand of the Avenger back from striking. On the seventh day the boy died. The servants, afraid to inform their lord lest grief might drive him to despair, stood round, one whispering to another to be spokesman. But in these looks and whisperings the king read the boy's death. He asked if it were so. At once, on learning the truth, he rose from the ground ; he washed, he anointed himself. Then he appeared in the place of general concourse, more so, indeed, than the crowded city-gate — the court of the tabernacle. It was evident to all the people that the king had recovered from his grief. Eeturning thence to the palace, he ordered the servants to supply him with food after his long fast. They expressed their surprise at the coolness with which he received the tidings of his child's death. ' I shall go to him,' he said, ' but he shall not return to me,' — an answer sufficient to blind the servants to the real J 1 6 The Kingdom of All- Israel : its Histoiy. causes of liis sorrow. But grief does not usually work in this way ; and, had they known the story as we know it, some of them might have drawn the true conclusion. David now found himself compelled to face all the evils threatened against his house, whatever shape these evils might take. Meanwhile Joab had effected a lodiijment in Eabbah. The lower town, situated among streams in the Jabbok valley and called the ' Eoyal City,' apparently because it contained the king's palace, was taken. The rest of the town, on the right bank of the stream, could not hold out much longer. Joab prepared everything for the assault. But he urged David to bring up reinforcements and to command the army himself. Probably the forces besieging Eabbah were insufficient to blockade the town and cut off hope of escape from the fugitives. By assembling the whole Hebrew army and surrounding the city, the war might be stamped out ; while, if the survivors of the siege escaped into the neighbouring wastes, their marauding bands might cause endless annoyance along the frontier. David saw the wisdom of Joab's advice. Assembling the whole force of his kingdom, he crossed the Jordan and sur- rounded Eabbah before the besieged could escape. Hanun and his people soon paid a heavy price for their treatment of David's ambassadors. From the brief record of the sacred writer we may gather that, on the day the assault was delivered, Hanun decked himself in his royal robes, and com- bated to the last against the Hebrews. His dead body was found among the slain. The crown which he had worn was plucked from his head and set on David's by the triumphing soldiery. Eabbah and all that it contained became the spoil of the victors. The fate of the surviving citizens is involved in doubt. While some think they were sent into the royal forests as hewers of timber or cutters in the saw-pits, or became brickmakers for the king, others believe they were cruelly torn with saws or axes, and even burned to death. But the history of the following years does not square with The Avenger of Blood. 3 1 7 this alleged cruelty. Many of the people appear to have been left in the town under the rule of Shobi, a son of Nahash, and a friend of David. That prince had held aloof from the court of Amnion when it encouraged Hanun to insult David's men. He and liis adherents were rewarded for tliis friendship when the rest of their countrymen had been punished for the crime. Among the Ammonite captives was an infant girl named ' Naamah/ or ' Delight.' She may have belonged to the royal family and been received into David's palace on the overthrow of her kindred. Many years after- wards she became the wife of Solomon. It appears to have been about this time that Philistia, which had been only brought to its knees in former cam- paigns, was effectually prostrated. Probably advantage was taken of David's entanglements in the east to throw off his yoke. Encouraged by the presence among them of a family of giants, the Philistines rose against their conquerors at Gezer or Gob on the northern frontier, and at Gath farther south. At the first tidings of the revolt, David hurried to the borders, apparently with a small force. An engagement took place. The Hebrews were beaten, and David would have fallen by the sword of one of the giants had not Abishai brought help in time and slain the enemy's cliampion. So serious was the danger, that the Hebrew officers resolved never again to permit the king's presence with the army in the field. An accident of war might at any moment * quench the lamp of Israel.' The hopes of the Philistines rested mainly on a few men of great stature, who * were born to the giant in Gath.' Whether they were the sons of Goliath, who was slain by David many years before, or merely of the same family, cannot now be made out. But one of them bore the same name, and may have been Goliath's son. Our translators made him Goliath's brother. In various battles four of these giants were slain, and the Philistines defeated. In the end their country was thoroughly conquered. 1 8 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, The joy of David in these crowning triumphs of the Hebrew arms was doomed to be blighted by another stroke of the Avenger of blood. His large palace was filled with sons and daughters. Amnon, the eldest, the son of Ahinoam, was twenty-three or twenty-four years of age. Absalom, the third born, and Adonijah were a year or two younger. These young men were sons of different mothers. Amnon, or as he appears to have been called in the playful language of affection, Aminon {faithful), is a name found elsewhere on the rolls of Jewish families. The young prince had apartments in the palace ; he was waited on by a man-servant, and his most trusted companion was his own cousin Jonadab, the son of Shimeah or Shammah, David's brother. The two cousins, though not perhaps much nnlike in age, were altogether unlike in parts. Jonadab was ' very wise,' quick to mark signs of change, which escaped the eyes of less observant men, ready in counsel, fertile of resource, unscrupulous in deeds. Probably he aspired to be to the king's eldest son what Husliai was to the king, his friend. This much we know with certainty — Amnon was but a tool in his craft}^ cousin's hands. He acknowledged the superior power of Jonadab ; he yielded to its control, even when his own sense of right condemned the proposals of his adviser. Among other inmates of the palace was a young princess named Tamar {a pcclm tree), the full sister of Absalom. She was most beautiful, like her brother ; like him too, if we may judge from her name, she was of goodly carriage. As she was still unmarried, she may have been about seventeen years of age, in the perfection of budding womanhood. Though her father was the powerful ruler of Palestine, and her mother the daughter of a Hittite king, she had been accustomed to dis- charge ordinary household duties in the palace. Her skill in breadmaking was conspicuous. A sick man's disordered fancy might even be excused for imagining no baker in the land able to please the palate so well as she. Amnon was The Ave72ger of Blood. 319 smitten by the beauty of Tamar. Knowing that a marriap-e so contrary to the law would never be allowed, and believing, perhaps, that a discovery of his love would alarm David into removing her from the palace, the young man kept his passion hidden in his own breast. But Jonadab, his friend, perceived a secret fire eating at his heart. A confession of the passion was wrung from the prince. With reckless disregard of all law, Jonadab fanned the flame. Guided by his counsels, Amnon, pretending sickness, took to his bed. David, hearing of his eldest son's illness, paid him a visit. He found, as had been previously arranged between the cousins, that the prince would not taste of food. Inquiring what he could do for the invalid, he was asked by Amnon to send Tamar to bake a couple of heart-cakes in his room, and to give them to him with her own hands. David had a fellow-feeling with a sick man's fancies. When a few years older than Amnon, he had taken a similar liking for water from the gate-well of Bethlehem. Xone else could quench his thirst, and brave men risked their lives to bear away a skin of it for their chief. The unsuspecting king falls into the trap. Tamar is told to repair to Amnon's room. The sick man, unable to bear the presence of strangers, orders every one out : and again the sword of the Avenger descends on David's head in a deed of terrible foulness. Amnon's love has turned into hatred. Abused and dishonoured, Tamar is violently thrust out into the court of the palace by her brother's servant. She is guilty, it seems ; the prince is shocked, and innocent. Bending her virgin robe, and defiling her head wdth ashes, perhaps from the very fire on which she had baked those fatal cakes, she hurries through the court towards the apartments of her brother Absalom. Her hand is lifted to her brow like one in pain ; her cries attract the attention of passers-by. Absalom is soon made aware of the blight cast on his sister's young life. He counsels her to conceal the shameful deed. He even affects indifference to the dishonour done to his sister. In his meetings with Amnon there is 320 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, never a word said about it, good or bad. David spoke out his anger and sorrow ; but he allowed the criminal to escape. He knew human nature too well not to dread vengeance under that indifference in Absalom's face and manner. For months and years he feared ; for months and years he watched ; w^ien he and others had been thrown off their guard, the careless, easy-going Absalom suddenly startled the world as his sister's avenger. Two years passed away ; the crime of Amnon seemed to be forgotten ; buried, it might be, among other scandals of the palace. It was spring-time, according to our reckoning ; but the barley was ripe, and the season for sheep-shearing had come. Absalom had a farm at some distance from Jerusalem, called Baal-Hazor (the village-place). As it was not far from Ephraim, it may have been situated among the hills of Ben- jamin. It was a modest establishment, large enough for its owner's wants, but not for his vanity. Being a young prince of much pretence, a king's son by both father and mother's side, he wishes to act the great man on the occasion of this sheep-shearing. He invites all his brothers to the feast. He even invites the king and the great officers of state. But his father declines the invitation ; the expense will be too great for Absalom's means. He still urges his suit, but in vain. David gives him a blessing, a handsome gift, it may be, to eke out his own resources ; a gift as well as good wishes. But although the king declines for himself, he will not surely keep back Amnon, the heir-apparent, from honouring the feast with his presence. David has fears on the point. He yields at length, and Amnon, with all the grown-up princes of the blood, set out for the merry-making at Baal-Hazor. Absalom possessed the power, not given to many, of firmly attaching to himself the young men who served him. They were ready for any deed he might order. Life itself they made light of, if the throwing of it away should be for their master's good, or if the taking of another's were by his command. They i The A venger of Blood. 3 2 1 knew Absalom to be David's favourite son, to whom nothing could be denied, and to whom everything might be forgiven. But that did not attach them to the prince. There was about him an easiness of bearing, a kindliness of manner, a readiness to help, which won the love and the attachment of the lower ranks. He knew his power over the servants when he invited Amnon to his house. He used that power to take the ven- geance which he had waited two years for. A numerous cavalcade of young gallants from Jerusalem arrived at Baal-Hazor for the feast. They and their retinue were all unarmed. Perhaps, indeed, the princes, accustomed to the soft delights of a palace, had not much of their father's courage. "Without suspicion they give themselves up to the pleasures of the day. The servants of Absalom are busied here and there in the crowded hall. As the feast wears on, the wine-cup passes freely among the guests. The merriment rises higher every moment. Amnon, entirely at his ease, feels the cheering influence of the wine. Suddenly the voice of Absalom rises above the din of the revelling, ' Smite Amnon ! ' The servants, who had been waiting for the signal to put him to death, assail the prince with the knives used in carving for the company. The screams of the victim, the cries of the onlookers, proclaim to the waiting men outside the deed of blood which was going on within. One or two of them mount the mules standing near and ride off. They carry to Jerusalem a terrible story : Absalom's servants have murdered all the king's sons, without leaving one. The palace is thrown into confusion. The king rises from his throne, he rends his robes in horror, he casts himself on the ground. His courtiers, standing beside their lord, give way to like expressions of grief. Desolation has swept through the palace ; the sword of the Avenger has again fallen with a crusliing blow on David's house. After the first bursts of grief were past, Jonadab, the friend of the murdered prince, ventured to doubt the story. He said Absalom had taken the life of X 32 2 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. Amnon only. He speaks indeed as one to whom the tidings were a thing long looked for. He knew the purpose of murder was formed from the day of Tamar's dishonour. And probably for that reason Jonadab had taken care not to put himself in Absalom's power, when his friend Amnon and the other princes accepted the invitation. His words were soon shown to be true. The watcher on the gate-tower reported the coming of much people round the shoulder of Zion, which looks into the western valley. Jonadab, on the outlook for the princes, is the first to carry the tidings to the king. Scarcely had he finished when they burst into the palace. With ' very sore weeping ' they bewail their brother's untimely fate. David and his courtiers join in the wail of grief for the dead. A third time has the crime of David, though done in secret, been openly avenged. But for the first time has the sword of the Avenger spilt the blood of his children. Dissensions in the palace followed the murder of Amnon. Absalom had fled to the court of his grandfather Talmai, king of Geshur, a region then, as it still is, an asylum from which it was difficult to take offenders. Had David chosen to exert his power for the punishment of the criminal, Absalom could not have escaped. But he shrank from shedding the blood of his own son ; and if Absalom had fled to Hebron, the man- slayer's city of refuge, the law of the land might have defied king or king's son to touch him. But David's wives and children had no such scruples. With one voice they were clamouring for vengeance. While pretending zeal for the law, they were really actuated by another motive. After Amnon's death, Absalom, in their eyes, became heir to the throne. Were he removed, the chance of the crown falling to one of the other sons would be bettered : ' Let us kill him,' they are represented saying, ' let us kill him for the life of his brother whom he slew ; and we will destroy the heir also ' (2 Sam. xiv. 7). Perhaps there was another reason. If Absalom ever ascended the throne, his first step might be to rid himself of The Avenger of Blood, 328 every competitor for the crown. David resisted their entrea- ties, perhaps also their threats. His affection for the outlaw grew stronger every day. He did not even conceal from his counsellors a half-formed purpose of visiting his favourite son at Geshur. Tor three years these battles went on in the palace. The avengers of blood were demanding the life of the murderer ; but, as the blood of Amnon was not