The NewCentury Bible ^ 1 6^11 Kings ;* JAN 3 1910 *] Division T^SA^ Settioa \ ■ Volumes already published or m preparation : — NEW TESTAMENT. 1. MATTHEW, by Prof. W. F. Slater, M.A. 2. MARK, by Principal Salmond, D.D. 3. LUKE, by Principal W. F. Adeney, D.D. 4. JOHN, by the Rev. J. A. McClymont, D.D. 5. ACTS, by Prof. J. VERNON Bartlet, M.A. 6. ROMANS, by the Rev. A. E. Garvie, M.A., B.D. 7. I AND II CORINTHIANS, by Prof. J. Massie, M.A., D.D. 8. EPHESIANS.COLOSSIANS, PHILEMON, PHILIP- PIANS, by the Rev. G. CuRRiE Martin, M.A., B.D. Q. I AND II THESSALONIANS, GALATIANS, by Prin- cipal W. F. Adeney, D.D. 10. THE PASTORAL EPISTLES, by the Rev. R. F. HORTON, M.A., D.D. 11. HEBREWS, bv Prof. A. S. Peake, M.A. 12. THE GENERAL EPISTLES, by Prof. W. H. Bennett, D.D. 13. REVELATION, by the Rev. C. Anderson Scott, M.A. OLD TESTAMENT. GENESIS, by the Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett, Litt.D., D.D. JUDGES and RUTH, by the Rev. G. W. Thatcher, M.A., B.D. I and II SAMUEL, by the Rev. Prof. A. R. S. Kennedy, M.A., D.D. JOB, by Prof. A. S. Peake, M.A. I and II KINGS, by the Rev. Prof, Skinner, D.D. PS ALMS(Vol.I) I TO LXXII.by the Rev. Prof. Davison, D.D. PSALMS (Vol. II) LXXIII to END, by the Rev. Prof. Davison, D.D. ISAIAH, by the Rev. Principal Whitehouse, M.A., D.D. MINOR PROPHETS: Hosea, Joel, Amos. Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, by the Rev. R. F. HORTON, M.A., D.D. MINOR PROPHETS : Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, ZechARIAH, Malachi, by the Rev. Canon Driver. D.D. THE NEW-CENTURY BIBLE KINGS OXFORD HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY /js- ^-%% sr^l "^ >A^ General Editor : Principal Walter F. Adeney, M.A., D.D. ^in^e INTRODUCTION REVISED VERSION WITH NOTES INDEX AND MAP EDITED BY ,- REV. PROFESSOR SKINNER, D.D. NEW YORK: HENRY FROWDE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, AMERICAN BRANCH EDINBURGH : T. C. & E. C. JACK The Revised Version is printed by permission of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge CONTENTS PAGE Introduction i Text of the Revised Version with Annotations 55 Appendix : Note I. On the Site of Solomon's Buildings . . 440 Note II. On the Stor}' of Jeroboam in the LXX . 443 Note III. On the Chronology of the Reigns of Amaziah, Azariah, and Jeroboam II . . . 447 Index 449 Map of Syria, Assyria, and Babylonia. Plan of Jerusalem. THE BOOK OF THE KINGS INTRODUCTION I AND II KINGS INTRODUCTION I. Historical and Religious value of the Book. The historical writings of the O. T. (from which we exclude the five books of the Law) are in the Hebrew Canon sharply divided into two groups. The older group, consisting of the four books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, bore the title of ' The Earlier Pro- phets,' and forms the first half of the middle or Prophetic division of the Canon ^. The later group was placed in the third part of the Canon (the so-called ' Writings * ^ That Samuel and Kings formed each but one book origin- ally is clear from the unnatural interruption of the narrative ui. the points of section ; and is besides amply attested by external evidence. The partition was first made in copies of the LXX, where our books of Samuel and Kings appear as the First, Second, Third and Fourth books of * Kingdoms.' From the LXX the division found its way into later versions ; it was not introduced into Hebrew Bibles until after the inven- tion of printing (second Bomberg Bible, 1517 a. d.). A trace of the secondary character of the partition even in the LXX remains in the fact that the Vatican MS. repeats in both cases the first verse of the second book at the end of the first book. This difference between the Hebrew and Greek texts was known to Origen and Jerome, the foremost representatives of Hebrew scholarship amongst the Fathers. Thus in Origen's list of O. T. books quoted by Eusebius {Ht'st. Eccl. vi. 25. 2) we read, ' First and Second Kingdoms, amongst them (the Jews) one — Samuel, ^'the called of God," Third and Fourth Kingdoms, in one— Ouammelch David, which means "the Kingdom (sic) of David."* Similarly Jerome, in his Prologus galeatus, speaks of ' Samuel, which we call First and Second Kingdoms,' and 'Kings, which is contained in the Third and Fourth volumes of Kingdoms.' We are therefore thoroughly justified in treating the Book of Kings as a single work. B 2 4 I AND II KINGS or Hagiographa), and was composed of the two books of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, which in ordinary editions of the Hebrew Bible stand (in reversed order) at the close of the whole collection. To this diflference of canonical position corresponds a marked diversity of character, which may best be expressed by saying that the two groups represent the labours of two distinct historical schools. The outstanding feature of the earlier group is what is termed the Deuteronomic redaction ; that is to say, these books were thrown into shape and edited (in ways to be afterwards explained) by a school of writers who were influenced by the ideas of the Book of Deuteronomy. The other group (with which we are not further concerned) was produced at a much later date by an editor or editors whose standpoint, broadly speaking, was that of the Priestly Code \ The aim of a commentary on Kings is, of course, not to rewrite the history of the period by the help of the material which the book supplies, but to explain the history as written by entering as fully as possible into the point of view of the writers concerned in its produc- tion. And since the Book of Kings is on the whole the most complete and typical specimen of Hebrew historical writing which the O. T. contains, it is desirable to com- mence with some consideration of (i) the conception of * Since the Deuteronomic redaction extends over all the books Joshua to Kings, the question is naturall}'' raised whether they may not originally have been a continuous work, which was afterwards split up into four volumes. That cannot be proved to have been the case : the differences which appear in the redaction are too considerable to be readily accounted for by the assumption that they were all edited by the same hand. At the same time, it is true that the original sources from which the history was compiled run on from one book into another, and the division of these sources is somewhat artificial and arbitrary. It is interesting also to note that in the Lucianic recension of the LXX edited b^' Lagarde, the partition of Second and Third ' Kingdoms ' occurs after i Kings ii. ir of the Hebrew text (see Introductorj' Note to i K. i, ii.). INTRODUCTION 5 history to which the book owed its inception, and (2) the literary method which determined its form. I. Writers on the science of history commonly recog- nize three distinct types of historical literature. There are first ftarrative or descriptive histories, whose object is simply to communicate or commemorate facts, and where the writer has no extraneous interest in his subject, but seeks merely to convey to his readers an accurate and vivid impression of the events whose importance has excited his attention. Then there is the large and influen- tial class of didactic or pragmatic historians, who look on history as a storehouse of political or patriotic or ethical or religious lessons, and write it for the instruction or edification of their contemporaries. Lastly, there is the scientific or genetic view of history, which aims neither at being picturesque nor instructive, but seeks to exhibit events in their true relations to the great social and spiritual movements to which they owe their ultimate significance ^ This last point of view is an almost ex- clusively modern development, and can hardly be said to be represented in antiquity at all. But the other two are almost equally ancient, and go back to near the fountain-head of written history. Thus, amongst classical historians, Herodotus, the ' father of history,' is generally regarded as a representative of the narrative style, and Thucydides and Tacitus of the pragmatic'*. And of ancient histories in general it may be said that they belong to one or other of these two types, or else combine the characteristics of both. To which, now, of these two classes shall we assign the Book of Kings ? At first sight it might appear impossible to give a decided answer. The book contains some 1 See Bernheim, Lehrbuch der historischen Meihode (1894), p. 14 ff. ^ The term pragniatike historia appears to have been first used by the Greek historian Polybius, in the second century B.C. (Bernheim, 1. c). 6 I AND II KINGS purely descriptive passages, like the story of Solomon and Adonijah, or the account of Jehu's revolution, which produce the impression of having been written without any motive except an aesthetic interest in the thrilling series of events which they narrate. And alongside of these we might place the numerous annalistic statements of fact which, though destitute of literary charm, are nevertheless in themselves entirely free from personal predilection or didactic purpose. On the other hand there are many sections, such as the stories of Elijah and Elisha, or the narrative of the man of God at Beth-el (in I K. xiii), where the desire to enforce a religious lesson is unmistakably manifest. But the important point is that if we consider the book as a unity, and fix our attention on its persistent and characteristic features, we cannot fail to observe that it is dominated throughout by the aim of making the history a vehicle of moral and religious teaching. Interwoven with the narrative is a perpetually recurring strain of comment and application, the avowed purpose of which is to point out the great lessons which were seen to be exemplified in the past history of the people. And when we read the book in the light supplied by these comments, we find that nearly eveiything it contains is subservient to the main end of impressing these lessons on the minds of the readers. What the lessons are we shall consider more particularly when we come to deal with the standpoint of the author (p. isfT.j. For the present it is enough to recognize that the Book of Kings is essentially a didactic history, in which, how- ever, a certain element of purely narrative histor>' has somehow been incorporated. 