shed with- out cause, the king w^ould not yield to their demand. His domestic happiness was for ever at an end. A greater danger alarmed the counsellors of the king. The murder of Amnon was not a deed which could be confined within the four walls of the palace. It was done openly before a crowd of spectators, and by men who knew the cause of quarrel between the brothers. In a short time the outrage on Tamar and the death of her ravisher were talked of in Hebrew households. All were aware that Amnon was doubly guilty of death. More heinous crimes than his were seldom com- mitted. !N"o home was safe, no virgin could freely discharge the ordinary duties of life in her father's house, if Amnon escaped unpunished. ' The vain fellows,' ' the fools,' as the debauched and the worthless were called, might soon imitate the example set them by the heir to the crown. Among a people bred to strict regard for law, the avenging of Tamar was considered a sacred duty. Absalom, according to their view of the matter, had done no wrong ; the father of the damsel had not discharged his duty ; her brother had taken it in hand and carried it through. The majesty of the law had been vindicated by the death of Amnon ; the friends and relations of the murdered prince called the slayer a criminal, the people at large counted him a hero. The boldness of the deed, and the tenacity of purpose which it showed, commended the prince to the nation as one worthy to rule over men. It was not therefore in agreement w4th their views of justice to let Abcalom spend year after year in banishment. Murmurs began to rise among the people (2 Sam. xiv. 15). Threats 324 The Kingdom of A II- Israel', its History, even seem to have been uttered, if the prince were not recalled from exile. Perhaps, indeed, he was already setting in motion the springs of that discontent which, in a few years, drove David from his capital, and placed Absalom for a time on the throne. Several of the king's council became aware of this state of feeling among the people. But they w^ere also aware of the battles in the king's own household. And however anxious to see Absalom recalled, they shrank from incurring the hostility of the royal family. At last Joab, aware of the king's own leanings towards his banished son, contrived to put the views of all parties before him without coming forward himself. Unless we consider the danger wdiich Joab ran in moving in the matter, we shall form a poor estimate of the wisdom he showed in accomplish- ing the prince's recall. The palace was wholly set against the measure. The king himself could not think of bringing back the exile. But Joab knew the kind's lonoino- for a reconciliation. He was aware also of the discontent among the people. Without showing his hand in the matter, he got the case laid before the king by a wise woman of Tekoa, who, in a friendly spirit towards David, had the skill to hold up to him a mirror wherein he saw himself and his danger. One day when he sat in the gate dispensing justice, she cast her- self on the ground before him, and besought his help. Pre- tending she was a widow, whose two sons had quarrelled till the one killed the other, she described her w^oeful plight in defending the survivor from the rest of her kindred. She showed how a desire for the inheritance was masked under zeal for the avenging of blood. Pitying her sorrowful case, for it was the counterpart of his own, he assured her of his protection. Seeing he had not apprehended her meaning, she requested leave to speak further. She then charged him with fault himself in not fetching home his banished. The speeches which she heard among the people w^ere making her afraid. As a loyal subject, she feared the dangers to which these The Avenger of Blood. 325 speeches against tlie king's government might lead ; for every- where the Hebrews were regarding Absalom as unjustly cut off * from the inheritance of God.' * May Jehovah be with thee/ she said, uttering a prayer, not stating a fact. Before dismissing her, David ascertained that Joab, faithful as he ever was, had contrived this little plot. Joab conveyed to Geshur the king's permission for Ab- salom to return from exile.^ But the prince was forbidden to enter the palace, or to approach his father. He was recalled from exile certainly, but watched like a dangerous neighbour. David had clogged the boon he bestowed on his son with conditions which drained it of nearly all its sweetness. While yielding to the feeling of the people on the one hand by recalling Absalom to Jerusalem, he was, on the other, deferring to the fears, real or pretended, of the rest of his family. For two years the impetuous young man submitted to this shutting out from the honours of his birthright. But his pride could stoop to it no longer. He sent for Joab to speak to him on the subject. Joab refused to come. He sent a second time, and again he met with a refusal. Absalom replied to these slights by ordering his servants to set fire to a barley field belonging to the general. His retainers, as faithful to him then as they had shown themselves five years before, cared for neither high nor low who stood in the way of their mas- ter's orders. The field which he told them to burn was beside Absalom's house. The grain, almost ready for the reaper and ^ Several slight incidents referred to in the course of the history give grounds for tlie following chronological table : — B.C. 1035. RapeofTamar. March-April, 1033. Murder of Anmon. ,, ,, 1030. Recall of Absalom from banishment. ,, ,, 1028. Restoration of Absalom to David's favour. The season of the year (March or April) is determined by the two incidents of sheep-shearing and the burning of the dry and ripened barley in Joab's field. August-September, 1024. Flight of David from Jerusalem. But the date 1024 B.C. rests on reading four years for forty in 2 Sam. xv. 7 — a doubtful emendation. Between Absalom's return to Jerusalem and the fulfilment of his alleged vow in Hebron, four years can scarcely have elapsed. J 26 T/ie Kingdom of A 11- Israel: its History. quite dry under the fierce sun, burst into flame. The fire- raisers did not seek to conceal themselves. In their eager- ness to destroy Joab's property, they may have laboured to keep the fire from spreading, as it was likely to do, to other fields. Every one knew that the prince's men had set the barley on fire. Joab feared some more serious annoyance if he still refused to see him. Accordingly he paid Absalom a visit, and demanded the reason of the barley being set on fire. Absalom offered no explanation but the messages he had already sent. He insisted on being restored to his rights. He denied all wrong-doing. He even professed his willing- ness to die if the king found fault in him. But he was resolved not to live the life of an exile within sight of his father's palace. Conscious that Absalom was right, or afraid to tempt his anger further, Joab promised his good offices. He found the king not unwilling to relent. After five years of estrangement, father and son were again reconciled. But on the side of the prince it was a reconciliation intended only to mask the greater wickedness than Amnon's death, on which he was now setting his heart. The popularity of Absalom had increased even while he was under a cloud at court. The confidence, wdth which he appealed to his innocence before Joab, was but a reflection of the verdict long before passed by the people in his favour. The readiness, too, with which the servants obeyed his orders in firing Joab's barley was a proof, not only of his power of securing devoted partisans, but also of a fuller consciousness of that power. During the five years which had passed since Lis retainers murdered Amnon, Absalom had grown into a manhood that was aware of its own strength, and disposed to use it for its own ends. In his seclusion from public life his servants appear to have kept him informed of the feeling of the people in his favour, of their admiration of his beauty, and of their interest in the events of his daily life. Several petty details are preserved, which show more clearly than The Avenger of Blood. 327 words the feelings and the gossip of the people at this period. A more handsome youth could, not be seen in the country. He was the perfection of manly beauty, from the sole of the foot to the crown of the head. His children were like their father in this respect ; and his daughter, whom he called Tamar, after her unfortunate aunt, but whom the rest of the family called Maachah, after her grandmother, appears to have closely resembled him in beauty of person and in the power of securing the affections of others (2 Chron. xi. 21). Even the luxuriant growth of his hair was published among the vulgar by admiring retainers. They boasted of its woman- like length and weight ; they told how he polled it but once a year, and how he surprised his friends by weighing down with it two hundred royal shekels. Had not Absalom been the idol of the tribes of Israel, these things would never have been thought of or talked about. Their very smallness is the best guarantee we could have of his great popularity with all ranks. Absalom was not long at court before he turned this popularity to account. He knew the nation was not satisfied with his father. The business of the law courts, over which the king himself presided, had become too vast to be attended to by one man. Appeals from inferior judges, and cases brought directly before the king, could not all receive a fair hearing, even though decided in the shorthand ways of Eastern rulers. Unquestionably the loose administration of justice formed a real grievance, of which Absalom was forward to take advantage. But the scandals and intrigues of the palace had also leaked out into the cities and hamlets of Israel. They had damaged the king ; they had weakened his hold on the affections of a law-loving people. Absalom in their eyes was the representative of law and custom. He was known to have vindicated the authority of both when the king would not. He was known also to have paid a heavy price for his boldness. Absalom was a hero and a martyr in the people's cause. In their eyes David was a 328 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, breaker of the law himself, and a screener of others from its penalties. The people were ignorant of the real character of the prince. They saw only what lay on the surface. But in popular movements it is too often outward show which catches the multitude. Were the outer cloak lifted off from their uuAvorthy idols, the generality of mankind would be the first to raise the axe which should dash those idols in pieces. The famine of three years' duration, which weakened the kingdom sometime in the latter part of David's reign, fits in exactly with the murmurings of the people at this period. For three seasons the rainfall was short of the requirements of the ground. Dry winters were followed by bad harvests. And among a people accustomed to trust entirely to their own fields for the following year's food, a deficient harvest was the cause of much hardship, while a total failure was ruin to most classes of the community. A three years' famine produced serious discontent among the Hebrews, for the governed always find consolation in attributing their troubles to the incapacity or wickedness of their governors. David was under a cloud with his people for not vindicating the majesty of the law himself ; he fell still further in public estimation by punishing the prince who, having next to him the best right to become the law's minister of vengeance, had discharged that duty ; and he seemed to his subjects to be under the frown of Jehovah, when the heavens refused their usual rains. Absalom's success in overturning his father's throne is thus more easily explained/ David became alarmed at the lonfr-continued drouG^ht. 'O >'-'"-- o- ' Among the indications of a probable date for the three years' famine, the death of Saul's sons, and the four battles with the Philistines, are the following (2 Sam. xxi.):— (a) They took place before the rebellion of Absalom ; for (2 Sam. xxi. 17) David's officers resolved he should not take part in any battle again. Hence they refused to let him command the army against Absalom. (6) The reproach of Shimei that David was guilty of the blood of Saul's house (2 Sam. xvi. 8) points to something more nearly touching David than the death of Ishbosheth, and more recent. The Avenger of Blood. 329 P)iit a vision of the Avenger's sword may have made him unwilling to repair to that Friend, whom he had been accns- tomed to consult. However, the cause of the drought was not the wickedness of the palace. It stretched further back. The oath of assembled Israel to protect the temple slaves of Gibeon had been outraged by Saul. For reasons now nnknown, he had planned the utter destruction of their city. * Zeal for Israel ' was the cause assic^ned, the mistaken zeal of a fanatic. As the wilderness tabernacle was removed from Nob to Gibeon, he may have imagined that, in harbouring tlie priests and the tabernacle, the people of the city were sheltering traitors. But whatever the reason may have been, he purposed putting them all to death.^ His hand was stayed before his purpose could be accomplished. The murder of the Gibeonites left a blood-stain on the whole kingdom. ' Saul and his house of blood-guiltiness ' are given as the ground for punishment falling on the nation. It was slow of foot, it was long in coming, for the generation which does the sin in a country is not always the generation which bears the punish- ment. But when the scourge did come, it fell on all ranks of men. Between the Gibeonites and the royal household had grown up a blood feud, for which law and custom in those times had only one remedy, ' blood for blood.' Deeply rooted in the national character, this rule was productive sometimes of good, sometimes of evil It is alien to our manners. We condemn it for the harm it would give rise to, if cherished among ourselves ; we overlook the good it may have done among a totally different race. ^ Blood for blood ' was the demand made by the citizens when their ambassadors received an audience of the king. Atonement must be made ; but neither silver nor gold could appease the feud. A sacred duty lay on them to atone for the blood of their slaughtered 1 Judging from the ordinary law of 'like for like,' we may suppose that he took the lives of seven of tliem, for as many of the royal family were afterwards slaiu as an atonement for his crime. 2, so 1 he Kingdom of All-Israel : ils Histo?y, townsmen by the blood of the household, at whose hands it was shed. ' Blood, it defileth the land,' said the law, ' and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein but by the blood of him that shed it' (Num. xxxv. 31-33). Saul had gone to his account ; the stain of blood was crying for vengeance on his family, just as the stain of Uriah's blood was resting on David's palace, and claiming victim after victim from among his children. In neither case did the law against punishing the children for their father's sins apparently hold good. In both the father's guilt brought ruin on the sons. An open slaughter of the innocent is visited on Saul by an open demand for the lives of his children ; an underhand murder of the innocent is visited on David by the violent end of son after son, all happening in the ordinary course of events, linked together by easily traced causes and effects. But the same hand was directing the government of the world in both cases. How such reflection of punishment from the head of the sinner on to his children consists with the law, that the children are not to be punished for the father's sins, is a question in philosophy which we shall leave alone. But no fact is more clearly written on the face of history, than punishment glancing off from the guilty on to the seemingly innocent, while the law of God distinctly forbids the son to suffer for his father's crime. Men are forbidden to punish the child for the father's sin ; does the same rule not hold in the court of heaven and before the throne of God ? ^ To a high-minded man, as David was, the delivering up to death of seven children of the man whom he followed on the throne, could not fail to be a source of bitterest sorrow. Saul's family entertained not the slightest hope of recovering the crown, nor did David stand in fear of their pretensions. They were sunk in poverty and neglect. Neither during Absalom's rebellion nor after it is there a whisper of danger ^ Compare the facts and views given by Grote, History of Greece, viii. pp. 418, 419, in Alexander's massacre of the Brancliidse. The Avenger of Blood. 