2. The last remark leads us to notice a no less im- portant distinction in respect of method between the historiography of the O. T. and that with which we are familiar in modern times. The writing of history on a large scale necessarily involves the use of written authori- ties, which are the historian's sources of information for INTRODUCTION 7 events beyond his own personal knowledge ; and nothing is more characteristic of the historical practice of the O. T. than the manner in which these authorities are dealt with. The modern history is a free and original composition, setting forth the view of the author and the conclusions he has reached after careful criticism and comparison of all the sources accessible to him. The \ Hebrew historian, on the other hand, was as a rule a/ compiler rather than an independent author; instead of writing a new account of the course of events as it shaped itself in his mind, he simply selected from the documents at his disposal passages which he deemed worthy of preserva- tion, and then transferred these extracts bodily to his own pages. The method differs entirely from the mere quota- tion of authorities by modern writers ; for it is only in the rarest instances that the source from which a passage is taken is indicated. The notions of literary property and plagiarism had not then been thought of; and writers who advanced no pretensions to originality for themselves were guilty of no imposture when they borrowed without acknowledgement from their predecessors. The evidence for these general statements is drawn from the historical literature of the O. T. as a whole. It is found that these writings without exception have originated in the manner just described ; and a gieat part of the labour of scholars is directed to disentangling the various elements which enter into the composition, and to assigning each to its proper source. Hence we may reasonably anticipate that the same composite structure will be exhibited in the Book of Kings ; and if the expectation should be confirmed, it will furnish a complete explanation of the alternation of descriptive with didactic sections which was spoken of above. For though it is certainly possible that such a combination might occur in the work of a single historian, it is much more natural to suppose that it arises from the collocation of different documents, some of them written with an interest different from the compiler's, and display- 8 I AND II KINGS ing a power of graphic and artistic narrative rarely found in union with a fixed homiletic bent of mind. These observations will perhaps suffice to indicate the general character of the work with which we have to dea^ At the same time they determine the lines on which the exposition of the book must proceed, and guide us in forming an estimate of its permanent historical and re- ligious value. First of all, bearing in mind the didactic and hortatory aim of the writing, we shall not expect it to give a com- plete view of the natural sequence of events. We shall not be surprised if prominence is given to occurrences of religious importance, to the neglect of matters which though interesting in themselves belonged more to the sphere of secular history. Still less need we look for an analysis of the subtle play of social and political forces which lay behind the phenomena, and which it would be the province of a modern historical investigator to explore. The Hebrew mind traced events directly to the agency of Providence, and attributed to each event an indepen- dent significance as an expression of the Divine will. Each, therefore, conveyed its own lesson ; and nothing was lost by isolating it from its connexion with other events, provided it had a meaning unmistakable enough to be read by its own light. Although this conception of history may not satisfy all the demands of the intellect, it would be an utter mistake to suppose that it is vicious in principle, or destructive of the sense of historic truth. It is easy to understand the discredit into which the pragmatic method in history has fallen; but none the less it represents a point of view which cannot be rendered obsolete by any improvement in the conception of human development. That the past experience of a people as recorded in its national history is fitted to yield valuable guidance for the present and the future is a conviction too well established to be overthrown ; and therefore, when the scientific historian has said his INTRODUCTION 9 last word, there will always be room for a writer of a dififerent cast of mind to point out the lessons which the present may learn from the past. Most of all is such a treatment justified when the point of view is religious. The investigation of secondary causes, whether in nature or in history, does not exclude the belief in a Divine purpose unfolding itself through the manifold processes of the finite universe ; and in the great crises of universal history the mind instinctively recognizes the presence and action of the Almighty. Who will say that the significance of an event like the destruction of Jerusalem is not more truly apprehended by the religious writer of the Book of Kings than by one who should regard it merely as an incidental result of the advance of mankind to a higher material civilization ? In the second place, we must not overlook the immense advantages of the Hebrew practice of incorporating earlier sources in the text. In default of the modern devices of footnotes and references to extant documents, it is difficult to conceive any method which could better serve the ends of genuine historical study. The authorities thus imbedded in the narrative are necessarily nearer to the events than the author of the book ; and in certain cases we can be sure that they reflect the impressions of first-hand contemporary observers. To disentangle these original sources is no doubt a laborious and delicate operation ; but in so far as it is accomplished, it puts us in possession of independent points of view, which not unfrequently throw light on matters passed over in silence by the editors of the book. We are thus enabled in some degree to trace the growth of religious ideas from the various stages at which the several docu- ments were written down to the age of the latest editor who has left distinguishable marks of his individuality in his work. Such, then, are the conditions of study imposed on us by the nature and composition of this instructive portion lo I AND II KINGS of Scripture. The O. T. appeals to the religious mind in two ways : first as a direct word of God to the soul, and secondly as the record of a historic revelation, given to men in the past, of the Divine character and purpose. The two can never be wholly dissociated ; but it is certainly the case that they appear with varying emphasis in different sections of the sacred literature. In the Psalms and the prophetic writings, for example, the note of inward religion is so direct and powerful that, without much acquaintance with the circumstances in which the words were written, the devout reader may hear the voice of the living God speaking plainly to his heart and conscience, and be lifted into true and saving fellowship with Him. Even there, it is true, half the profit of the message will be missed, unless the words be read in the light of the conditions which called them forth. But in those parts of the Scriptu -e to which the Book of Kings belongs there is obviously less of this immediate and self-evidencing appeal to the heart. On the other hand, they are of inestimable value as a record of the process by w^hich the revelation came to be, and of the facts in which inspired men recognized the presence of God in their national life. And here the historical method of study is almost indispensable to any profitable use of the writings. We need to realize, more fully than we have yet learned to do, that God was present in the history itself, not merely in the words in which the history is recorded, or in any theory of the history which may be current in a particular age. The nearer, therefore, we can come to the actual facts— the solid unimpeachable realities— of Israel's history, the better we shall understand the Divine training of that chosen race to be the bearers of revelation to mankind. II. The Framework of Kings. From what we have now learned of the general character and structure of Kings it is obvious that the INTRODUCTION ii first step in the analysis of the book must be to trace the process by which it was first thrown into something Hke its present shape. It so happens that this inquiry is facihtated by a very clear indication of editorial activity, viz. the recurrence of a regular series of notices by which the different reigns are introduced and concluded. This set of formulas constitutes a sort of framework, by which the narrative is at once held together and at the same time divided into definite compartments ; and its structure is so uniform as to make it practically certain that the scheme was carried through by a single writer. It will appear afterwards that the author of the ' framework ' was the first to arrange the material in its present order, and is therefore entitled to be regarded as the main compiler of the Book of Kings ^ It is worth while to look somewhat closely at the structure of this framework. The complete Introductory Formula for the kings of Judah embraces the following items: (a) the date of accession according to the year of the contemporary king of Israel (w^hich we shall call for brevity the Synch7'07iisni) ; {b) the age of the king at his accession ; [c] the duration of the reign ; {d) the name of the queen-mother; {e) a judgement on the religious character of the reign. The corresponding formula for the kings of Israel is similar in form as regards «, c, and e\ but is simplified by the omission of b (the age of accession), and d (the name of the queen- mother). The Concluding Formulas contain {a) a refer- ence to the proximate source (see p. 23) from which the author has drawn some of his materials ; {b) a notice of the king's death and burial ; and [c) the name of his successor. With the exception of the Synchronisms, which were possible only for the period of the divided monarchy, the framework is applied consistently and with ^ There are several facts, however, which suggest that the ' framework ' in a somewhat simpler form was found in the proximate sources employed by the compiler. 12 I AND II KINGS few intermissions to the whole history, from the death of David (i K. ii. lo) to the accession of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah (2 K. xxiv. i8f.)^ The entire absence of either formula is extremely rare. And although fragments from the annals are frequently taken up into the frame- work, there is only one case (or at most two) where any considerable part of the narrative has been allowed, as it were, to slip out of the framework altogether ; i. e. to appear between the conclusion of one reign and the introduction of the next : 2 K. ii (xiii. 14-25). How far these irregularities are designed, and how far they are due to alterations of the text, is a question that has to be considered for each case separately ^. Now, even in the bare and formal statements of the framework there are several indications that its author is the person mainly responsible for the selection and disposition of the historical material of which the book is composed, (i) The chronology of the framework furnishes the key to the somewhat peculiar arrangement of the parallel histories of Israel and Judah. The method adopted is to treat the affairs of each kingdom indepen- dently, and carry forward the narrative till it reaches the end of a reign in which a change of sovereign has occurred * A feeble imitation of the framework appears also in the books of Samuel (i Sam. xiii. i ; 2 Sam. ii. 10, 11 ; v. 4, 5 . These have all the appearance of an attempt to extend the chronological system of Kings backwards to the earlier history. ^ For minor variations (which are numerous but uin'mpor- tant;, displacements, &c., the reader must be referred to the Text (where the framework is marked by the letter D) and the Notes. The Introduction is nowhere entirely omitted except for the reigns of Jeroboam I, Athaliah, and Jehu : the Conclusion only in the cases of Jehoram of Israel, Ahaziah of Judah, Athaliah, Hoshea, Jehoahaz of Judah, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah. In all these instances it is possible to assign plausible reasons for the omission ; but it still remains doubtful whether the cases of Jehu, Jehoram, and Ahaziah are not rather to be explained by subsequent disturbances of the text. (Sec the Notes ad he.) INTRODUCTION 13 in the sister kingdom. Then the records of the other monarchy are taken up, and continued in Hke manner, till they have gone beyond the date at which the first series stopped. Such an arrangement is obviously im- possible without the control of a systematic chronology ; and since the order corresponds perfectly with the data of the framework there is a presumption that both proceed from the same author. (2) The manner in which the writer of the framework refers to written documents for information which is not to be found in the book strongly suggests that he has exercised his personal judgement as to the matters that ought to be embodied in the history. (3) But the most important point is that in the religious judgements of the introductory formulas the writer reveals a definite theory or point of view, which could hardly fail to exert an influence on the historical presentation as a whole. These judgements involve several religious principles : e.g. the duty of whole-hearted loyalty to Yahweh and the sinfulness of idolatry in all its varied forms and degrees. But their most distinctive feature is the idea of the exclusive sanctity of the Temple in Jerusalem and the illegitimacy of all sacrificial worship of Yahweh at other shrines. This is the meaning of the constant complaint that 'the high-places were not taken away' even by the most pious sovereigns of Judah (except Hezekiah and Josiah) '. The same principle underlies the uniformly unfavourable verdict on the kings of Ephraim ; for it is expressly pointed out in i K. xii. 27 that the ' sin of Jeroboam '—the erection of the golden calves —was a deliberate defiance of the authority of the central sanctuary at Jerusalem. Now this idea was first intro- duced into the public religion of Israel by the promul- gation of the law of Deuteronomy in the reign of Josiah (see ^ The connexion is seen especially from i K. iii. 2, where it is intimated that the sacrifices of the high-places were at any rate a venial offence so long as no central Temple existed. 