331 to David from that source. Still, free tlioiigli he may have been from apprehension, the demand of the Gibeonites for seven sons of Saul to return on them blood for blood, put him in most unhappy straits. Should he say ' No,' he would set at nought one of the most binding laws of Eastern nations. Should he say ' Yes,' there were men in those days, as there are in our own, ready to sneer at the chance so opportunely presented of ridding himself of the seven ablest men of a rival family. Judged by the laws and customs of the land, David could not act otherwise than seize the seven men and hand them over to the Gibeonites, a painful but an unavoid- able grief to his great heart. His treatment of Absalom had already put David in disagreement with the cherished customs of his peoj^le. Should he set himself against the same customs a second time, especially when three years of drought had terrified the nation with fear of divine vengeance, the crown might be forfeited by his kindness of heart. The best known of all Saul's kindred was Mephibosheth. But David's league of love with his father Jonathan threw a shield of safety over that helpless prince. Nearest of kin though he was to the shedder of the Gibeonites' blood, him David could not deliver up to death. Other victims were found ; two sons of Eizpah, the concubine of Saul, and five sons of his eldest daughter Merab.^ These seven David handed over to the injured citizens. Solemn and heart- rending it must have been to all present that day, when the inheritors of the father's feud were pierced through with the sword on the hill of Gibeah, their ancestral town. Nailed to crosses or stakes prepared for the occasion, the seven bodies were then raised in the air. From the middle of April to the first droppings of the winter rains in October, ^ Michal is said to have been their mother. In our version she is said to have 'brought them up,' a rendering scarcely allowable. If Merab died earl)% and if the care of her children devolved on her sister JMichal, the latter might be said to have been their mother. The bringing up of Genubath, not by his mother, but by his aunt, Queen Tahpenes, is a parallel case (1 Kings xi. 20). 2,^2 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, the crosses with their ghastly burdens stood out against the sky on the hill-top. But they were not left unguarded. Eizpah, the hapless mother of two of the men, spread a couch of sackcloth on the bare rock, and allowed neither vulture by day nor jackal by night to touch the dead. Her affection became matter of common talk. It penetrated to the palace, and was made known to David. Satisfied, when rain began to fall, that the curse of drought w^as removed from the land, and touched by the affection of the mother for her dead sons, he ordered the bones of the slain men to be taken down. He could honour the dead, thoudi he could not save the living. Impressed, as every one must have been, with the fate of a family once so powerful, the king showed his sorrow by interring the bones of its scattered members in a common grave. He himself, after bringing the remains of Saul and his three sons from Jabesh, conveyed them to Zelah, a place in the canton of Benjamin, where Saul's fathers were buried. The bones of the seven w^ere carried to the same spot and laid in the same grave. Absalom saw his opportunity in the growing unpopularity of the king. But he was also urged to action by the change which had come over the gossip of the palace regarding the succession to the throne. Since his flight to Geshur, his brother Solomon had grown to be a boy eight or nine years of age. Bathsheba was known to be chief favourite among David's wives. And the regard with which her child was treated must have revealed to the courtiers David's intention to name him for the throne. Absalom's temper could not brook this affront. He regarded the crown as his by right, for he was David's eldest surviving son. His mother, too, was a king's daughter, while the rest of David's wives were the daughters of commoners. And of Solomon's mother he could say nothing too harsh or too scandalous. His brothers were young men of a small spirit, well enough fitted to engage in the intrigues of a palace, but not to stand comparison The Avenger of Blood. 333 with him, or to cross his purposes. Suspicious of his father's intentions, and determined to wield a king's sceptre, he resolved to bring matters to a speedy issue. The weakest part in David's government was the admini- stration of justice. As chief judge of the nation, to whom every one was free to bring his suit, the king should have dispensed justice every morning. For some reason he was less mindful of this duty than he ouglit to have been. Absalom saw the chance presented of ingratiating himself with the people. He laid his plans so as to dazzle the multitude by unwonted magnificence, to catch them by unwonted affability, and to cheat them by an affectation of unwonted attention to business. Early in tlie morning, even when there may have been suspicious eyes to report his doings, he drove his chariot into the open space of the city gate. Fifty runners preceded him on foot. When he reined in his horses, his retainers stood in advance or round about the chariot. Horses and chariots were new things in Jerusalem, things, too, which were sure to be spoken about. They could not be driven into the public square of the city without drawing toGfether a lar^i^er number of onlookers than usual. Amoncj this crowd the servants of Absalom, wholly in their master's interest, worked their way, seeking out all who had cases to bring before the king. Word was passed to the prince, and a servant was sent to ask the suitors to come to his chariot. He kindly inquired of each to what city he belonged, he examined the cause which brought him to Jerusalem, he pro- nounced it good and right, and then expressed his regret that no one dispensed justice in the king's absence. Overcome by this kindness and magnificence, the man would have pros- trated himself before the prince. But Absalom put forth his hand to prevent the obeisance. He did more. He drew the man toward him, and kissed him, as he would have done au equal. Few were able to resist attentions so overpowering. Almost every one who received them spread abroad most JJ 34 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, flattering reports of magnificence, of kingly bearing, of gracious condescension. The whole country was ringing with the prince's praise. He had stolen the hearts of the people ; he had sapped the foundations of their allegiance to his father. If David was aware of the magnificence affected by Absalom, there was an excuse at hand. The prince had resided for three years in horse-breeding Syria. In his grandfather's dominions, every man of substance had one or more horses : every chief or noble rode in his own chariot. Absalom had become accustomed to this magnificence. He preferred it to riding on mules, or walking on foot, as was usual at his father's court. With an excuse so good, what had the prince to fear from a father so indulgent as David ? Absalom was guided in his schemes by Ahithophel, one of the discontented party at court. Something had evidently happened to give the chief councillor deep offence. His character is drawn in one of the Psalms : ' The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, but war was in his heart ; his words were softer than oil, yet were they drawn swords ' (Ps. Iv. 21). As Ahithophel's ideas of his own greatness could not brook the smallest slight, an insignificant cause may have led to this great dislike of the king. Because Bathsheba may have been the daughter of his son, Eliam, the wrong done to her former husband, Uriah, is sometimes given as the cause of Ahithophel's quarrel with David. But Bathsheba was David's favourite wife; her son was his destined heir. In assisting Absalom, Ahithophel would thus be wronging his own grand-daughter and her child, if not procuring their death. jSTo connection existed between the murder of Uriah and the discontent of Ahithophel. But whatever may have been the cause, discontented he certainly was, and in these measures of Absalom the hand of Ahithophel may be most surely traced. Another of the leaders on Absalom's side was Amasa, who appears to have been of great influence in the rebel camp. He was the son of Abigail, the sister of Zeruiah, Joab's The Avenger of Blood. OJ mother. Amasa and Joab were thus cousins to each other, and nephews to David. But there seems to have been some stain on the birth of Amasa. His father, Jether, is called in one place an Israelite, in another an Ishmaelite ; his mother was a serpent's (Nahash) daughter, — an allusion not to parentage, but to character (Gen. iii. 15), similar to Belial's daughter (1 Sam. i. 16). Amasa does not appear to have held high office in David's court or army. The neglect with which he was treated, combined with his relationship to the royal family, and perhaps with the traditions of his military skill, may have pointed him out to Absalom as a man, whose fidelity might be safely tampered with or easily bribed to a change of government. When the rebellion succeeded, he became commander-in-chief under the new king. Some time elapsed between Absalom's restoration to favour and the beginning of the rebellion.-^ It cannot have been long, for not a whisper of the conspiracy reached the ears of Joab or any of the king's trusted advisers. And yet the rebels had formed a party in almost every quarter. As soon as things were ready for the rising, Absalom requested leave of his father to visit Hebron in pursuance of a vow which he uttered when in exile. As his restoration to favour was to be fol- lowed by paying this vow, the interval cannot have been very many weeks. And the deceiver adopted the surest plan to allay suspicion. A new-blown zeal for the law screens the villany he is meditating ; nor could David have refused permission without injuring himself still more in public estimation. But instead of suspecting any evil, David was overjoyed at the appearance of a regard for religion in this request. He not only gave him leave to go, but he allowed him to invite to the feast at Hebron two hundred men of Jerusalem. They ^ ' At the end of forty years,' 2 Sam. xv. 7. It is most difficult to account for forty years in this passage. ' Four years ' or ' forty days ' are no imj)rovement, for tlie former is too long and the latter too short an interval for fuKilling the vow and perfecting the treason. * Forty weeks ' would solve all difficulties. OJ 6 The Kingdom of All-Is7'acl : its History, had no knowledge of the design on foot. But they gave Absalom the appearance of a large following as he passed through the country. His partisans, too, were encouraged by the sight of numbers ; for in all revolutions an apparent majority secures the support of waverers.^ While they were on the way to Hebron, Absalom's messengers were hurrying to all quarters, warning the disaffected to be ready for the rising. With such skill was the rebellion planned, that Absalom was celebrating his coronation feast, and in every tribe the begin- ning of his reign had been proclaimed by sound of trumpet, before David knew of the rebellion. And with such celerity did things move forward, that Absalom, with an overwhelming force, was within a day's march of the capital before the king had taken thought of defence. Ahithophel's counsels guided the arms of the rebel. That crafty adviser left the court of David before Absalom. He repaired to his own city of Giloh, a place situated among the mountains of Judah, several miles south of Hebron. He was thus within easy call of the prince. Jerusalem was no longer a safe residence for David. Dis- content was rampant there as well as everywhere else. But besides, the army of Absalom rendered a defence of the town impossible. If David and those who continued faithful to him remained in it, treachery within, and an assault from without, would speedily terminate the civil war. The only hope of safety was to delay till it should be seen who remained loyal. Orders were accordingly issued for withdrawing from Jerusalem the soldiers who favoured the king. His wives and children, with the exception of ten concubines who remained to look after the palace, set out mostly on foot. Every- thing had to be done in haste. Mules could not even be found to ride on. They halted for a little, at a place called ' the House of the Distance,' ^ on the declivity leading down to 1 For the vow and the feast, see above, p. 263. - Some take this to have been the last house of the city. It may be the boundaiy line between Judah and Benjamin. See Josh, xviii. 16. The Avenger of Blood, 337 the brook Kedroii, while the king passed in review the soldiers who remained faithful. He stood near the ark which Zadok and Abiathar with the Levites had borne out from the city. The retreat was led by a body of men called David's own ser- vants ; then the bodyguard of Cherethites and Pelethites passed before him ; then the Gittites, commanded by Ittai. David called that captain from the ranks, and urged him to return. It was not right to expose a stranger to the dangers of civil strife. But Ittai refused. He had cast in his lot with his friend, and whatever might be that friend's fate would be his also. * Go,' the king said, ' pass over,' and the strangers with their wives and little ones, descendinf? the hill, crossed the Kedron. David's words tp Ittai, ' grace and truth,' were a proverb of which the origin can be traced.^ They are found for the first time in the 'passing hy of Jehovah witnessed by Moses (Ex. xxxiv. 