14 I AND II KINGS on 2 K. x\ii f.) ; and indeed the framework itself testifies that it had been ignored by every ruler down to that time, with the solitary exception of Hezekiah (see on 2 K. xviii. 4). We thus learn that the author of the framework must have written after the publication of the Deuteronomic Law, and that his mind was so imbued with its teaching that he applied its central idea retrospectively as a measure of the religious condition of the people from the time when the Temple was built. It might almost be anticipated that a writer holding such a view of the inner significance of Israel's history would leave other and clearer traces of his individuality on the book. III. The Compiler and his Standpoint. We are therefore led to examine whether, apart from the framework, the Book of Kings contains any expression of what may be called the Deuteronomic standpoint. And the answer to that question is not difficult. Through- out the book we find a number of passages, easily separable from their context, which are strongly coloured not only by the spirit and ideas, but also by the language of the Book of Deuteronomy. Associated and often intermingled with the Deuteronomic phrases we find also a set of stereo- typed expressions, figures of speech, &c., which, though not found in Deuteronomy itself, are characteristic of the style and vocabulary of the particular writer who inserted the Deuteronomic passages in Kings ^; so that in most cases it is an easy task to distinguish his work from all other elements of the composition. The sections thus isolated are marked in the text by the letter D, and will be seen to be nearly all of the nature of comments designed to elucidate and enforce t'ne religious lessons of the histor)\ It cannot of course be absolutely proved that they are from the same hand as the framework ; but ' Lists of both sets of phrases are given by Driver, IntrodHC- Won", p. 200 ff., and Burney, in DB, ii. p. 859 ff. INTRODUCTION 15 since both represent an identical standpoint, and the character of each is essentially editorial, it is at least a reasonable assumption that they are the work of the same writer. If this be the case, the proof that the author of the framework was also the compiler of the book becomes almost irresistible. For, as the framework constitutes the formal unity of the history, so the Deutero- nomic passages impart to it a unity of spirit and purpose ; and if both are contributed by the same writer we need not hesitate to speak of him as the real author of the Book of Kings. It was remarked above (p. 6) that the author of Kings, whoever he might prove to be, belonged to the class of didactic historians. This estimate is now fully confirmed both by a survey of the contents of the book and by an examination of the Deuteronomic passages which we assign to the compiler. From the former we learn that he had little interest in political affairs as such — important reigns like those of Omri and Jeroboam II being dismissed with a few meagre notices, while events of an ecclesiastical character, such as the building or repair of the Temple, or the finding of the Law, are described at great length. Thus the mere selection of material, apart from his own comment and reflection, shows that the writer's dominant interest was religious. When we turn to the passages which form his individual contribution to the work we are enabled to define his position and purpose more exactly. The general principle which he desires to enforce is clearly expressed in such places as i K. ii. 2-4 (David's charge to Solomon), ix. 1-9 (God's second appearance to Solomon), 2 K. xvii. 7-23 (review of the history of the northern kingdom), &c. It is, in one word, the principle of retribution— the truth that fidelity to Yahweh is rewarded by national prosperity, and unfaithfulness punished by national misfortune. The standard of fidelity is, as we have seen, the Book of Deuteronomy ; and the writer's purpose is to show how 1 6 I AND TI KINGS the ideas inculcated in that book have been those which moulded the destinies of the nation throughout its past history. The Deuteronomic ideas most insisted on (besides the doctrine of retribution) are : (a) the exclusive right of Yahweh, based on His choice of Israel as His special possession, to the whole-hearted allegiance and worship of His people; (d) the necessity of maintaining that worship in its purity, uncontaminated by heathen elements, whether in the shape of material representations of Yahweh or the association of false gods with His service ; (c) the restriction of sacrificial worship to the central sanctuary at Jerusalem. The Divine element in the history is symbolized by the three great theocratic institutions of the Temple, the Davidic dynasty, and Prophecy, each of which represents an aspect of Yahweh's gracious presence with Israel, and affords an external test of the people's attitude towards Him. In the neglect or abuse of these institutions the writer finds a measure of the nation's declension from the religious ideal by which alone its true welfare was secured. From all this we see that the compiler is no mere religious antiquary, dwelling by preference on those matters in which he was specially interested, but writes with the serious moral purpose of impressing on his own generation, and those which might follow, the lessons which the national history was fitted to teach. It is not necessary to show in detail how the whole historical treatment is made subservient to the illustration of the principles that have just been stated; a few salient examples may suffice. The glories of Solomon's earlier reign are explained by the fact that he ' loved Yahweh, walking in the statutes of David' (l K. iii. 3). who is always held up as the ideal of kingly virtue and piety. The misfortunes of his later years are attributed to his introduction of foreign cults in his old age (xi. 9 ff.) ; and here the compiler's didactic aim has led him to modify somewhat the representation of the older sources on which his narrative is based (see p. 174). INTRODUCTION 17 The secession of the northern tribes is the judgement on Solomon's apostasy (xi. 29 ff.) ; but at the same time it leads to a permanent contravention of the Deuteronomic standard in the establishment of the calf- worship, which is always emphasized as the principal cause of the ruin of the northern kingdom (2 K. xvii. 21-23). Of the later Israelite kings, some— like Ahab— sinned more heinously than Jeroboam, and are singled out for special reprobation (i K. xvi. 31, xxi. 25 f.) ; and any striking exemplifications of the law of retribution in their case are carefully recorded (2 K. ix. 7 ff., 25 f., 36). In the quieter history of Judah the chief illustrations of the writer's religious principle are the sin of Manasseh, and the Deuteronomic reformation in the reign of Josiah. The former sealed the doom of Judah and rendered the destruction ot the state inevitable (2 K. xxi. 10 ff., xxiii. 26 ff.) ; while the latter availed to delay the final catastrophe (xxii. 19 f.), and possibly in the view of the original editor (see below) had been the means of averting the judgement entirely and saving the existence of the nation. We are not to suppose, however, that the compiler has yielded to the besetting temptation of the pragmatic historian, and sacrificed historical truth to the exigencies of a religious theory. There may be a few cases similar to that of Solomon mentioned above, where the material has been slightly readjusted in order more effectively to point the moral ; but over against these we find many instances where facts are faithfully recorded, although they are at variance with a rigid application of the doctrine of retribution. The verdict of approval stands against the names of several kings whom either the disasters of their reign (Amaziah) or the circumstances of their death (Asa, Jehoash, Azariah, Josiah) must have seemed to mark out as objects of Divine displeasure; and conversely, the severe condemnation pronounced on Ahab has not led the compiler to suppress the testimony of older authorities to his great achievements or many noble traits in his i8 I AND II KINGS character. The truth is that the lessons which the writer seeks to inculcate are those naturally suggested by con- templation of the history as a whole, and could therefore be conveyed by a straightforward narration of the facts from wliich they are drawn. It is undoubtedly true that the compiler has rejected a great deal of valuable material because it was irrelevant to the didactic purpose of his work ; but with regard to what he has retained, his pro- cedure seems to be that of an honestj fairminded, and reliable historian. IV. The Second Redaction and Date OF THE Book. Thus far it has been convenient to speak of the com- pilation of Kings as a single operation, and of the editorial comments as if they had all been contributed by the same writer. As a matter of fact, the Deuteronomic sections are so far homogeneous that the general conclusions we have reached regarding the scope and character of the book will not be affected by any subsequent discover)' of minor differences of standpoint which may be revealed by a closer inspection. The only question, indeed, which gives practical importance to these differences is the question whether the passages were written before or after the fall of the state. That the book was not finished till the latter part of the Exile is clear from the fact that the narrative is brought down to the release of Jehoiachin in the year 561 ; and the easiest supposition might seem to be that the compiler did not set to work till after that event. But against this we have to take note of certain indications that the main work of compilation was executed by a writer living before the Exile. Thus the hypothesis of a single redaction may prove to be insufficient ; the pre-Exilic book will have been continued by an Exilic or post-Exilic editor ; and the question will have to be considered whether this second editor merely added INTRODUCTION 19 a supplement at the end, or whether he undertook a more or less comprehensive revision of the work as a whole. The most obvious trace of a pre-Exilic redaction lies perhaps in the use of the phrase * unto this day,' with reference to conditions which no longer obtained after the downfall of the kingdom. The chief instances are i K. viii. 8, ix. 21, xii. 19 ; 2 K. viii. 22, xvi. 6 ; in all of which it will be seen that the phrase is either quite impossible or at least extremely unnatural in the mouth of a post-Exilic writer. It is true that in many cases the expression may reason- ably be assigned to the older documents from which the compiler drew his information ; and it has been suggested that he may have copied the words mechanically, heedless of the fact that they were no longer applicable to his own time. But since the phrase in any case presupposes a considerable interval between the events and the time of writing, since it is a characteristic phrase of the com- piler (cf. I K. ix. 21, X. 12 ; 2 K. xvii. 23, 41), and since it often appears not (as in 2 K. x. 27) in long extracts from earlier authorities, but in brief extracts culled from official annals, the theory of editorial inadvertence is not very probable ; and we are fairly entitled to assume that whether the compiler found the formula in his sources or not, he at least employed it intelligently and with deliberate reference to his own point of view. But this evidence does not stand alone. When we turn to the Deuteronomic additions, which were certainly composed by the editor, we find further signs that some of them presuppose the continued existence of the Judaean state and monarchy, (i) In several passages the language seems to imply that the Davidic succession in Jerusalem had never been interrupted down to the time of writing (es- pecially I K. xi. 36, XV. 4 ; 2 K.viii. 19). It is quite evident that in none of these places is the Exile contemplated, for the full promise is that the lamp of David's house is to burn continuously and continually in Jerusalem ; and such language would be altogether unsuitable if the writer had C 2 20 I AND II KINGS only in view the resuscitation of the monarchy after a long captivity. (2) Of a precisely similar character are some of the references to the Temple : it is spoken of as it it were still standing in the time of the Deuteronomic writer. 'I'hus in I K. ix. 3 it is said that Yahweh has put His name there for ever, and that His eyes and His heart shall be there continually. Again, in Solomon's great intercessory prayer (1 K. viii. 14-53— a Deuteronomic composition) the leading idea is that the Temple will endure through all future generations as the pledge of Yahweh's presence ; and while all sorts of calamities are anticipated as possible consequences of Israel's apostasy, the destruction of the Temple itself is nowhere hinted at. These two arguments have considerable force ; but it must be admitted that there is one consideration which to some extent weakens them, and leaves the conclusion more or less doubtful. It might be urged that the passages in question, while undoubtedly written by the compiler, express a Divine purpose which was conditional on the fidelity of the kings and people, and that the purpose had been frustrated by persistent rebellion on the part of both. This point of view is unambiguously expressed in i K. ix. 1-9, where, alongside of a promise of the perpetuity of the Temple and the dynasty, there is a direct threat of exile and the overthrow of the sanctuary in the event of disobedience. For this reason it is difficult to say for certain whether the writer was living under the shadow of institutions whose ruin might yet be averted, or whether he was looking back on great hopes irretrievably shattered through long-con- tinued violation of the conditions of Yahweh's favour. But even after allowance is made for that source of uncertainty there remains an impression that, if the Temple and the monarchy had actually ceased to be, the fact would have influenced the representation more decidedly than is the case in the passages considered. And that impression is strengthened by contrast with the terms in which the respite of the northern kingdom is spoken of in 2 K. xiii. INTRODUCTION 21 23 : ' Yahweh was gracious unto them . . . because of His covenant . . . neither cast He them from His presence as yet' (But see the note on the verse.) On the other hand, there are Deuteronomic sections where the Exilic or post-Exilic point of view is revealed without ambiguity. The clearest examples are perhaps ' 2 K. xvii. iQf. {where the Exile is referred to as an accom- plished fact), and xxi. 10-15, xxiii. 26 f., xxiv. 2-4, 20 (where it is irrevocably decreed by Yahwehj. Less decisive are i K. ix. 7-9 ; 2 K. xxii. 15-20. Now these are short passages ; and it is not immediately apparent whether they point to a systematic revision of the book or are of the nature of isolated post-redactional insertions. But when the Deuteronomic sections are re-examined in the light supplied by the existence of undoubtedly post-Exilic elements, it is found that a number of passages can be more naturally assigned to this post-Exilic writer than to the pre-Exilic compiler of Kings \ It follows that the first of the two alternatives best expresses the true state of the case ; the post-Exilic Deuteronomic additions are due to a second editor^ who not only provided the conclusion of the narrative as it stands, but also contributed a good deal of the hortatory matter in which the book abounds^. The conclusions to which we are brought are therefore as follows. The hypothesis of a single (post-Exilic) com- pilation, though not absolutely inadmissible, is difificult to reconcile with the indications noted of a pre-Exilic point of view. It possesses undoubtedly this great attraction, that the fall of the state furnished a more natural oppor- tunity and motive for a comprehensive treatment of the national history than any that can be suggested in the ^ The discussion of the literary questions involved in this distinction is reserved for the Notes. In the Text the passages assigned to the 3'ounger editor, where it has been thought advisable to distinguish them, are marked by the letter D^. 2 It is commonly held that he likewise supplied the Syn- chronisms of the framework ; but see below, p. 39. 22 I AND II KINGS period immediately preceding that catastrophe (Ktinig, Einleittnig, p. 267 f.). But the hterary evidence seems too strong to be overruled by that consideration ; and the balance of probability is in favour of the view that the history was originally compiled before the Exile, but was afterwards supplemented and to some extent revised by a younger editor who lived during or after the Exile. The two redactors belonged to the same Deuteronomic school of historians, and are so much alike in their principles and their cast of thought that it is not always possible to assign an editorial insertion with confidence to the one rather than to the other. To what point of the narrative the first compiler brought down his work cannot be definitely determined. A natural period for such a histoiy to be written would be the latter part of the reign of Josiah, when the great reformation of religion might seem to have secured a return of temporal prosperity to the state ; and an ap- propriate conclusion might be found in 2 K. xxiii. 25. But the last reference to the Chronicles of the kings of Judah (see p. 25) does not occur till xxiv. 5 ; and if that work, which has been the compiler's principal authority for the southern history (see p. 23), was not finished till after the death of Jehoiakim, the compiler's own date must be still later. This brings us into the reign of Zedekiah ; so that unless xxiv. 5 be the mistaken repetition of a stereotyped formula by a copyist, the book must have been written on the very eve of the final captivity, when all hope of a favourable turn in the fortunes of the nation must have passed away. The continuation of the framework in the appendix would not of itself present any difficulty, since the younger editor would naturally adopt the plan laid down by his predecessor. The precise date of the second redactor is also uncertain ; but it can be pretty securely fixed within narrow limits. The superior limit is, of course, the liberation of Jehoiachin from his Babylonian prison in 561 (2 K. xxv. 27 ff.) : the INTRODUCTION 23 language suggests further that his death had already taken place (' until the day of his death,' Jer. Hi. 34). On the other hand, the prominence given to this incident seems i to show that it was comparatively recent at the time of i writing ; and we may place the second redaction in the quarter of a century between 561 and the return from captivity (536). V. The Sources. I. Proximate Sources. That the Book of Kings is a compilation from written documents is virtually ac- knowledged in the habitual reference to certain authorities which we have seen to be an all but constant feature of the framework. It is true that these works are only referred to for information which the compiler has not included in his own history; but it will not be deemed an extravagant speculation if we assume that he was also indebted to them for some of the material which he did think worth preserving. It is therefore of some conse- quence to ascertain what the nature of these compositions may have been. They are only three in number : (i) The Book of the Acts of Solomon (l K. xi. 41) ; (2) The Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel (cited for all the reigns except Jehoram and Hoshea) ; and (3) The Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah (for all except Ahaziah, Athaliah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah). The Hebrew expression rendered ' Book of the Chron- icles ' {sepher dibri hayydmwi, lit. 'book of the affairs of the days ') is the technical term for official records which were kept in the state archives for the purpose of commemorating important political events (Esther ii. 23, vi. I, x. 2 ; Neh. xii. 23 ; i Chron. xxvii. 24). Hence we may surmise that the Books of the Chronicles of Israel and Judah have something to do with the official annals of these two kingdoms \ That such annals were kept, ^ The distinction drawn by Wellhausen and Kuenen between 24 I AND II KINGS there is every reason to believe : we read frequently (2 Sam. viii. 16, XX. 24; I K. iv. 3 ; 2 K. xviii. 18, 37; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 8) of a minister called the viazkir (lit. 'remem- brancer'), whose duty it would naturally be to record public events affecting the policy of the state. And this view of the nature of the two documents is so far borne out by the few hints we get as to their contents. We see that they were mainly if not exclusively of a political character, containing much valuable information regarding the doings of the several Icings^. This, indeed, appears to have been the chief difference between these older histories and our present Book of Kings, and at once suggests a reason why the compiler did not avail himself more freely of their material. The only question now is whether the compiler's references are to the royal annals themselves, or to histories of a more popular character based on the annals and incorporating much of their contents. To the former view there are two 'chronicles' and 'book o/" chronicles* — as if the latter were a literary composition based on the official documents— appears to be fallacious. The word sepher (book) is a regular component of the title of the annals themselves, as may be seen from the passages cited above. In i Chron. xxvii. 