6). Ittai was told to pass hy almost the next time they occur in history (2 Sam. xv. 20). Between these two passages the relationship is both singular and close ; and the proverb reappears in John i. 14,' fuU of grace and truth.' But sometimes only the half of it is found, ' full of grace.' This splitting of a whole phrase into its two halves we shall find occurring in another case from the Pentateuch. The direction of David's flight had been agreed on in a hurried council as soon as the revolt became known. Fortu- nately the safest road to escape immediate danger was also the surest for gaining the help of friendly swords. By taking a north-east direction, David would be on the way to the ferries of the Jordan, which afforded communication with the land of Gilead on the east bank. Arrived there, lie would be in comparative safety. Of all the tribes of Israel, those on the east side of Jordan had most cause to be grateful to David. From Syrians, from Ammonites, from Moabites, he had given them complete deliverance. While they enjoyed the riches of ^ The whole proverb occurs once in Joshua, twice in Sanuiel, frer^uently in the Psalms, four times in Proverbs, and once in Hosea. Y 00 8 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. their own country, they had a large share of the riches arising from the traffic of their neighbours with foreign nations. Should the strong hand of David be lifted from the necks of these prostrate foes, Gilead and the adjacent districts would speedily be wasted with fire and sword. If, therefore, the king could count on finding friends in any place, it was certain to be in Gilead. And nowhere had he a better chance of being joined by veteran soldiers. The garrisons of Damas- cus, of Syria, of Ammon, of Moab, and of Edom, could all be easily communicated with. It was wise to choose Gilead as a place of refuge. The king had also recovered from the stupor of his first grief. He was beginning to see more clearly in the darkness. Zadok and Abiathar might be of service to him by remaining in the city : they could be of none by accompanying him in his flight. Disguising his real meaning, he told Zadok to carry back the ark of God to Zion, addin^ir, if it were God's will, he should see it aoain. The hiorh priest or any of the Levites near him might report these words to Absalom without fear. But Zadok did not apprehend the object of sending him back. ' Art thou not a seer ? ' the king said privately. It was an old-fashioned word, that had been out of use for a generation. It sharpened Zadok's thinking. And then, David told him to send his own son and Abiathar's with such news as they might gather of Absalom's plans. The brave priests, both of them thoroughly devoted to the king, were the best men to trust with this dangerous duty. If Jerusalem could have been held against the rebel army, sound policy would have forbidden Joab to abandon a place of its importance. A soldier who surrenders a stronghold to the enemy, without even striking a blow in its defence, is guilty of treason. But the first thought of David and Joab, the greatest soldiers of the day, is flight. They forsake Jerusalem, before which the rebels might have been delayed till they grew weary of the enterprise, or till dissension broke out in their ranks. A military blunder so serious The Avenger of Blood, 339 cannot be attributed to these experienced soldiers. Jerusalem was not fortified. The works were in progress then and for years afterwards. But they could not resist an immense host such as accompanied Absalom. The truth of this is put beyond doubt by the prayer of David in Psalm li. : ' Do good in Thy good pleasure unto Zion ; build Thou the walls of Jerusalem.' A few months before that psalm was written, Joab and the Hebrew army made a narrow escape from destruction in battle with the Syrians and Ammonites. Had they been defeated, Jerusalem might have shared the fate which overtook Eabbath-Ammon. David had fallen into grievous sin ; punishment was coming when he wrote the psalm. Anticipating a scare such as he and his people formerly felt in the crisis of the war with Amnion, he prays : ' Build Thou the walls of Jerusalem.' The departure of the king was an event long remembered, from several of the incidents by which it was attended. As the multitude filed out of the city, the valley of the Kedron and the sides of the neiG^hbouringj hills sent forth a wail of sorrow : ' All the country wept with a loud voice.' Citizens, who crowded forth to witness the leave-taking, or followed the retiring soldiers, helped to swell that cry of grief. David himself, covering his head in token of bitter sorrow, and walking on his bare feet, joined in the weeping as he climbed the ascent of Olivet. His captains and soldiers, with Eastern openness of feeling, also covered their heads and wept aloud. It was the weeping of strong men, for every one of whose tears there should run streams of rebel blood. Meanwhile, rays of hope begin to streak the darkness. While he is thus plunged in grief, a messenger, perhaps one of the two hundred who accompanied the prince to Hebron, arrives with tidings that Ahithophel, the king's sagest counsellor, has proved false. ' Mine equal, my guide, and mine acquaintance,' wrote David, ' we took sweet counsel together, and walked unto the house of God in company' (Ps. Iv. 13). '0 Lord,' lie said, 'turn 340 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, the counsel of Ahithopliel into foolishness.' He had then reached the top of Olivet. While he was praying,^ David's friend Hushai arrives from the other side of the hill. His clothes are rent, earth is on his head. Well was it for both David and him that he was not one of the two hundred, whom Absalom contrived to put out of the way. He had been residing on his own estate in the north of Benjamin, and he was then on his road to the capital to share the fortunes of his friend. But since Hushai could do better service as a traitor in the council of the rebel prince than as a friend, uselessly to cumber the little army in the field, David urged him to proceed to Zion, and put himself in com- munication with the high priests should he discover anything of importance. He might thus defeat the plans of Ahithopliel, while seeming himself to serve Absalom. The two friends then parted, the one descending the western side of Olivet towards the city, the other slowly passing down the northern slope towards the wilderness ferries of Jordan. Shortly after parting from Hushai, the king's forces met Ziba, the servant of Mephibosheth. He had a couple of asses with him, laden with 200 rounds of bread, 100 bunches of raisins, 100 of summer fruits, and a skin of wine. David's suspicions were awakened. Ziba seemed to him on the way to pay court to the new king. But when he asked him, shortly and sharply. What meanest thou by these ? Ziba was ready with an answer which went to the king's heart. The asses were for the women and childen to ride on, the food for the soldiers, and the wine for those to drink who might faint in the weary wilderness. Faithfulness exists somewhere, the king thought as he heard these cunning words. Ziba's present was a ray of hope in the gloom. But, he asked, where is thy 1 David is generally thought to liave worshipped at a chapel or high place on the top of Olivet. But there is no ground for this in the words : ' When David was come to the top of the hill, where he prayed to God ' (2 Sam. xv. 32) against Ahithopliel (in ver. 31). Our version has put worshipped iov prayed (see Ex. xi. 8 ; 1 Sam. ii. 36, i. 28). The Avenger of Blood, 341 master's son ? ' At Jerusalem/ was the answer, ' for he said, To-day shall the house of Israel restore to me the kingdom of my father.' It was a falsehood. I*robably it was as true as the story of the bread and the fruit and the wine. Unfor- tunately, David believed it. And he acted on his belief: * Thine/ he said, * is everything which was Mephibosheth's.' Astonished at the turn thin^^s had taken, Ziba is master enough of himself to reply : * I humbly beseech thee, let me find grace in thy sight, my lord, 0 king.' David's rash faith in this deceiver, and his still hastier words, reflect disgrace on his treatment of the slandered cripple, the son of his friend. As David journeyed onward he came to a place in Benjamin called Bahurim, the residence of two men, — one a bitter foe, the other a true friend of the kino-. Since the latter was from o home, and his wife was keeping the house, we can scarcely be wrong in identifying him with Azmaveth, one of the Mighties (2 Sam. xxiii. 31) who w^as afterwards placed over the king's stores or treasures (1 Chron. xxvii. 25). The other was Shimei, a man connected with Saul's family, and of much influence in the neighbourhood. He was also on friendly terms with Ziba, who lived at no great distance, — an intimacy which may be regarded as another proof of the hollowness of Ziba's professions of loyalty. Shimei came out to view the fugitives. A ravine separated the height on which he stood from the ridge along which they were marching. "When David appeared on the one liill, Shimei was seen on the other. With curses loudly spoken he railed on the king as a wicked man, guilty of the blood of Saul's house. He even threw stones and earth at David, harmless it may be at the distance, but annoying to men of spirit. This continued for some time, as Shimei moved in the direction of their march. David seemed unwilling to act a king's part. His captains, who were gathered round him, forbore to speak. At last Abishai angrily requested leave to cross the ravine and take off that dead dog's head. Joab urged David to comply. Had Ittai or Benaiah made the 342 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. request, he might not have met with a refusal But Abishai was one of those, who put it in the power of Shimei to curse David as a shedder of the blood of Saul's house. The bloody end of Abner, and the equally bloody end of Ishbosheth to which it led, rushed at once into the king's thoughts. An indignant reproof silenced the two brothers : ' What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah ? So let him curse, because the Lord hath said unto him, Curse David.' It was a more severe punishment to Shimei to let him alone than to take his life. He w^as treated with contempt. He was allowed to curse on and to throw stones till he was weary. He made him- self a fool before the chief men of the kingdom, without the smallest good to himself or to the rebel cause. From that day onward he knew there could be no terms of friendship between him and David. For a half-hour's indulgence in silly cursing and stone-throwing, his conscience would henceforth never cease to frighten him with a Eunner's sword. But the pro- vidential sparing of Shimei's life probably led to Ahithophel's death. Meanwhile the rebel army was approaching the capital. Attended by men from every quarter, Absalom and Ahitho- phel were reaping the fruits of successful treason in their triumphant march towards Zion. ]N"or was the success in Jerusalem less soothing to their pride. Zadok and Abiathar, the chiefs of the national faith, are in the power of the new king, if they do not mean to serve him. Hushai the Archite, the friend of David, presents himself at the palace to pay allegiance. ' God save the king ' were his words of homage. Staggered by Hushai's baseness, Absalom, half in doubt, half in contempt, asked, ' Is this thy kindness to thy friend ? ' Whatever generosity was left in Absalom's bosom w^as ruffled. But Hushai deftly parried the thrust. ISTothing but skilful flattery could save him from ruin. Smoothly and readily came the excuse to Hushai's lips : ' Whom the Lord, and this people, and all the men of Israel choose, his will I be, The A venger of Blood, 343 and with liim will I abide.' Absalom's head was turned by his success. In that short interview Hushai saw, how he might best manage matters by sailing with the stream of the prince's own high thoughts. Whatever seemed to exalt the young man would be preferred to sager counsel, if less skil- fully proposed. Ahithophel, carried away by the credit due to successful management, would be less obsequious when it came to a battle of wits. His first proposal fell in with the prince's humour, and was followed on the day of their entry into Zion. The ten concubines left by David in charge of the j)alace, Absalom took as concubines to himself. It was the custom in the East for the successor of a king to claim the wives and concubines he had left behind (2 Sam. xii. 8). Absalom, by taking these ten women to be his concubines, avowed his resolution not to stop in his career till he had hunted his father to death. It was a barrier in the way of peace which could not be removed. Henceforth there could be no truce in the civil war. So long as David lived, Absalom's success was not assured, and Ahithophel was not safe. Conscious of his danger, the chief counsellor proposed to finish the war at a blow that night. The road David had taken was well known. Shimei could be in Zion as soon as Absalom. He knew the direction of David's flight, the number of soldiers with him, the host of women and children who cumbered their march ; and he could boast of their want of spirit. Ahithophel saw the necessity of surprising David that night, scattering his troops, and killing the king himself. Shimei's story showed how easily the thing could be done. And Ahithophel was not slow to offer his services for this purpose. Asking twelve thousand men from Absalom, — a thousand from each tribe (Num. xxxi. 4), — he offered, with their help, to overtake the fugitives and destroy David. The prince and his chiefs closed with the offer. Ahithophel appears, indeed, to have left the cabinet for tlie purpose of selecting the soldiers. But the military chiefs took the 344 '^^^^ Kingdom of All-Israel : its Histoiy, matter to heart after he withdrew. The cunning counsellor i was leaving nothing for the young prince to do but to obey. All the glory was going to Ahithophel ; no room was left for a display of Absalom's vanity or his general's prowess. Ahithophel was setting himself up as king-maker. He was treating Absalom as a puppet, to be moved when and where he pleased. Fear and dislike, however they may have been planted in the prince, turned his thoughts towards the courtly Hushai. Before it is too late, Absalom orders Hushai to be summoned. He informs him of the plan which the council had sanctioned ; then, dislike or doubt cropping out, ' Shall we do after his saying V he asks ; * if not, speak thou.' Hushai saw in these words the cloud under which Ahithophel had passed. David's life was then hanging by a thread ; for the carrying out of Ahithophel's counsel meant success to the rebellion. But with a voice and countenance trained to composure, Hushai pointed out the dangers of a night attack against w^arriors accustomed to campaigning. They would not wait to be attacked, as Ahithophel imagined. Their watches would be set far out. At the first clash of arms the raw soldiers of the prince, hearing their shouts, would lose heart. They would immediately run, and would spread reports of an overthrow. A defeat would be fatal to the new king ; his forces would melt away as fast as they had assembled. After exciting the prince's fears, he touched his vanity. 'Gather all Israel,' he said, 'take the command, and in royal state sweep from the earth the paltry few who dare to defy thy greatness.' Hushai's proposal was greeted with applause. ' If he betake himself to a city, let all Israel bring ropes to that city, and we shall drag it to the brink of the ravine and topple it over, so that not even a pebble shall be left.' Hushai knew he was speaking foolishness. Only a well-trained voice could have gone on, without faltering, from beginning to end of a proposal so incredibly senseless. But it pleased the prince ; it pleased Amasa and the chiefs in the army; it displeased no one but The Avenger of Blood. 