24, the text requires amendment. ^ For example : 'all that he did,' 'all his might,' 'how he warred,' &c, ; the conspiracies of Zimri and Shallum ; the fortifications of Asa and Ahab ; Ahab's ivory palace ; Hezekiah's water-supply ; &c., &c. The single exception to the political character of the references is the 'sin' of Manasseh (2 K. xxi. 17), and even that exception is more apparent than real. For although in a state document an act of the king would not be branded as a ' sin,* it might very well have been recorded there as an achievement to the king's credit ; while the compiler's repugnance led him to stigmatize it briefly as a 'sin.' To the view here taken of the nature of these notices it has been objected that no king would be likely to describe himself as a conspirator in his official annals. But, as Cornill points out, the only conspiracies for which the Chronicles are cited as authorities are those of Zimri and Shallum, both of whom reigned a verj' short time, and would quite probably be referred to as conspirators in the annals of their successors. INTRODUCTION 25 objections. In the first place, the official annals were not public property, and therefore could not have been con- sulted by any reader desirous of further information. In the second place, while the compiler might conceivably have had access to the annals of Judah, he could not possibly have seen, those of Israel, which must have perished long before his time. The books of Chronicles must, therefore, have been in circulation as independent works ; and it is reasonable to suppose that they were not mere transcripts of the official records, but literary pro- ductions of a more general kind, though based on the information supplied by the annals \ The northern Chronicle must have covered the whole history of the kingdom of Ephraim, and probably con- tained in addition the account of its fall, and the re- peopling of the land by Assyrian colonists {2 K. xvii. 24 ffi). The Judaean Chronicle came down to the death of Jehoiakim (p. 22) ; and, as we have seen, must have been composed before the Exile. The Book of the Acts of Solomon differs somewhat in its title from the other two, and may have been a work of a different character. It is probable that like them it was based on the annals of the reign ; but whether its subsequent expansion followed on similar lines it is im- possible to say : it depends on how much of the present account of Solomon's reign was taken from this particular document. The criticism of that section of the history is so peculiar that further consideration of this point may be deferred to the Introductory Notes to i K. iii-xi (p. 81 f.). It only remains to be said that these three documents ^ On this view of the two books there seems no reason why they should not be regarded as the source of some narratives which, while too diffuse to have been taken straight from the annals, yet have the appearance of being based on official documents (2 K. xi, xii ; xvi. 10 ff. ; xxii, xxiii). It should be added that there is some evidence that the Chronicles themselves were composite works,, in which different sources were amalgamated (see on i K. xi. i4ff. ; 2 K. xi). 26 I AND II KINGS are always referred to as separate works ; and there are no good grounds for the opinion held by some that before the time of the compiler they had been united in a single pre-Deuteronomic Book of Kings. 2. Primary Sources. The historical matter of the Book of Kings (as distinguished from the editorial framework and commentary) is of two kinds : (l) brief and often fragmentary extracts from official annals ; and (2) lengthy continuous narratives, sometimes full of picturesque detail, and displaying literary power of a high order. Of the first, nothing now remains to be said: we regard them as taken ultimately from the state records of the two monarchies, but immediately from one or other of the three historical works described in the last paragraph \ With respect to the longer narratives, there are one or two points to be noted. In the first place, their style and general character are such that in most cases they would have been out of place in a political chronicle, and therefore they cannot be reasonably assigned to any of the sources named by the compiler. In most, though not quite all, the religious interest predominates, and is exhibited chiefly in the prominence given to the activity of the prophets. In the second place, their literary features show that they were not written by the compiler himself, while the differences of style and standpoint prove them to have been produced by many different authors and under varied circumstances. In the third place, they are not unfrequently annotated by the com- piler ; hence they must have passed through his hands and been incorporated by him in the book. It is important also to observe the links of connexion between them and * Those belonging to the reign of Solomon are denoted by the letter A (see p. 82) ; in the subsequent history they are marked KI and KJ respectively, without any attempt to discriminate between notices that may have stood in the original official sources and others which received their present form from the editors of the books of th.c Chronicles. INTRODUCTION 27 the annalistic passages— each tacitly presupposing the other in a way which makes it practically certain that it is the compiler himself who has blended the two dis- parate elements into one whole ^ The conclusion to which all this leads is manifest. Just as the compiler has omitted much that he read in his proximate sources, because it did not further his religious aim, so he has enriched the history from a variety of independent docu- ments ; and he has been able to draw on these sources all the more freely that for the most part they represent a religious standpoint essentially akin to his own. We now proceed to enumerate the most important and the most easily distinguishable of these independent sources. C. The account of Solomon's accession in i K. i, ii, is taken from what may be described as a Court-memoir of the reign of David. It belongs to the same document as 2 Sam. ix-xx ; and apparently forms the immediate continuation and conclusion of that graphic and well- informed narrative ; see further, p. 57. There are some resemblances between its style and that of the story of the revolt in i K. xii, which seem to show that it was known to the writer of the latter passage ; but in what precise relation the two stand to one another it is difficult to judge. S. In the history of Solomon we find a few anecdotes illustrative of his wisdom and greatness which are cer- tainly not annalistic, and whose origin cannot be definitely traced to any known source : viz. Solomon's dream at Gibeon (i K. iii.4-15) ; his famous Judgement (iii. 16-28) ; the visit of the Queen of Sheba (x. i-io). There is, however, no serious difficulty in supposing that they were in the secondary source, the Book of the Acts of Solomon ; and they have been marked accordingly. See p. 82. * E.g. I K. xiv. iff. is unintelligible apart from xii. 25 ff. ; xvii. I presupposes xvi. 20 ff. ; 2 K. ix rests on viii. 28 ; &c., &c, (Wellhausen, against Thenius). 28 I AND IT KINGS T. The account of the building of the Temple and palace in i K. vi, vii, which is wedged into a mass of an- nalistic fragments, is commonly supposed to be drawn from a document preserved in the Temple archives (see p. 103). To the same source some would assign the later sections which we have marked J (see below). N. For the history of the kingdom of Israel the com- piler has used first of all a group of northern narratives, mainly of a political character: i K. xx, xxii. 1-38 ; 2 K. iii, vi. 24-vii. 20, ix, x ; and next, A series of biographies of the great northern prophets — Ej. Elijah: i K. xvii-xix, xxi ; 2 K. i. 2-17; and Es. Elisha : 2 K. ii, iv. i-vi. 23, viii. 1-15, xiii. 14-21. It will be found that these groups overlap one another at several points ; and their mutual affinities have per- haps not been quite satisfactorily made out as yet. The political series (N) is united by some striking literarj' resemblances ; and hence Wellhausen and others suppose that the passages are all taken from a single historical work dealing with the important peiiod from Ahab to Jehu. The prominence given to the prophets Micaiah and Elisha is, of course, not in itself an objection to this view ; because their activity was in reality an influential factor in the political life of the time. The two latest commentators (Benzinger and Kittel), however, take a different view. While recognizing the essentially political and secular character of i K. xx, xxii, they regard the later passages (especially 2 K. iii and vi. 24 ff.) as really belonging to a life of Elisha. The occasional similarities in language to I K. XX, xxii they explain by conscious or unconscious imitation of the one author by the other ; and it is pointed out that there are affinities hardly less striking with the undoubtedly prophetic narratives, Ej. and Es\ These latter groups are both of composite origin ; and it is thought that 2 K. iii, vi. 24 ff. represent a particular stratum ' For details, see the Notes, pp. 244, 282 f., 305 f. INTRODUCTION 29 in the collection of Elisha-narratives — more political than the rest, but still belonging decidedly to the depart- ment of prophetic biography. It seems doubtful if either of these theories does justice by itself to all the facts of the case ; and some more complicated hypothesis may have to be resorted to in order to harmonize the conflicting indications. It is certainly remarkable that the whole of both groups (i K. xx, xxii not excepted) illustrate more or less distinctly the influence of the prophets in North Israel. In i K. xx, it is true, the prophets are anonymous ; and the passages relating to them are generally regarded as patches on the original political narrative, added by the compiler. But it is quite as likely that they express the purpose of the independent document before it was incorporated in the Book of Kings ; and in that case we should have to suppose that an originally political narrative had been utilized as the basis of a great work on northern prophecy. This would explain the dual character of 2 K. iii, vi. 24 ff., which may have been partly rewritten to form the political background of the ministry of Elisha, while at the same time their original affinities with i K. xx, xxii have been preserved. It is, further, not improbable that the strictly prophetic Elijah- and Elisha-narratives (Ej. and Es.) had been amalgamated with N into a com- prehensive history of prophecy in the kingdom of Ephraim. J. Coming now to the southern kingdom, we find four lengthy passages (2 K. xi, xii. 4ff., xvi. 10-18, and xxii. 3- xxiii. 24) which seem to have a common origin ; and which, as has been mentioned above, some critics assign to the Temple archives. We are disposed to think they are taken straight from the Book of the Chronicles of Judah (KJ) ; and have marked 2 K. xi accordingly. For the other three passages, whose origin may be more doubtful, the symbol J has been used. I and I^ Finally, the account of Hezekiah's reign is amplified in 2 K. xviii. 17-xx. 19 by extracts from the biography of the prophet Isaiah, in which perhaps two 30 I AND II KINGS separate narratives had previously been combined (see p. 3S6fif.). These are the principal documents which the compiler had at his disposal in writing the history of the monarchy. We see how his use of them has been guided by his dominant religious purpose, which has led him to devote so much space to narratives of which the prophets or the Temple formed the central interest. We have next to consider what assurance we have that all these passages were actually inserted by the compiler, and not by some later editor or scribe. That subject has to be discussed in connexion with some facts which show that post- redactional additions do occur in our present Book of Kings ; and to this question we now turn. VI. Later Additions and Redactions. The evidence thus far adduced goes to show that the Book of Kings existed substantially in its present form before the close of the Exile, and that the strictly historical material had been sifted and arranged by a pre-Exilic compiler. We have found no proof that the younger Deuteronomic editor had any fresh documents at his command, or that he has added new facts to the history covered by the work of his predecessor. For the interval between the two redactions he does appear to have availed himself to some extent of written sources (see p. 436) ; but for the rest his additions are confined to the didactic element of the book, and have all been freely composed by himself. But have we any certainty that the process of compilation and expansion was completely arrested about the end of the Exile, and that no important additions were made after the book left the hands of the second redactor ? Is it not possible that not only inter- polations, but even complete narratives of late date, may have been inserted by successive editors in the long INTRODUCTION 31 period between the original redactors and the time when the text received its final form ? The activity of late editors is often most easily recog- nized in short glosses or interpolations which they have introduced (frequently in the margin at first) for the purpose of explaining or modifying" some statements which had become either unintelligible or incredible to the age in which they lived. The discussion of such matters belongs to the province of textual rather than of literary criticism ; and it is unnecessary in this place to say more than that the presence of such interpolations is to be expected, and is abundantly proved. There is just one series of slight insertions of sufficient importance to be mentioned here, because it reveals a point of view . different from that of the Deuteronomic compilers. The letter P is used in the text to denote what may be called Priestly glosses ; i.e. glosses which show a familiarity j with the Priestly Code of the Pentateuch, and represent / a tendency to superimpose its characteristic phraseology / on the more ancient narratives of the Book of Kings. / That they are really later additions is further shown by the fact that a considerable proportion of them was wanting in the MSS. from which the Greek translation was made. It will be seen that glosses of this kind are few in number, and are practically confined to one section of the history. They occur most frequently in the account of the dedication of the Temple (i K. viii. i-i i) ; there are one or two in the description of the Temple buildings (vi, vii) ; and perhaps a couple of isolated instances in the rest of the book (e. g. i K. xviii. 