345 the king-maker. Ahithophel's plan was set aside, and the orders he may have given were countermanded. But Hushai did not wait to see the result. His own proposal was un- suited to the case of Absalom ; he could not believe it would be followed. If Ahithophel's were acted on, nothing could save the royalists from destruction before morning. On leaving the council chamber, Hushai repaired to the taber- nacle, the least suspected place in the city. That he should meet Zadok or Abiathar there was also above suspicion. But, in that apparently casual meeting, he made known the design that w^as on foot. A serving woman was instantly despatched to En-rogel, a well outside the walls, where the women of the city washed their clothes then as now. Ahimaaz and Jonathan, the high priests' sons, were waitino; near. The maid communicated to them her message. Less careful than they might have been, the young men instantly started at runners' speed for the king's camp. The two spies had not proceeded far on their way when they w^ere seen by one of Absalom's followers. Their persons were well known ; their running betrayed their errand. Before they had got as far from En-rogel as that place is from Zion, they saw horsemen toiling up the hill in pursuit. Fortunately the spies had a friend in Bahurim, to whose house they ran for safety. His wife was at home. With a woman's quickness she hid them in a bottle-shaped well or corn-pit, which happened to be in the house-court, threw a covering over it, and spread peeled barley above. Owing to the hilly ground, the pursuers had lost sight of the runners. On reaching the house they found the woman in the court grinding barley for family use. AVhen asked about the two runners, she says she saw them, but they had gone over the brook of water. If the pursuers stopped to search the house, and if the woman's story were true, the runners would have so much the more time to escape. And when Absalom's men did cross the brook and search in vain on the other side, the 346 The Kingdo77i of A II- Israel : its History, woman would have cause to triumph by twitting them with their loss of time at the crisis of the chase. When they were out of sight on the road back to Jerusalem, the runners left their hiding-place and hastened to report to David the plan of Ahithophel. The king and his captains saw the danger of their position. With all haste they set themselves to place the Jordan between them and the enemy. By daybreak not one of the fugitives was on the western side of the river. The tide had at last turned in David's favour. The same morning, which witnessed David's army safe across the Jordan, saw Ahithophel riding forth from Jerusalem. In the accept- ance by Absalom of Hushai's policy, he read the ruin of the rebel cause. Chaorined, too, at finding himself thrust down to the second place, Ahithophel preferred death to the dis- grace of being again humbled in council, and to the certainty of being called to account for his treason. He reached his own city of Giloh ; he set his affairs in order, and then hanged himself in his own house. The anointing of the rebel chief by the high priests followed immediately after. Meanwhile David liad reached Mahanaim, a well-known city of Gilead, situated among the rich fields of the granary of Syria. Friends from all quarters gathered round him. Of his immediate helpers, three are specially mentioned, Barzillai, Shobi, and Machir. They stocked the palace at Mahanaim with everything fitted to promote the comfort of the women, children, and soldiers who accompanied the king. A long and toilsome journey lay before the fugitives after crossing the Jordan. On both sides of the river the air was fiercely hot. But the kindness of these great men supplied all the neces- saries and many of the comforts of life when they reached the city. Nor is this kindness the only outstanding feature in the matter. Shobi was a son of ISTahash, and dwelt in Eabbath-Ammon. He may have been viceroy of the conquered country. Machir was the kindly noble who sheltered Mephibosheth till David took him into favour. The Avenger of Blood. 347 He was now paying back that kindness by favours, which might have made David Wush for his injustice to the poor cripple on the previous day. The language used regarding the three nobles shows they displayed a genuine outpouring of affectionate regard for David, not obedience to a command they dared not disobey. But otlier friends soon hastened to the king's standard. Old soldiers whom he had often led to battle flocked to his court as the only centre of hope for the land. The palace of Ishbosheth, which may have been occupied by David during these months of exile, was guarded by an army of twenty thousand trusty men,-^ before Absalom had gathered all Israel and got ready the ropes which were to pull the city to the neighbouring stream. Arranged in com- panies and divisions, all under leaders of tried skill, they waited for the storm to burst from the other side of Jordan. Amasa lost no time in gathering his levies. Prom the rapidity of the rebel movements and the forwardness of their preparations, David considered him to be possessed of powers of organizing an army in no way inferior to Joab's. When tidings arrived of the rebels' approach, so high w^as the spirit of the royal troops that they marched to meet the enemy, instead of waiting to receive their attack behind the city walls. David himself wished to lead the army. As his life and crown were the prizes of battle, it did not become him to shrink from danger. But all his advisers opposed the step. Even the soldiers entreated him not to leave the cit}-. Between David and his men there was the affection inspired by mutual regard, by common hardships, and by a common ^ This estimate may be accepted as a fair guess, for — (1) The army or the chiefs said that the enemy wouUl count the king's life equal to or rather more than the lives of half their whole number (2 Sam. xviii. 3) ; and (2) They immediately add that he was equal to ten thousand soldiers. (3) The numbtn- of rebels who appear to have fallen hy the sivord in tho battle which followed was twenty tliousand (xviii. 7), a number sufficiently striking to affect the imagination of the royalists, as if each loyal sword had taken the life of a rebel. 34^ The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, cause. His leadership was firmly declined. All would fight with stouter hearts if they knew he were in a place of safety, and if they were free from the confusion which might arise from his hurt or death. And the chiefs had not forgotten the risk run by David not long before in the war with the Philistines, nor their vow that he should never be allowed again to expose himself in the field. With one voice they insisted on leaving him behind in Mahanaim. A sufficiently strong plea for this arrangement was soon found. ' Stay with the reserves in the city/ some one, with pardonable craft, proposed to the king ; ' bring them up if we require help, and pluck the glory of victory by deciding the battle.' David found himself compelled to remain as commander of the garrison. The three brigades into which the royal army was divided were commanded by Joab, Abishai, and Ittai. As they marched past the king in the city gate, soldiers and people heard his charge to these officers, ' Be gentle for me with the young man, with Absalom.' The place chosen by Joab as a battlefield was near enough to be reached by David with fresh troops, to retrieve a lost day or to save a beaten army from destruction. Others also besides the general had studied the ground, and knew the roads from it. Amongj these was the runner, Ahimaaz. The scene of battle was known as Ephraim's Wood, evidently from the Ephraimites who perished in the war with Jephthah a century or two earlier. Two roads led to Mahanaim, one through a plain girt about by hills, and another across the ru(?fTed ground at their feet. Absalom mio-lit take either or both of these roads. As his forces were largely drawn from the tribes which acknowledged the authority of Ishbosheth, when that prince reigned in Mahanaim, there were not a few in the army competent to direct its movements. Eeliance on these guides may have misled both Absalom and Amasa. Joab and his fellow-chiefs deemed it safest to meet the storm of war near the junction of the two roads. While their rear The Avenger of Blood. 349 was tbiis comparatively safe, for the reserves under David rendered it dangerous for the rebels to throw themselves between Joab and the city, their ]30sition on the foot-liills gave them an advantage over an undisciplined rabble. The broken ground, on which they seem to have been drawn up, enabled their small front to face a superior force. Eight before their position the road northward stretched through a wood of oaks, tamarisks, and other trees. Gently rising heights, wholly free from timber, and open glades of sur- passing richness, here and there offered an easy line of march to the rebel army ; but in most places the road was so broken up by watercourses and ravines, that the passage into easier ground beyond would weaken the spirit of a mere militia unaccustomed to the hardships of war. Plunging into a steep glen, then slowly climbing the opposite bank, then toiling for a short distance through the underwood of the forest, and repeating this sort of march for hours, the troops of Absalom, weary and broken, were slowly nearing the ambush at the outlet from the wood, where their veteran foes were posted.^ As the rebel army did not expect to meet the enemy outside the city, no precaution was taken against surprise. Absalom and Amasa may have thought the royal forces afraid to face them in the field. But when the leading ranks of the rebels cleared the wood where the hill path left the plain, an unpleasant meeting awaited them. The holiday march of these dreamers of triumph was at once stained with blood. A brisk attack from the skilled and fresh soldiers of Joab threw their ranks into confusion. Their prince, unprepared for battle, without his helmet and riding among the advanced 1 ' Rising, as the couutry does, suddenly from the deep vaHey of tlie Jordan, it is naturally, along its whole western boi-der, deeply furrowed by the many streams which drain the district ; and our ride was up and down concealed glens which we only perceived when on their brink, and, mounting from which, on the other side, a short canter soon brought us to the edge of the next. ' — Tristram, p. 462. 350 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History. troops on the king's^ mule, tlie symbol of a king's peaceful progress, had not even time to seize his arms. The wearied rebels, footsore, broken, and panic-struck, are driven back into the wood. There is no battle ; there is ruin on all hands, confusion, flight, and death. Not a moment is given to them to rally. The very evil came on the mighty host, which Hushai described so well when he counselled Absalom not to risk a night attack on David's camp : ' When some of them be overthrown at the first, whosoever heareth it will say, There is a slaughter among the people that follow Absalom ; and he also that is valiant, whose heart is as the heart of a lion, shall utterly melt.' At the first clash of arms Absalom hurried to the rear through the wood. The prince was not fleeing from the enemy. He had shown courage too often before to allow us to take this view of his conduct. He seems to have been carelessly riding in front when his men fell into the ambuscade of Joab. By chance ' he was met by the servants of David.' Unpardonable carelessness he was cer- tainly guilty of, but there is nothing in his conduct to warrant a charge of cowardice. Though within a few miles of the enemy, he has neither guards around him nor trusty servants at his side. He counted himself as safe as if he were makin;]: a royal progress through a friendly canton. The horses and chariots which he paraded in Zion, and which he would not exchange for a mule's back on the field of battle, are not at hand. The faithful servants, who had shown themselves ready to die for him under less favourable circumstances, sink out of sight as if they had never existed. Manifestly the vainglorious prince was snared to his fate by the belief, that David's veterans would not meet his rope-drawing rabble in the field. Turning the mule's head, the scared prince hurried to the rear. He was hasting to gain his chariot and his guards and his captains. But he was not destined to reach that shelter. As he swept in headlong riding under a branch- ^ ' Riding upon the mule,' 2 Sam. xviii. 9. The Avenger of Blood, 351 iiig oak, similar to many still met with in tliat region, liis liead was entangled in the drooping boughs, while his long hair, flying behind him from the hardness of the pace, was whirled round and twisted amid the foliage.^ The mule galloped from below him, itself frightened by the sounds of war behind. The reins fell from the grasp of the stunned rider. Absalom was left hanging, snared by his own beauti- ful and vaunted locks. He was unarmed. He had no sword to cut the hair rope or saw the branch and let himself to the ground. He may also have been at first too much stunned by the suddenness of the shock to think of freeing himself with his own hands. He was hanging a helpless prize to the first pursuer who reached the spot. He was long in being discovered. Not unlikely he had wisely determined to sweep at some distance round the flank of his own soldiers as the surest way of reaching his guards, without causing alarm among the troops as they entered the battle. And there he swung midway between heaven and earth, the unworthy receiver of a nation's love. He had been careless of the lives trusted to him ; the same carelessness was costincj him his own. If Joab's swordsmen did not come to end his misery, he might hang from that tree till, in fulfilment of a Hebrew proverb, the ravens of the valley plucked out his eyes ; and hunger, with slow and painful steps, wasted his handsome body. Meanwhile the swords of the royalists and the fears of the rebels had converted the first flight of a few into a headlong rout of the whole army. Absalom was not at hand to direct his officers or cheer his men. The idea that he had fallen in the first passage of arms or been taken prisoner, if it once gained ground, would undo all the bonds that held the army together. Amasa and every chief under him would feel their power gone. The want of Absalom at the crisis of battle ^ ' As I rode under a grand old oak tree, I, too, lost my hat and turban, which were caught by a bough.' — Trktrarn, p. 463. 352 The Kingdom of All-Is7^ael: its History, relieved tliem of the disgrace of defeat and the responsibility of command. The panic grew as tidings of the foe passed to the rear. Only the presence of Absalom could check its progress, and steady the ranks of the rebels. A great unwieldy host, unaccustomed to act together, and wearied with a toilsome march, is suddenly assailed by a compact body of veterans springing on them from ambush, whom they imagined too terrified to venture beyond the city walls. From the height of confidence these raw troops pass at once to the depths of despair. Their leader, the only common bond they had, suddenly disappears. All is lost almost before a blow has been struck. Driven back on the treacherous wood which they have just left, the fugitives find worse enemies in its marshes and ravines than in the swords of the enemy. Twenty thousand fell before the veterans ; a larger number were trodden to death by their comrades, or met a worse end from accidents or wounds and from want of food and water among the ravines of the wood. The oak in which the prince was snared, while this slaughter lasted, seems to have been off his soldiers' line of flight. For some time none of the pursuers approached the spot. At last one of them, roaming about, a mere straggler it would seem, recognised the rebel chief. He might have slain him secretly, but having heard the king's orders to spare the young man's life, he hurried off to report the discovery to Joab. A considerable time elapsed, but no other came near the oak, and Absalom remained fast fixed among the branches. Joab was angry with the soldier for not killing the rebel on the spot ; for the death of Absalom was the surest means of crushing the rebellion. And a fear, lest he may have dis- entangled himself and escaped, made Joab both bitter and hasty in dealing with the discoverer of the prince. Ten silver pieces and a girdle would have been the reward had the soldier thrust him through where he was hanging. But the man bluntly told Joab that a thousand pieces in his hand The Avenger of Blood, 353 would not have persuaded liim to disobey the commands of the king. And he added, with the boldness of a free-born soldier, that had he done as Joab wished, Joal) himself would have been the first to accuse him to the king. In the words whicli passed between the soldier and the general, we see most clearly the regard entertained by the army for David, and the contempt with which they judged the proceedings of Joab. But there was not time to discuss the matter. Absalom might escape, and the fruits of the victory be lost. Hastily snatching up three pointed rods, and summoning ten of his bodyguard, Joab hurried towards the oak. From the rudeness of the weapons thus