3 1 b). Now the extreme rarity of these priestly annotations is a very interesting fact, and a proof of the fidelity with which the character- istic features of the book have been preserved. What a systematic revision of the Book of Kings from the priestly standpoint would have meant we can partly judge from the parallel sections of the books of Chronicles, where the ancient history is largely recast in order to 32 I AND II KINGS bring it into conformity with the ideals which had long become traditional under the influence of the Priestly Code. The almost complete immunity of the IJook of Kings from this method of trcaiment is a valuable testimony to the soundness of the historical tradition which it represents. The question regarding the insertion of longer narrative passages is at once more difficult and more important. Strictly speaking, we can have no absolute assurance that any particular section stood in the original book, unless it bears traces of the compiler's pen, or else is presup- posed by some other section which demonstrably passed through his hands. It must be admitted that the number of important passages which fail to satisfy this abstract test is not small. But on the other hand, the mere absence of editorial comment is plainly no proof that a passage was 7iot placed by the compiler ; and no sober critic would think of disputing its genuineness, except where it interrupts the connexion, or where its standpoint and language suggest a considerably later date. Thus, the incident of Naboth's vineyard in i K. xxi contains clear evidence of the compiler's activity, and must be unhesita- tingly set down as belonging to one of his sources. The same cannot be said of Elijah's conflict with Jezebel and Ahab in i K. xvii-xix. But then the two narratives so closely resemble each other that no reason can be given for assigning their authorship to different periods ; since one is certainly older than the compiler, the other must be presumed to be older likewise, and to have been incor- porated by him in his work. By the application of that obvious principle of criticism, the great bulk of the documentary material is guaranteed beyond all reasonable doubt. There remain, however, a few cases where at least the possibility of post-redactional insertion must be left an open question. A typical instance is the story of Jeroboam and the man of God from Juduh in i K. xiii. We note in the INTRODUCTION 33 first place that this narrative seems to have been intruded into its position, and not without disturbing the continuity of the verses immediately preceding. It contains, more- over, features which in the judgement of some critics indicate a stage of theological reflection more advanced than the period preceding the Exile. Hence, in the entire absence of any sign, direct or indirect, that it passed under the eye of the compiler, the suggestion that it was inserted in a later age cannot be absolutely excluded. Some scholars, indeed, think the facts can be sufficiently ex- plained by assigning the section to the younger (Exilic) redactor ; but that view has little to recommend it. For, apart from the question whether the younger redactor used any additional documents at all, if the difference of stand- point be as great as is alleged, the interval of time between the two redactions seems too short to account for it. The same kind of considerations applies to some other passages, whose early date is open to question : they are those marked in the text by the letter Z. VII. The Greek Version of Kings. The translation of the O. T. from Hebrew into Greek was gradually accomplished at various times during the two and a half centuries preceding the Christian era. The middle portion of the Canon, to which the Book of Kings belongs, was probably in existence in its Greek garb about the middle of the second century B.C. ^ ; so that from that time downwards we are sure that the transmission of the text ran in two parallel channels, although actual MS. evidence of the existence of either is not met with till a much later date. The lay reader is apt to be surprised at the deference paid by modern commentators to this version, seeing it only purports to be a translation in another tongue of an * See the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, written by the Greek translator, c. 130 b. c. 34 I AND II KINGS original which we still have in our own hands. It may therefore be desirable to say a few words here in explana- tion of the importance for O. T. study of this translation, which is commonly known as the Septuagint (LXX), and which, it should be remembered, was the Bible chiefly used by the N. T. writers. Every one understands the value for N. T. criticism of a comparison of various readings in different MSS. In the study of the O. T. this resource fails us, all existing Hebrew MSS. being practically identical, and none of them older than the ninth century a.d. This, of course, shows that extraordinary care was exercised in copying the text from that time onwards, and there is reason to believe that the same scrupulous fidelity was observed since the second or third century A. D., when it is supposed that a standard Hebrew text was adopted, to which all MSS. were conformed. We have no right to assume, how- ever, that a similar uniformity prevailed before that date, or that the standard text uhimately agreed upon represents accurately the original autographs, or even the closest approximation to them that might have been obtained. Now, the chief value of the LXX is this, that very fre- quently it is a translation, not of the text which we read in our Hebrew Bibles, but of an independent and divergent text, which of course must have been that of some Hebrew MSS. at the time the translation was made. Though these MSS. have perished and have left no successors in Hebrew, the LXX affords positive proof of their existence ; and they have to be reckoned with as independent witnesses to the condition of the text, say in the second century B. c, just as if they lay before us now. And whether they represented a superior or inferior form of the text is a question not to be settled off-hand by 2ir\y a priori considerations, but to be decided on the merits of each particular case. If, for example, the LXX should suggest an emendation of the Hebrew, which renders intelligible what is otherwise obscure, there is a presumption that it INTRODUCriON 35 follows the reading of a better MS. than that followed in preparing the standard Hebrew text. Or if the LXX lacks a passage which looks like an interpolation in the Hebrew, it strengthens the probability that an insertion had really been made in the family of MSS. represented by the standard text, but not in those followed by the LXX. Or, once more, if the LXX should mention some incident not recorded in the Hebrew, which throws light on the general sequence of events, we may suppose that the LXX has preserved a genuine element of the historical tradition which the Hebrew has lost. Of course, all these hypo- thetical cases may be reversed, with the result of estab- lishing the superiority of the Hebrew; but each instance has to be examined separately, without prejudice in favour of one version or the other. Here another fact has to be noticed. From the time of Origen the text of the LXX has been subjected to repeated revisions ; and the constant tendency of these revisions was to assimilate its text more and more closely to the Hebrew standard. New Greek translations, based on our present Hebrew, had come into existence ; and when a reviser thought that his exemplar of the LXX deviated too far from the Hebrew, he was very apt to substitute the corresponding section of the more recent versions as being more faithful to the Hebrew verity. Hence, if of two Greek MSS. one gives a literal reproduc- tion of the Hebrew as we have it, while the other markedly diverges from it, there is a very strong probability indeed that the latter will represent the original LXX and the former a later accommodation to the Hebrew. Or if, as frequently happens, a passage of the Hebrew is duplicated in the Greek, once in a literal rendering and again in a divergent form, we may again assume that the latter is the real text of the LXX, and therefore of the group of ancient MSS. on which that translation was based. These are perhaps the elementary facts on which the critical use of the LXX proceeds ; but the questions which D 2 36 I AND II KINGS arise in practice are amongst the most difficult with which textual criticism has to deal. Unfortunately the study of the LXX text is not yet sufificiently advanced to permit of its being fully utilized as an instrument of critical in- vestigation. Much remains to be done before the original translations are disentangled from the later accretions that have gathered round them ; and the idiosyncrasies of the various Greek translators will have to be carefully marked before a confident judgement can be formed on the character of the Hebrew text which underlies their work. Still, even the helps already available, if used cautiously, are of priceless value to the expositor. For while no existing edition professes to give the LXX text in its original condition, there are some texts which can be pretty safely relied on as representing it very closely in particular instances. The edition of Swete reproduces the text of the famous Vatican MS. (referred to as LXX (B)), which, so far as the Book of Kings is concerned, is relatively free from the harmonizing alterations of the revised recensions; and that of Lagarde, giving the text of a family of MSS. supposed to represent the recension of Lucian of Antioch (LXX (L)), about the beginning of the fourth century A. D., also contains many independent readings which appear to be primitive. These, together with the so-called Hexaplar Syriac and the monumental work of Field ^ are perhaps the most useful aids in this branch of investigation ; and by a judicious use of the material provided by them we undoubtedly obtain a great deal of light on points of exegesis and criticism which would otherwise be hopelessly obscure. In order to convey some idea of the mutual relations of the Hebrew and Greek versions we here enumerate the more striking cases of variation:— In the second chapter * Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt, &c., vol. i, 1875. For information on all these matters the reader is referred to Swete's admirable Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, 1900. INTRODUCTION 37 of I Kings two long insertions occur in the LXX, one after verse 35 and the other at the end of the chapter. These have a certain critical interest, though it is difficult to believe that they are essentially anything better than a rechauffi of material which the Hebrew contains in other and more natural connexions (see p. 80 f.). In ch. iv, on the other hand, the arrangement of the LXX is distinctly superior to the Hebrew (see p. 94). The most perplexing of all the differences is the widely divergent account of the career of Jeroboam which the LXX inserts between verses 24 and 25 of ch. xii : along with this we have to take the account of the revolt, which corresponds in the main to the Hebrew (though the name of Jeroboam does not appear till verse 20), and also the omission of xiv. 1-20. It is very difficult to understand how such a narrative could have arisen out of the Hebrew account ; but the discussion of the question must be reserved for an Appendix (Note II). A simpler case is the transposition of xx and xxi, so as to bring together the Elijah narratives on the one hand and the political narratives on the other in what many scholars regard as the true and original order (p. 254). Another kind of variation is seen in the fact that the reign of Jehoshaphat is inserted (in i K. xvi. 28*-^) before instead of after that of Ahab. This is the result of a difference in chronology which makes Jehoshaphat accede to the throne in the eleventh year of Omri instead of the fourth of Ahab ; and it illustrates at once the resolute consistency with which the editors carried out their principles, and the freedom with which they rearranged the material in accordance with them. And finally we may call attention to a series of discrepancies in the chronology, which cannot be explained by accidental errors in copying, but seem to imply two radically distinct chronological systems between which the allegiance of different editors had been divided. To this subject we shall return in the nexty section. It does not appear that any single theory will apply to 38 I AND II KINGS all these variations ; which, be it remembered, are not one tenth part of those that have to be dealt with in a minute study of the book. Some, no doubt, might be set down to the caprice or ignorance of the translators ; but there are others which still await a satisfactory explanation. One is almost driven to regard them in the light of residual phenomena, which refuse to accommodate themselves to any hard and fast theory of the composition of the book. The one general conclusion to which they unambiguously point is that the text of Kings remained in a very fluid condition down to the second century B. C: ' Neither the one version nor the other is the original ; each represents a stage, and not always the same stage, in the long-pro- tracted labours of the redactors \' VIII. The Chronology. The compiler of Kings would appear to have been one of the first O. T. writers to recognize the importance for the historian of a definite and systematic chronology. He has met this requirement by the elaborate series of notices contained in the Introductory Formulas of the framework ; and if the figures should be found reliable, he has thus provided the materials for a perfect chronology of the period covered by his histor)'. The tests to which every such system must be subjected are firsts its self- consistency, and second, its agreement with independent trustworthy records, such, for example, as those supplied by the Assyrian monuments. Now, a very slight in- spection of the system suffices to show that its data frequently contradict each other, so that it is quite im- possible to accept its statements without criticism. On further examination, it appears that the results do not correspond with those derived from the Assyrian inscrip- tions ; although it may be said at once that the errors of the Hebrew text appear to be much less extensive than ^ Kucnen, Ondcrzoek, p. 428. INTRODUCTION 39 is often supposed. We are here confronted with problems of extreme intricacy, an exhaustive discussion of which is far beyond the scope of the present volume. It is necessaiy, nevertheless, that something should be said on the subject, partly for the sake of exhibiting the prin- ciples on which the chronological scheme of the book has been constructed, and partly with the aim of reducing the probabilities of error to their proper dimensions. I. The Chronological Scheme. First of all, it is necessary to distinguish between the two elements which enter into the chronological statements of the framework : viz. first, the lengths of the reigns ; and second (for the period of the divided monarchy), the synchronisms between u the histories of Israel and Judah. The numerous dis- j crepancies between these two sets of figures prove con-/ ciusively that they do not proceed from the same author, and that the synchronisms have been calculated from the durations of the reigns (not, of course, vice versa). The facts cannot be explained by the assumption of textual corruption, for it is usually found that a mistake once introduced is perpetuated, until it is neutralized by another. It is reasonable to suppose that the lengths of reign were^j taken from the Chronicles of Israel and Judah by the' compiler, and therefore rested originally on good authority: whether they have been accurately transmitted is of course another question. The synchronisms are usually attributed! to the younger redactor ; but in view of the remarkable deviations found in the LXX (especially in LXX (L), see below) it seems more probable that they were inserted at a much later stage in the history of the text. For our immediate practical purposes, therefore, it might be safe to confine our attention to the durations of the reigns, neglecting the synchronisms except in so far as they help to locate an error in the other series, or throw light on the mode of reckoning there employed. The next question, accordingly, is as to the manner in which the length of a reign was computed. Two methods 40 I AND II KINGS are possible : (a) The first (which is the one that com- mends itself to us as most natural and convenient) is to reckon by complete calendar years, so that if a king comes to the throne in the middle of a year that year will be given to his predecessor, while the ensuing year is counted as the first year of the new reign. On this principle the time occupied by a series of reigns will be obtained by simple addition of the separate durations. (d) But another method is conceivable. The year in which a change of reign occurs might be reckoned twice, once as the last year of the deceased king, and again as the first of his successor ; so that to find the true period covered by a number of reigns we must deduct from the sum of the lengths one year for each reign. Benzinger has tried to prove that both methods were in use among Hebrew chronologers ; and that while the latter (d) governs the chronology of the Hebrew text, the former (a) lay at the basis of the original LXX, and is represented by a striking but fragmentary series of notices preserved chiefly in LXX (L). The facts arc perhaps not sufficiently numerous to allow a confident judgement on the latter point ; although it will appear presently that Benzinger's theory gives significance to many interesting phenomena of the text of LXX (L). At all events, it is quite clear that (d) is the prevalent method of the Hebrew synchron- isms. This is seen most evidently from such cases as Nadab, Elah, and Ahaziah (of Israel), each of whom reigned two years, while each reign terminated (according to the synchronisms) in the year immediately following that in which it began. At the same time, there are a good many exceptions— e.g. Abijam, Jehoash (of Judah), Pekah, &c.— in which (barring errors of text) the method (a) appears to be followed. We may now proceed to illustrate these results from the chronological data of the book. For this purpose we divide the history into three periods, marked by the two absolutely fixed synchronisms between the histories of INTRODUCTION 41 Israel and Judah : viz. the deaths of Ahaziah of Judah and Jehoram of Israel on one day, and second, the fall of Samaria in the sixth year of Hezekiah of Judah. In the first period— from the revolt of the ten tribes to the murder of Ahaziah and Jehoram by Jehu— there are six reigns in Judah and nine in Israel. Taking the lengths of the reigns as they stand in the Hebrew, the sum is, for Judah ninety-five years, and for Israel ninety- eight years. If, now, in accordance with the method (d), we subtract a year for each reign, we find that each series runs to eighty-nine years. So close a correspon- dence cannot be accidental ; and the result confirms the hypothesis that (d) is actually the system on which the Hebrew computation is based. The method (a) yields an inequality of three years ; and possibly this is the ex- planation of the fact that Abijam receives six years in the LXX as against the three years of the Hebrew; though it might still be made a question whether the reign was lengthened in the LXX or shortened in the Hebrew. At any rate, the six years of the LXX brings the Judaean series up to ninety-eight years, in harmony with the Israelitish series. The synchronisms of the period present many anomalies in both versions ; but in the Hebrew the method (d) obtains on the whole, while the LXX has some striking examples of (a). One of the most singular is the case of Asa, who is said to have ascended the throne in the twenty-fourth year of Jeroboam (i K. XV. 9, LXX) ; although the Hebrew allows only a twenty-two years' reign to the latter monarch (xiv. 20). This is a passage which was not found in the original LXX ; so it is just possible that some MSS. assigned him a twenty-five years' reign ; and in this way the advantage of giving six years to Abijam would be neutralized. But these perplexing inquiries cannot be further pursued here^. ^ It may also be noted that in a passage peculiar to the LXX xii. 24*) the Vatican MS. gives only twelve years to the reign of Rehoboam. 