hastily seized, we must infer that the Hebrew general was unarmed ; a strong proof of the security he felt in the want of enterprise on the part of Absalom and his officers, and an equally strong proof of the importance he attached to his office as commander-in-chief. The prince was still hanging from the tree. On coming up, Joab at once struck him. But though the rods were thrust into his body, the strokes were not mortal. The ten guards- men standing round gashed the living, Vv^rithing form with numerous wounds. Their chief had set the example. Sucli excitement as might arise from the greatness of the conse- quences that must follow the deed, and from the consciousness that he was openly defying the king, unsteadied the hand of Joab; excitement caused the guardsmen to deal these bar- barous wounds. But the story of the prince's capture had spread among the ro^^al troops. Many were running towards the spot. Soon a great crowd gathered round the oak, witnesses of the guardsmen's butchery. A few stood at a distance, hanging on the outskirts of the crowd, and knowing something of what was passing. Unable to prevent a breach of the king's orders, they kept themselves aloof from a deed in which they could take no part. As soon as the prince was dead, Joab saw the time was come to stop the carnage and the pursuit. The rebellion expired z 354 ^^^^ Kingdom of All-Israel : its History, with Absalom's last breath. Every drop of blood shed after- wards would only delay the return of David to Jerusalem. As Joab turned away from the scene of the prince's butchery to stop further bloodshed, one of the men on the outskirts of the crowd requested leave to run to the city with tidings. It was Ahimaaz, the son of the high priest Zadok. A request so reasonable, preferred by a man of standing, could not well be denied. But as the king's son was dead, Joab refused leave. Feeling that the story of Absalom's death was too revolting to be detailed to the king, he preferred to send tidings of the battle by one of his own creatures. The Cushite, apparently a negro servant of the Hebrew general, seemed better fitted for the mission. ' Go, tell what thou hast seen,' were the orders given in public, whatever else may have been said in private. The Cushite, proud of the honour, bowed low to his master, and hurried, by the shorter but more difficult road across the hills, towards Mahanaim. Meanwhile the trumpets had sounded to stop fighting. The royal troops, returning from the pursuit, were mustering round the mangled body of Absalom. A great pit, used it may be by the country people for snaring game or wild beasts, was discovered not far off. The dead body was dragged thither and thrown in. A huge cairn of stones was then raised over the grave by the victorious troops, to mark the spot as a place which should be shunned or spat on by passers-by in all time coming. No such memorial did the vain prince hope to leave as a remembrance of his greatness. His sons had all died in infancy. In a transport of grief at their loss, he spoke as if he were doomed to go down childless to the grave ; he bewailed his want of a remembrance among poRterity. The dead stone of a lordly monument might supply in some measure the loss of living representatives. The King's Dale, near Jerusalem, the resort of the citizens of Zion, furnished a fitting site for the memorial; the pillars, the pyramids, the tombs of Egypt, furnished examples to The Avenger of Blood. ODD imitate. Accordingly he built a pillar or tomb, known in Jerusalem as Absalom's Hand. The cairn may still exist in Gilead; but the Hand of Absalom, though spared by David on his return from Mahanaim, has long since been swept away. While the army was thus engaged, Ahimaaz again urged Joab to grant him leave to bear tidings to the king. The general, unwilling to comply, but conscious that he had sent an nnworthy messenger, endeavoured to dissuade the young priest. But Ahimaaz still entreated permission, as if he either were a favourite of the general, or had been appointed the king's runner. Twice was his prayer refused ; another was sent in his stead ; but he persisted in his request. At last he receives permission : Joab bids him ' run.' There had been a purpose in these repeated requests. Ahimaaz knew he could outrun the Cushite. Instead of taking the shorter and more difficult hill path, Ahimaaz turned towards the longer but easier route by the plain. Meanwhile David was expecting tidings from the army. He knew the time when the armies would meet, a clear proof of nearness to the wood of Ephraim. Seated between the two gates that fronted tlie quarter in which a runner would first be seen, David was ready to send succour or to cover a retreat. At the coming of the king, a watchman went up to the top of the gate above the spot where he was sitting. Suddenly his voice broke the stillness, ' A man runninir alone.' ' He has tidino'S, then,' the king remarked to his retinue, and rising, repaired to the gate which the man was approaching. 'Another man running alone,' exclaimed the sentry from the tower, directing his words towards the gate,^ which the king had then reached. * He also brincjeth tidin<'s,' were the words in which David concealed his fears on hearincj of another runner. A sinG^le runner could only be a messenger, whether of good or of evil. ^ * To the porter' in our version, a pointing of the Ilclirew whidi it is agreed by the best commentators to discard. ' To the gate ' is the correct rendering. 35^ The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History, But two runners, following close on each otlier, might be urgent and more urgent messengers for help, or might be the first fugitives from a broken army. As the first runner came on apace, the watcher recognised his stride and figure as those of Ahimaaz. The name was a welcome relief to David when called out by the sentry. ' He is a good man,' he said, ' and Cometh with good tidings.' Adonijah, now his eldest son, appears to have been at his side and heard the words. He treasured them in his heart and copied tliem on a future day. The face of the runner, as he drew near, showed the nature of his message. His breathless eagerness allows him to utter but one word in answer to the still more eager looks of David's retinue : ' Peace,' he cried. That one word revealed the result of the battle. He was too much overcome by his exertions to add a word of respect or explanation. Touching the ground with his forehead in token of homaf^e, he com- municated his tidings to the king with a solemnity befitting his standing as an heir to the high-priesthood : ' Blessed be the Lord thy God, which hath delivered up the men that lifted up their hand against my lord the king.' Assured of the result, David's first thought was for the safety of Absalom. A higher motive than a father's fondness prompted the question, ' Is the young man Absalom safe ? ' But Ahimaaz could not or would not tell. He had hung on the skirts of the crowd that gathered round the tree when the ten guardsmen cut down the prince. He had heard the shouting, and perhaps suspected what was on foot; but he prefers to let Joab tell his own tale of blood. Meanwhile the Cushite is nearing the gate. Ahimaaz is bidden stand aside among the king's retinue. The negro runner arrives. With the eagerness of one new to the honour of bearing despatches, he calls out, ' Tidings, my lord the king.' Ahimaaz, with the easy courtesy of a high-bred noble, had heralded his news with the ordinary salutation, ' Peace.' But the Cushite is proud of his office : ' The Lord hath avenged thee this day of The Avenger of Blood, 357 all them that rose up against thee.' Again David's fears come to the surface ; his first inquiry at Cushi is for the safety of Absalom. ' The enemies of my lord the king be as that young man is/ was the answer of the runner. ' Mucli moved ' was David at the words. Tears flowed down his cheeks ; with heavy sobbing be went up to tlie guards' chamber over the gate, and as he went, his sorrow burst forth in words : ' 0 my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom ! would God I had died for thee, 0 Absalom, my son, my son !' There was no attempt to hide this outburst of grief. His counsellors could not have concealed it had they wished. David himself was overpowered by the shock. He does not bury the sorrow in his heart till he reaches the palace ; but struck down by overmastering anguish, he seeks the nearest place of refuge, the guard-room over the gate. Through its latticed window all who passed heard the king's wail for an unworthy son. This was no common grief. The probability of Absalom's death was present to David before the armies engaged. He took every precaution to save the prince's life ; he could not be taken by surprise if these precautions failed. Even the question put to both the runners showed the current of his fears, it might almost be said, of his expectations. Fondness for a misguided son cannot explain this depth of sorrow. A rebel has met his death on the field of battle ; the king whom he attempted to dethrone, instead of rejoicing at his people's victory, is over- whelmed by grief at the rebel's fate. Looking at the circumstances of the case as they lie on the surface, David's grief is inexplicable. He seems to have utterly forgotten the king in the man, and the man in the father, while we feel withal that even the fondest father would have shown more decency in his sorrow. But this surface view of David's sorrow, though justly resented by the people as an insult to their faithfulness, was not the right view. Fondness for the young man was not the 35S The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. cause of this grief, any more than fondness for Bathsheba's son was the cause of David's first display of excessive sorrow. In both cases his heart seemed ready to burst ; in both cases the recoil from grief to composure was equally sudden ; and in both the servants were unable to control or account for their master's sorrow. The same cause had been silently at work during the long years which elapsed between them. A father's fondness could not be that cause. Tor many years David and Absalom had seen little of each other. They had become strangers in feeling, and strangers by high-handed deeds of blood and violence. For many years, seven at least, tliey had seldom spoken to each other ; for five of these they had not seen each other's face. Besides, Absalom had usurped a place in the empire which David knew he was never destined to fill. In seizing the throne he had also outraged natural affection. When we sum up these causes of estrange- ment between father and son, it seems contrary to the workings of humanity to ascribe David's grief to fondness for Absalom. The world has never seen aught approaching to this faulty tenderness of nature in a king or in a man. But the theory of such tenderness is unfounded. David had deeper causes for grief than he could avow to the world. When, ten years before, ' he fasted and lay all night on the earth' during the sickness of Bathsheba's infant son, the sword of the Avenger had only begun to strike his life. When Absalom fell, that sword had been twice bathed in his children's blood, and thrice, too, it had cut the tenderest chords of family life. A fourfold restitution was the punish- ment David ordered for the stealer of the poor man's ewe lamb : a fourfold punishment — Bathsheba's infant son, Tamar's cruel fate, Amnon's death, and the shame of the ten women left to keep tlie palace — had not satisfied the Avenger of Uriah. But a fifth blow falls on his household : Absalom is slain, when his life might have been saved and the arm of the Avenger stayed. ISTo escape from the doom uttered by The Avenger of Blood. 359 Nathan seems possible now. Every previous blow liad been unavoidable, so far as David's power to avert it was concerned. Absalom's death in battle he feared and endea- voured to prevent. But for Joab, the prince would not have died. Never before did David fully realize the doom uttered against him, * The sword shall never depart from thy house.' A dim outline of coming sorrow at first floated before his mind. As blow after blow descended, the outline was filled in with startling details, and this last stroke of the Avenger had completed, as it w^ere, the distinctness of the picture. Hope of a remission of punishment was now gone for ever. The shock was greater than a sensitive mind could bear ; a weak mind would have lost its balance. David was bidding farewell to hope, a farewell which could not be bidden without uncommon grief. His heart fainted at the prospect of other strokes from the Avenger's sword : his grief burst all the barriers of royalty, and of gratitude to his victorious soldiery. Joab was the first to learn the effects of Absalom's death on David, and gradually the tidings spread among both officers and men. A sense of injustice pervaded all ranks. They had risked everything for the king. And now, when they have cleared the way for his safe return to the throne, they are saluted at their liome-coming with tidings of his excessive o-rief for a rebel, who met the end he deserved. With that sense of ridit which actuates men in the circumstances, the army felt the unworthiness of this return for their services. The king's smile and approving w^ords were the boons they fought for. But these they were denied. As they approached tlie city, their fears of an unwelcome reception were confirmed. Not the slightest show of gladness had been prepared for the victors. Their waives and daughters ought to have met them with songs and dances. But gloom and sorrow are reigning in the city. The king is giving vent to his grief. It was not the home-coming of a triumphant Hebrew host ; it was the stealing into the city of soldiers ashamed of their conduct, aud o 60 The Kingdom of All-Isi'acl : its History, to whom their couutrymen and countrywomen would not extend a welcome. Before the army reached the city, David returned to the palace from the gate chamber. There was no abatement of his grief. With muffled^ head, and with deep sobbing, he continued to bewail his son. Joab, ever rough and ever faithful, forced his way into David's presence. ISTeither guards nor servants could keep him out of the chamber, hateful though his presence was to the king. The man who had caused this wild grief is allowed admission. He believed he had done the king and his family effectual service by j)utting Absalom out of the way. Probably unbiassed minds found little fault with Joab, except the cruelty of his ten guardsmen. David himself, king and statesman as he was, felt that much could be said in favour of the high-handed act, otherwise he never would have admitted him to an interview. With sharp reproaches Joab puts a new danger before David. The wrong- doer is not the general, but the king. The army, he says, has stolen into the city like beaten men ; there was no welcome for them, no pride taken in their triumph. They have saved David and his wives and children : David in return has affronted them. He has loved his haters, and hated his friends. Princes and soldiers count as nothing in his estimation when weighed against Absalom. ' Ptise,' he said, as if David lay stretched on the earth, ' go to the gate of the city, otherwise the men who have fought for thee will all leave thee before morning, a worse evil than any that has befallen thee from thy youth.' The remedy was rough, but the cure was effectual. David saw the danger ; perhaps also he felt the unworthiness of his grief. It was not yet sunset. There was still time to thank the soldiers for their services in his cause. Orders were passed to the various divisions of the ^ The Hebrew word for deal gently (with Absalom) (1 Sam. xviii. 5) in David's charge to Joab, is the same as muffied (head) (1 Sam. xix. 4). The phiy upon the word, and the thrust in it at Joab, are evident. The Avenger of Blood. 361 army to muster in tlie city gate. David was tliere waiting to review them, precisely as he had done when they marched out to meet the rebels. The murmurs that were beginning to rise were laid to sleep. Cheerfulness again reigned througliout the host, and disaster was avoided by the rough but prudent firmness of Joab. Although the rebellion was broken, the spirit which gave it power still lingered west of the Jordan. David had lost the affections of the people ; their new king had fallen in battle, and there was not one of his followers competent to fill his place. The empire seemed to be again drifting on the rocks, which split it into fragments in the days of Saul. But there was a party in the land, especially among the central and northern tribes which, though small in numbers, had yet the prudence to shape public opinion into a recognition of David as the only safety of the country. The death of Absalom emboldened them to speak their sentiments freely. * Absalom is dead,' they are reported to have argued, * and there is none among us able to guide the destinies of the kingdom. Our neighbours are biding their time to impose on us the yoke of slavery. There is but one leader on whom w^e can rely ; there is but one tower of safety for us.' Tlie counsels of these king's friends, as we may call them, were the more readily listened to because Amasa, the general of Absalom, was then in Judah with the wreck of the rel)el army. Although the rising in favour of Absalom had been general throughout the kingdom, its strength lay in David's own tribe ; in that canton also the embers of rebellion smouldered longest. But the other tribes were more prudent in their manac^ement of affairs. Overtures had been made to David to resume the headship of the nation. Bat the men of Judah hung back in sullen estrangement. The high priests, Zadok and Abiathar, once so influential, had lost all power. Evidently the leading men of the tribe felt they had sinned too deeply for forgiveness. A proposal to the king to o 62 The Kingdom of All-Israel : its History. forget the past was more than they dared to make. Peace must come from the king who had conquered, not from the broken tribesmen. David was not disposed to push his advantage to extremities against the rebels. With the support of the other tribes, it would have been easy for him to crush the sullen remnant in Judah who still stood aloof from owning his authority. Many in that tribe would probably have joined him. But calamity had softened David's heart. He was also looking for a general to take the place of Joab, whose disregard of orders could not be allowed to pass unpunished. Hitherto the wars, in which the nation had been eng[a2;ed, had brouo-ht to li^ht but one man fitted to o'overn an armv. In vain had the kingj endeavoured to shake himself free from employing that man. There was blood on his hands crying to Heaven for vengeance. But now, for the first time since Abner's death, an opportunity was presented of displacing Joab. During the rebellion Amasa had shown a rapidity in action, which pointed him out to David as worthy to command the army. And as soon as the king heard of the movement among the other tribes, he resolved to secure Judah by offering Amasa the place filled by Joab. Instructions were accordingly sent to David's friends in Jerusalem, especially to the priests Zadok and Abiathar. A longer delay might witness the tide of loyalty rising so high among the other tribes that it would be at the peril of Judah to hold back. David's horror of Joab carried him a step too far. A pardonable regard for his own tribe carried him even farther. Much better would it have been for him to have undertaken the chief duties of Joab's office himself. But the appointment of Amasa was unwise. A beaten rebel was not a leader whom the troops of David would follow. In eao'erness to degrade Joab, the kinej was degrading himself and his soldiers. Henceforth treason became the surest road to office. * My brethren are ye,' ran David's message to Judah, ' My bone and my flesh are ye.' The A vcngcr of Blood. 363 He Avas quoting the words of submission, used long "before when All-Israel came to Hebron to make him king. It is a peculiarity of the historian in Samuel to quote other writers, and to quote words recorded by himself also. Under this sunshine of royal favour the sullenness of Judah rapidly gave place to exceeding loyalty. Before the other tribes were ready, perhaps even before they were all fully warned of David's purpose to return, the men of Judah had assembled in force at Gilgal, near Jericho, to escort the king to Jerusalem. The men of Benjamin were also repre- sented. Shimei, the Benjamite, whose stone -throwing and cursing gave him reasonable cause for apprehension, was of the number. A band of a thousand men, all belonging to his own tribe, attended him, an earnest at once of his power and of the disaffection his punishment might cause. Ziba, the servant of Mephibosheth, had come himself, and had brought with him his fifteen sons and twenty servants as friends of Shimei. Probably Shimei's knowledge of Ziba's doings compelled Ziba to maintain an appearance of friendship with the foolish stone-thrower. But this ill-timed partiality for Judah produced unexpected fruit. Only one-half of Israel was in time for tlie meeting at Gilgal. Murmurs, open and alarming, told their dissatisfaction with the favour shown to Judah. The men who acted worst and hung back longest stood hifrhest in the kinsj's recrard, from Amasa, the rebel chief, and Hushai, who seemed to the world the rebel prime minister, down to the humblest of the tribe of Judah. Nothing but a skilful leader was wanting to work greater trouble than Absalom had given. Meanw^hile the king, with his household and his men, approached the eastern bank of the river. The place chosen for the crossing was at one of those reaches of the Jordan where the stream spreads over the country, and allows an easy passage during the summer and autumn months. A ferry boat had been got ready for the women and cliildren. 364 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Histoij. Soldiers and others went over by the ford before the king.^ The western bank was thus held by David's guards before he himself ventured to cross. Almost the first man who met him on the shore was Shimei, come to crave pardon, with a whole ' thousand ' of Benjamin to back his petition. Abishai, Joab, and other officers stood beside David as the traitor approached. Casting himself on the ground, he confessed the wrong he was guilty of, and urged as a plea for pardon that he was first of all the house of Joseph to bid the king welcome. Abishai could not listen with patience to these unmanly pleadings. The soldier who had been faithful to his oaths could not endure this cringing of a baffled rebel. With justifiable indignation Abishai interposed the question, ' Shall not Shimei die because he cursed the Lord's Anointed ? ' The true soldier spoke as he felt, and as all others around him probably felt. But it was a rash question. Abishai thrust himself into a matter of which he was not the judge. And he did this before a crowd of listeners. His words, if allowed to pass, might alarm thousands of other traitors besides Shimei. He took the reins of justice out of David's hands by proposing a punishment most just in itself, but most impolitic in the circumstances. Whatever David's own purposes may have been, the question of Abishai forced from him an uncondi- tional pardon. He was driven into a corner by one of his most faithful followers. A rash word from the king, an attempt to impose conditions on Shimei, would give rise to endless reports and fears. The punishment of the rebel leaders was only put off; the discarding of Joab was a mere blind, and the appointment of Amasa was no guarantee for a ' An unfortunate division of the verse 2 Sam. xix. 17 has completely mystified the meaning. It reads thus (17) : 'And there were a thousand men of Benjamin with Shimei, and Ziba, the servant of the house of Saul, and his fifteen sons and his twenty servants with him ; and thej'- went over Jordan before the king. (18) And there went over a ferry boat to carry over the king's house- liokl.' The arrangement is clearly wrong ; it should be : (17) ' . . . his twenty servants with him. (18) And they (i.e. the king's own people) went over Jordan before the king : and there went over . . .' The Ave7iger of Blood, 365 traitor's safety. David was, perhaps, never before in so dangerous a position, when a word fitly spoken would still the gathering storm, or a hasty answer awaken the fears of a nation. Wliatever he might have done had Abishai not spoken, there was but one course open to him after the soldier's luckless meddling — reproof to the one, pardon to the other; rebuke to a loyal retainer, favour to a traitor. * With you and your brother,' he said, * I have no community of feeling ; ye are my evil genius.^ No man shall die to-day.' Then, turnint^^ to Shimei, he added, ' Thou shalt not die,' and he confirmed his word by an oath in the name of Jehovah. Shimei was no friend to his throne or his race. At the first opportunity he would endeavour to overturn the former and destroy the latter. But the word passed for mercy David most faithfully kept. He was suspicious of Shimei ; no trust could be reposed in him. Events had proved him to be a blunderer and a coward. But he was an intriguer from whom more danger might be dreaded than from bolder men. Shimei himself could not expect ever again to win the king's confi- dence. He was a man against whom ordinary prudence required David to be on his guard. At this great meeting in Gilgal two friends parted from David, with honour to the king in the one case, with dis- credit in the other. Barzillai, the Gileadite noble, had accompanied him as far as the ferries. He crossed the river, but declined the king's pressing invitation to go up with him to Jerusalem. He was eighty years of age, he enjoyed in abundance everything the earth could yield, but the pleasures of a court were without attraction in his eyes. To die in his own city, and to be buried beside his father and his mother, were the prayer of this wealthy noble. He had sustained the king's household during these months of exile : ' Come with me,' the king said, ' and I w^ill sustain thee with me in Jerusalem.' David might have promised him higher and better things ' Literally, ' For Satan to me,' o 66 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History than eatino- and drinking-, sinoinrr men and sinmnij women — thinGfs, too, more suited to the ac^e and standiuf:^ of them both. Even the Queen of Sheba showed to better advantage, in her conversation with Solomon, than David in his invitation to Barzillai. But though the aged noble would not go to Jeru- salem himself, he asked the kinsj to extend a welcome to his son Chimham. David gladly consented. He did more. He seems to have made the son in some way a member of his own family, and to have given him a home or an estate near Bethlehem. More than four centuries afterwards, ' the so- journing place of Chimham beside Bethlehem ' appears in the history (Jer. xli. 17). But while the parting of David from Barzillai was a source of honour, his parting from Mephibosheth was a disgrace. ' When Jerusalem came to meet the king ' at Gilgal, the helpless cripple was among the crowd. '■ Wherefore wentest thou not with me V David asked. ' My servant deceived me/ he said. ' I wished to go, but he went off with the ass that I told him to saddle, and he forbade his sons to help me. He hath slandered me to the king. But my lord is as an angel of God. I was honoured by the king, and have no right now to complain.' David's conscience was uneasy. He knew the worth of Ziba's loyalty. Jonathan's son ' had neither dressed his feet, nor trimmed his beard, nor washed his clothes,'^ while the king w^as an exile from his capital ; but his servant was an associate of David's worst enemy, and had secured his master's inheritance by the basest slanders. It was an unaccountable perversity of judg- ment to let the slanderer escape punishment. But it was a cruel act to say to the poor cripple, the son of his earliest and sincerest friend, ' Why speakest thou any more of thy matters ? I have said, Thou and Ziba divide the land.' ' Let him take all,' Mephibosheth replied, ' since the king is come again in peace.' ^ This is a proof of the short life of Absalom's rebellion, — perhaps only three months (2 Sam. xxiv. 13). The Avenger of Blood, 367 A stormy discussion at Gilgal between tlie leading men of the two divisions of the people disturbed the return of the king. High words passed between them in David's presence, which he had not prudence or ability to prevent. Dissatisfied with the part assigned to them, the men of Israel complained of the offensive leadership sought for Judah. Although form- ing ten parts of the kingdom,^ they were treated as inferiors, whose duty was not to advise, but to obey. The chiefs of Judah answered these just complaints with reproaches. Their own shortcomings during the past year ought to have given another turn to their thoughts. But the softness of speecli which turns away wrath had no place among the soldiers of Judah. So fierce became the battle of words, that the peace- ful meeting at Gilgal resembled the beginning of strife between two sections of the empire. As ill-timed as it was unwise was David's favour towards unworthy Judah. A leader was soon found for the disaffected Hebrew^s of the Ten Tribes, as unreasoning as were the people themselves. Passion and unreason forced the multitude to arms ; there was no thought of the incompetence of the chief who called them to the field, or of the unfitness of their array to cope with the soldiers of David. A man of Benjamin, Sheba-ben- Bichri, cjave the simal of revolt ; he is called a worthless person. ' Portion in David have we none, and inheritance in Jesse's son none : every one to his tent, Israel,* was the proclamation he issued at Gilgal by sound of trumpet.' Most of the members of the Ten Tribes appear to have retired to their own homes, dissatisfied and helpless. David they would not follow ; Sheba they could not trust. On receiving tidings of the rebellion of Sheba, David ordered Amasa, the new commander-in-chief, to assemble within three days the fighting men of Judah. Either they had returned home from escorting the king, or only the chief men had gone down to Gilgal. Zion was named as the ^ For the explanation of U)i parts, see above, p. 262. o 68 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, meeting-place. But the new commander was either too slow in action, or found difficulties on which David did not reckon, for the three days passed without any signs of him or his forces. Tlie king became alarmed ; soldiers might gather round Sheba ; or fortresses not yet recovered from the grasp of Absalom's party might admit him within their walls. So many were the indications of disaffection throughout the kingdom, that David said this adventurer had it in his power to do him more harm than Absalom. By gaining over to his side two or three strongholds, he could make them rallying- points for evil-minded men. Months might pass before they could be carried by the royal troops. Eebellion might then break out in other places and under leaders of greater name ; the tributary nations would seize the opportunity for revolting, and the delay of a few days might lead to the shaking of the whole kingdom. Aware of the danger, David saw the neces- sity of employing another officer, and perhaps, also, more reliable troops. ' Now,' he said to Abishai, ' take thou thy lord's servants and pursue after him, lest he get him fenced cities and escape us.' This was a most unwise com- mission to issue. It betrays David's distrust of Amasa's capacity or his loyalty. Nor could he hide from Joab and Abishai, any more than from himself, the mistake he had committed. There was only one safe course ; he ought to have gone himself on the expedition for which he selected Abishai. But instead of keeping every one in his own place by a little self-denial, he remains behind in Jerusalem, and trusts a general whom he had lately reprimanded, and whose brother he had disgraced. Following on the unfair dealing with Mephibosheth, this fresh blunder may be looked on as an additional proof of a growing weakness of j)urpose in the king. Although Joab had ceased to be commander-in-chief, ' the six hundred ' were under his orders. They knew his skill as a commander ; many of them had been enrolled at the first The Avenger of Blood. 369 formation of tlie band in the Cave of Adullani. These tried soldiers, with the guards of the palace and the order of the ' Mighties,' marched northwards. Abishai was the general in command, but, as Joab was in the army, every soldier knew that their real chief was the disgraced commander. At the Great Stone of Gibeon, on the highway leading to the north, they met the troops raised by Amasa. That officer at once assumed the command of Abishai's forces.^ Probably a desire to make the two brothers feel their inferiority had as much to do with the act, as the more worthy motive of uniting the whole army under one head. Joab, pretending friendship, advanced from the ranks of the six hundred to salute his superior officer. The two men were cousins, or brothers, according to the language then current. Joab was armed with a short sword, sheathed and hanoino- from his girdle. It was unusual with him to carry arms, for special notice was taken of the fact that day. As he approached Amasa, the sheath, by accident or awkwardness, got turned upside down, and the sword fell to the ground. But it was done of set purpose. Stooping down, Joab picked up the weapon ; and as he w^as too near his cousin to return it to its sheath with- out a breach of politeness, he advanced with the naked sword in his left hand. Amasa saw nothing to be afraid of He was a general at the head of his army ; the officer coming to salute him was his own cousin. ' Art thou in health, my brother ? ' Joab asked. Then, according to the custom of the East, he took hold of Amasa's beard with his right hand, as if to kiss his cheek. But when the victim was thus caught, with his left hand Joab buried the dagger in his cousin's right side. One gash was given, not with a faltering, but with an unskilful hand. Amasa's bowels, shed out on the ground, presented a sickening spectacle as he fell in his blood in the middle of the king's highway. 1 ' Amasa went before them ' (2 Sam. xx. 8). Compare 2 Sam, x, 16, * SlioLach weut before them ;' the meaning is, was their leader, or eommunder-iu-chief. 2 A 3/0 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its History. A more dastardly murder could not have been committed. The general of an army slain by one of his own officers on the highway, and in presence of his soldiers, who imagined, like their chief, that the murderer was but saluting the commander ! But the horror which the deed everywhere awoke touched the throne of David. Abner perished by Joab's hands at the end of one civil war : Amasa perishes in like manner at the end of another. Abner was bought over by David from the opposite side, but did not live to enjoy his reward : Amasa is bought over with the same price, and is murdered by the same assassin, before he had fully entered on office. David had only one way of escape from the charge of complicity in Joab's guilt, and that was by Joab's death. But Joab was too strong to be thus punished ; or, more truly, David was too weak. Even the king's warmest friends must have felt that blood unavenged was defiling their master's throne. All pretence of serving under a superior was thrown aside by Joab. He took the murdered man's place ; he gave orders as of old ; the soldiers, accustomed to obey, followed their former chief. But the feeling of confidence in Joab was not general among the new levies. They stood still, as they came up to the spot where Amasa was breathing out his life. For a leader so foully slain, it wanted but an angry voice and a ready hand to arm these soldiers against Joab. The longer they stood, the often er they heard the story of the murder ; and the greater the numbers that gathered round, the more imminent was the risk of a pursuit of Joab by those wdio had taken up arms to pursue Sheba. But one of Joab's officers had been left behind to guard against this danger. ' He that favoureth Joab,' he cried, ' and he that is for David — after Joab.' The appeal was made in vain. Seeing the danger, the officer removed the dying man from the highway into the field, and threw a cloak over the body. Since there was no one so forward for Amasa as was this man for Joab, the The A veiigei" of Blood. 371 soldiery began to move from the spot. Joab had again won with the sword the prize, which David had now twice vainly attempted to WTest from his grasp. The rebels soon found that a soldier wdiom there was no trifling with had command of the king's army. No walled town w^ould receive them ; or, if it did, the approach of the pursuers forced them to seek another place of refuge. Their numbers also began to fall off. Men of standing did not join them. Sheba continued to be their head. Joab's forces grew in numbers the further the pursuit was continued, for every city and village was showing its loyalty by sending men to aid his enterprise. At last the rebels were hunted into the walled city of Abel-beth-Maachah in the distant north. It w^as surrounded by the royal troops; an earthen mound, thrown up at some distance from the wall, was rapidly pushed forward towards the city. Already had the embankment reached the trench. Tlie battering- engine, swinging across, w^as shaking the wall. The defenders, too few or too cowardly, were doing nothing to prevent these preparations for assault. But the elders of the city w^ere afraid to propose a surrender to Sheba, or to open their gates to Joab. They were between the hammer and the anvil. Sheba and his men had them in their power for the time ; in a few hours Joab would arraign them for harbouring traitors. In this emergency the courage of a woman saved her people from a great calamity. Standing on the wall, she demanded a parley with Joab. He was soon ready to hear her proposals. Apparently the city had been at one time the home of a man of wisdom and uprightness, to whom people from a distance applied for advice. Eeminding Joab of the name for wisdom which the place thus came to enjoy, the woman reproved him for attempting to destroy a mother city in Israel, a part of the Lord's inheritance. The general denied the charge ; he wanted nothing but Sheba-ben- Bichri, the rebel. The terms were easier than the rebels counted on. Aware of this, the woman at once promised to 2i*]2 The Kingdom of A II- Israel: its History, throw Sheba's head over the walL Xor was it difficult to persuade those within the town to pay this price for deliverance. In a brief space the head of the rebel chief was thrown out to Joab. The royal forces at once returned to the south, and the rebels dispersed to their own homes. A second time, mainly by Joab's skill and rapidity of action, had the storm of civil war been turned aside from the throne of David. There was at last peace in AU-IsraeL Eut there was not contentment. The king himself, able from his high place and accurate knowledge of aftairs to look deeper than other men, knew there was much cause for fear. Shimei, with his powerful backing of Benjamites, suspected, if he did not know, that he owed his life to the ill-judged meddling of Joab's brother. Abiathar, too, was a disappointed man. The high-priesthood, which he counted a birthright of his family, he found himself compelled to share with a rival, Zadok. And Joab felt that he held both place and life at the sword's point. But these three were types of many more, who only waited a chance to throw themselves into the whirlpool of civil strife. CHATTEE XIT. THE CLOSE OF DAYID'S REIGX. (2 Sam. xxii.-xxiv. 25 ; 1 Kings i. 1-ii. 11 ; 1 Cliron. xxi. 1-xxix. 30.) Of the events wliicli took place during the last eight or nine years of David's reign, only two have been recorded ; the one of them, indeed, serves as introduction to the other. First was his sin in numbering the people ; tlien his preparations for building the temple. Whatever the sin may have been, it was the nation's as well as his. The ven^jeance, that had acjain and again fallen on the king's house in former years, disposes us to connect the punishment that came of numbering the people with David's sins and their consequences. But this is an error; for the sin that brought down the punishment was Israel's, not David's only. The writer of the books of Samuel goes farther ; his v/ords are : ' And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel' The corresponding passage in the book of Chronicles is : ' And Satan stood up against Israel.' While the former recorded two sins of Israel, the latter recorded only one, for the omission of the word ' again ' from the Chronicles is evidently not an accident. But the sin of Israel, recorded in the one book and passed over in the other, is the slaughter of the Gibeonites by Saul, a matter that had no connection wdth David and his house. Whatever, therefore, the sin of the nation may have been, it is clear that the punishment fell on them for their own doings, not for David's. Twice before had Moses numbered the soldiers of Israel, in both cases with the approbation of God. And repeatedly 374 The Kingdom of A II- Israel : its Histo7y. in after ages was the census of Judali taken and entered in the sacred books. But for following in the footsteps of Moses, David drew down vengeance on his people. Evidently, under- neath the surface of the story, something is hid away which is needed to explain the sin and David's sorrow. A difference of opinion prevailed among the king's advisers. Joab and the military men were strongly opposed to liis design. They retained their dislike to it even while the numbering was going on, and at last left the work unfinished. Something in the temper of the army, that is, the whole body of men in the country, lay at the root of this opposition. It may have been the tax of a half shekel which all those numbered had to pay. Small though it seems to us, and inadequate as a cause for grumbling, it ceased to be small when six or eight sons in one family had each to pay the half shekel. It was also an addition in money to existing taxes in kind, which were not light under the monarchy. And in that country money w^as scarce among Hebrew farmers ; it would be largely unknown. But if a money tax were exacted then, it might not only be repeated, but be the beginning of larger demands. No numbering had taken place for four centuries ; the tax had fallen into desuetude. To revive it was to lay a burden on the army, which Joab and his captains, who knew the temper of the soldiers, feared might lead to rebellion. Pielieve them of the tax, and the grumbling would lose its foundation. But to relieve them of the tax was to insult the lawgiver, and to expose the soldiers to his indignation. By paying the tax to the sanctuary in a lump sum, David might hope to satisfy the law, and quell the discontent of his soldiers. But if he adopted this plan, he would break the law himself, and involve the whole nation in his guilt. In the darkness which covers the subject this explanation may be accepted as a hypothesis, which gives reasons for Joab's repugnance to the numbering, for the guilt of the people, and for the guilt of the king. Comparing the numbering of David with that of Moses, we The Close of Davicfs Reign. 375 remark a broad difference between tlieni. Moses was com- manded to take the census of the able-bodied men in the Hebrew host. David not only had no such orders, but was strongly opposed by some of his best officers. Then there was a reason for the numberings by Moses ; there is none given for that of David. The land to be divided among the twelve tribes lay before the great lawgiver : a fair and equal parting of it into lots could be managed only by ascertaining the number of soldiers or families in each tribe. Lut though the king did not receive orders to take a census, as Moses did, he had permission from tlie law-book to take it at any time deemed proper. Punishment must therefore have descended on the nation, not for the mere act of numbering its able- bodied men, but for the unrecorded purpose involved in that numbering. The census was the first step towards some further piece of statecraft ; but so speedily did punishment fall on the nation, that the policy thus begun was quietly allowed to drop, and never figured in its records. At the end of his reign David completed the census left unfinished by Joab. According to both accounts of this numbering, the tribes of Levi and Benjamin were not counted, ' for the king's word was abominable unto Joab.' But there is added in the Chronicles, that ' by the last words of David the Levites were numbered from twenty years and above.' It could not. there- fore have been the taking of the census that drew down on Israel the vengeance of Heaven ; there was something deeper, unrecorded, but perhaps not unknown. It is maintained by several writers that the sin of David was his neglect of the law, which required the payment of a half shekel to the sanctuary for every soldier at the numbering. Ignorance or disregard of this law, in their view, led the king into a grave mistake, precisely as a like ignorance, twenty years before, delayed the removal of the ark for three months from Kirjath to Jerusalem. But this explanation of the guilt is liardly tenable. There is not the slightest ground for attri- 2,"/ 6 The Kingdom of All-Israel: its Histoiy. "billing to David either ignorance or disregard of this payment. A plague was certainly the punishment threatened if it were neglected/ But David was offered a choice of punishments, plague, famine, or, perhaps, civil strife. The fact of a choice having been given disproves this view of the sin. And its advocates overlook the strong opposition offered by Joab and his fellow-captains to the king's wishes, before a step was taken to number the people. David's chief soldiers based their dislike to the measure on other "rounds than a neglect to pay the appointed fine to the sanctuary. With an nnwillingness which he took no pains to conceal, Joab began the work. The autumn heats were passed when he crossed the Jordan and began his review of the Hebrew militia in the plains, not far distant from the place where Moses numbered Israel Moving northward and westward, Joab at last reached ' the strono-hold of Tvre,' from which he journeyed southward to the utmost border of Judah. For nine months and twenty days he was engaged in the number- ing. Even then it was not finished, for Levi and Benjamin were left nncounted. The ' strano-ers ' scattered throucjhout the land were carefully numbered, as he journeyed from place to place ; but the priests and Levites, who were also located in different parts from, one end of the country to the other, were not entered on his rolls. David's policy, whatever it may have been, allowed Joab to dispense with a census of the tribe of Levi, but not with a census of the men of alien blood. Even the time spent in the work, if nothing more was done than number the soldiers of each district, seems excessive. A country so small as Israel, and so thoroughly under command, ^ Ewald is of opinion that the plague punishment threatened for neglect of the half shekel payment was added in Ex. xxx. 12 by a later writer, because a plague did befall the Hebrews in David's time immediately after a census. This turn- ing of history upside down may be ingenious and bold. But Ewald forgets to state that the word used for ^:)?ar/?