42 I AND II KINGS It is in the middle period— from the revolution of Jehu to the fall of Samaria — that errors are most serious and most embarrassing. The sum of the Israelitish reigns is here 144, that of the Judaean 165 years ; if we follow the method (d) the numbers are 135 and 158 respectively. With such a discrepancy correct synchronisms are im- possible ; and there are two which at once arrest attention by their glaring inconsistency : those, namely, of Azariah of Judah {2 K. xv. i) and Zechariah of Israel (xv. 8). The former is eleven years, and the latter twelve years, too late ; but as they occur in opposite series the effect is cumulative ; and they reveal a total disparity of twenty- three years, which is just the amount of error we are looking for. But it is very difficult to conceive how the mistake could have originated. The latter synchronism obviously requires either that the reign of Amaziah (of Judah) be shortened, or that of Jeroboam II lengthened, by eleven years ^. Let us try the first alternative, which is the less objectionable of the two. In this case Azariah came to the throne in the fourth of Jeroboam II ; and the sum of the Judaean reigns is reduced to 147 years (on the method (d)). This still leaves twelve years to be accounted for ; but the synchronisms yield us no further guidance. A suggestion of Benzinger's may be helpful. He thinks that in the original scheme of the Hebrew the fall of Samaria was made to synchronize, not with the sixth of Hezekiah, but with the latter part of the reign of Ahaz (see below). If this view be accepted we possibly do not need to go any further : we seem to have come on a stage of the redaction in which the event coincided with the ninth year of Ahaz^ The editors of the Greek text of ^ Compare 2 K. xiv. 23, xiv. 2, xv. i, 8. For if 15th Amaziah = ist Jeroboam, then ist Azariah (=29th Amaziah) =i5th Jeroboam; and 38th Azariah = 52nd Jeroboam. To reconcile XV. 8 with the forty-one years' reign of Jeroboam we should have to antedate the reign of Azariah by eleven years, i. e. to curtail the reign of his father by that amount. ^ On the posaibility of an ovcrlappijig of the reigns of Ii\TKODUCTION 43 LXX (L) appear to have dealt with the problem on lines peculiar to themselves. Jehu is there said to have begun to reign in the second year of Athaliah, thus making an int:erregnum of one or two years in the history of Israel ; and the reign of Pekahiah is extended from two years to ten. This brings the Israelitish series (on the method (a)) up to 153 or 154 years. If now we assume as before that the reign of Amaziah has to be shortened by eleven years, the difference entirely vanishes; and the last year of Hoshea coincides with the sixth of Hezekiah. Unfortu- nately, the synchronisms proper to this system have been displaced in favour of those in our Hebrew text ; so that we have no means of checking the results. In the third period — from the fall of the northern to that of the southern kingdom— there are no synchronisms to assist or perplex the calculations ; and all that has to be done for the chronology is to compare it with the data derived from the Assyrian and Babylonian records. 2. Absolute Chronology. Thus far we have been con- sidering only the internal self-consistency of the scheme as it must be supposed to have passed through the hands of the synchronists at a certain stage of the redaction. We must now go on to compare the figures with the chronological data supplied by the Assyrian monuments. Here we naturally begin with the third period, which is bounded by two well-ascertained dates — the fall of Samaria in 722 and the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. Now, the sum of the reigns from the accession of Hezekiah to the end of Zedekiah is, on the reckoning ((3), 140 years; on the reckoning {b)^ 133 years. Hence the accession of Hezekiah would be on the one reckoning 727 B. c, and on the other 720 B. c. The first result agrees with the statement of 2 K. xviii. 10 that Samaria fell in Azariah and Jotham, see below, p. 45. We cannot take account of it here, because it is not contemplated in the sj^nchronistic scheme. On an ingenious attempt by Ruhl to solve the difficulty, sec Appendix. Note III. 44 I AND II KINGS the sixth year of Hezekiah ; and it is quite hkely that that synchronism is based on this very calculation. But singularly enough, the other result agrees with a view maintained on independent grounds by Winckler, and adopted by several recent scholars, viz. that the destruc- tion of Samaria took place towards the end of the reign of Ahaz, and that Hezekiah's reign actually commenced in 720. Which view is correct it might be difficult to say ; but there is no doubt that the second involves least disturbance of the traditional data of the Hebrew text. We shall see immediately that the shorter computation, on which it rests, gives the most satisfactory results for the earlier periods of the history, and is therefore to be preferred. Moreover, the date 720 for the accession of Hezekiah is alone consistent with the traditional ascrip- tion of a sixteen years* reign to Ahaz : if we were to accept the date 727 it would be necessary to shorten the reign of Ahaz to about eight years. Accordingly, we shall adopt henceforth the shorter Hebrew method of reckoning (l>) ; and fix the accession of Hezekiah in 720 B. c. Proceeding backwards, we pause first at the year 733, the date of Tiglath-pileser's expedition against Pekah (see Notes, p. 364) ; which must have taken place near the beginning of the reign of Ahaz and near the end of that of Pekah. Let us put it tentatively in the third of Ahaz and the last but one of Pekah. This puts the accession of Ahaz in 735, which harmonizes with 2 K. xvi. 2, where Ahaz is said to have reigned sixteen years. But it puts back the death of Pekah to 732 ; and so makes it necessary to assign to Hoshea a reign of eleven years instead of nine (2 K. xvii. i : see further, p. 374). We have now obtained a new point of departure, which to some extent neutralizes the uncertainty as to the accession of Hezekiah ; but the next step backwards reveals a more serious error in the Israelitish reigns. In 738 Menahem paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser (see p. 362) ; so that in the six years from 738-732 we have to find room for INTRODUCTION 45 part of the reign of Menahem and the whole of those of Pekahiah (two years) and Pekah (twenty years). There is therefore an excess of more than fourteen years, which will be most simply adjusted by reducing the reign of Pekah to four years (Hebrew computation). An interval of 104 years lies between this and the next earlier Assyrian synchronism, which is Jehu's tribute to Shal- maneser in 842 (see p. 335). For reasons which will presently appear, it is necessary to put the incident very near the beginning of Jehu's reign : let us assume for r c.v'jnience of calculation that he came to the throne in 843. The reigns from Jehu to Shallum cover ninety-eight years. This allows seven years for the part of Menaheni's reign preceding 738— a perfectly satisfactory result. It follows, therefore, that the traditional durations of the reigns from Jehu to Menahem are at least approximately correct. Passing to the Judaean series, we have no Assyrian synchronism between 733 and 842 ^ Putting, as before, the accession of Athaliah in 843, we should have between this and the accession of Ahaz a period of 108 years, for which we have lengths of reign amounting to 139 years'', a discrepancy of thirty-one years. We have no means of tracking this error to its source ; but the system which requires least alteration of the numbers in the Massoretic text is perhaps that of P. Rost, in KAT^, p. 319 ff. Rost divides the error into two parts, thus : (i) He reduces the reign of Amaziah from twenty-nine years (2 K. xiv. 2) to nine. (2) He supposes that the greater part of the reign of Jotham was a regency during his father's lifetime (2 K. xv. 5), and that he ruled independently for only five years (Hebrew reckoning) ^. With these assumptions we obtain ' The supposed mention of Azariah by Tiglath-pileser in 738 is now generally allowed to be a mistaken identification ; see p. 359. ^ On the assumption (justified by 2 K. xi. 4) that Athaliah reigned six full years. •' To be strictly accurate, Host's theory is that the sixteen 46 I AND II KINGS a perfect correspondence between the biblical data and those of the Assyrian inscriptions. And it will be found that the scheme fully satisfies the condition that the reigns of Amaziah of Judah and Jehoash of Israel must have been contemporaneous (xiv. 8 f.). In the first period— from the rebellion of the ten tribes to the revolution of Jehu — there is but one date fixed by Assyriology, the battle of Karkar, in which Ahab fought, in 854. This must have been near the end of Ahab's reign; but it requires very close calculation indeed to find time for the subsequent reigns of Ahaziah ajjd Jehoram, without reducing the numbers of the Hebrew text. Rest accomplishes it, however, in the following manner : he supposes the battle of Karkar to have been fought in the spring of 854, and the battle of Ranioth- gilead before the autumn of the same year. It is thus just possible to fit in the twelve years of Ahaziah and Jehoram before 843 ^ For the remainder of the period we have no means of strictly controlling the dates. The invasion of Shishak would yield a synchronism with Egyptian history ; and the relations of Solomon and Omri to the contemporary kings of Tyre furnish points of con- tact with the Tyrian annals ; but the chronology of these countries is too uncertain to be of much service in years assigned to Jotham (2 K. xv. 33) were wholly contem- poraneous with Azariah. but that his total reign was twenty years :^s.e xv. 30). The argument here is rather precarious : but the important point is that the reigns of Jotham and Azariah may be quite naturally supposed to have overlapped for an indeterminate period. * See Table III. Here (following Rost^ the year of Ahab's death and Ahaziah 's accession is given as 855 B.C. The explanation of this apparent contradiction is that the Hebrew year was reckoned from the autumn, while the Babylonian was reckoned from the spring. The year of Ahab's death ran from the autumn of 855 to the autumn of 854 : whether we call it 855 or 854 is merely a question of names. The essential point in the calculation is that the death of Ahab and the battle of Karkar must fall within the same Hebrew 3'car. INTRODUCTION 47 checking the figures of the framework of Kings. With regard to the latter, however, it may be mentioned that Winckler's investigation (based on extracts from the official annals preserved by Menander of Ephesus) yields results in perfect agreement with the Hebrew chronology. He puts the reign of Hiram I about 968-935 B. c, and Ittobaal I (Ethbaal) is exactly contemporary with Omri of Israel (887-876) \ On the whole, then, it may be said that the examination is surprisingly favourable, so far as the durations of the reigns are concerned, to the soundness of the Hebrew tradition. The details are given in the accompanying Chronological Table (HI), which is drawn almost entirely from the work of Rost referred to above. ^ See^^r^ p. 139. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES N.B. — Tables I and II give the lengths of reign and synchronisms according to the Hebrew Text and the LXX respectively. The figures in heavy type are those common to the two versions ; those peculiar to the Hebrew are in plain type; those peculiar to the LXX in italics. Table III ignores the synchronisms, and gives (i) the years B. C. of the various reigns according to the amended Hebrew text (after Rost), and (2) the dates fixed by Assyrian inscriptions. INTRODUCTION 49 TABLE I. Synchronisms, etc., of the Hebrew Text. Length of Reign. Year of Accession in contemp. Reign— Judah. Israel. Of Israel. Of Judah. 17 22 Rehoboam Jeroboam 3 41 Abijam . . , . - 18th Asa ... . 20th 2 Nadab . . 2nd 24 Baasha . . 3rd 2 Elah . . . 26th 7 days Zimri . . . 27th 12 22 Omri . 31st 38th Ahab. . . 25 Jehoshaphat . 4th 2 Ahaziah . . 17th 12 Jehoram . . i8th 8 Jehoram . . 6tli 1 Ahaziah . I2th 95 98 6 28 Athaliah Jehu 40 Jehoash 7tli 17 Jehoahaz . 23rd 1 16 Jehoash . . 37th 29 41 Amaziah . . . Jeroboam II 2nd 15th 52 6 mo. 1 mo. 10 2 20 Azariah . . . Zechariah . Shallum Menahem . Pekahiah . Pekah . . 27tli 38th 39th 39th 50th 52nd 16 Jotham . . . 2nd 16 9 Ahaz .... Hoshea . . 17 th 12th 6 Hezekiah . . 3rd i i6s 144 Fall of Samari a. 50 I AND II KINGS TABLE II. Synchronisms, etc., according to LXX. _ ' _ Year of Accession in Lengtii of Reign. contenip. Reign— | Jiidah. Israel. Of Israel. Ofjudali. IV^ 22?- Rehoboam Jeroboam ! 6 Abijam 18th 41 8 24 2 7 days^* 12 Asa . . . Nadab . Baasha . Elah . . Zimri Omri. . 2m 2nd 3rd 20th 22nd^ 31st 25 22 2 Jehoshaphat Ahab . . Ahaziah . lUh 2nd \ 2ith^ 8' 12 Jehoram. . Jehoram 5th 2nd-' 1 Ahaziah . . lltir^ 98 98 6 2 Athaliah Inten-egmmt ^ 28 Jehu 2nd' 40 17 16 Jehoash . . Jehoahaz Jehoash . 7th 23rd 37th 29 41 Amaziah. Jeroboam I 2xid 15th 52 6 mo. Imo.'' 10 10' 20 Azariah . . Zechariah Shallum . Menahem Pekahiah Pekah . 27th 38th 39th 39th 50th 52nd 16 Jotham • . 2ixd 16 9 Ahaz . . . Hoshea . 17th 12th 6 Hezekiah . 1 3rd 165 154 Fall of Sams irii I. > B (in xii. 24a) gives \2 years. - Not in original T,XX. ^ b has 7 SM.rs: * Luc. only : B omits. Luc. only : B agrees with Hcb. « So Luc. : B ha:, 40! " Luc. (cf. i K. i. 17. Hcb.) : B has l8th. * Luc. only. * B omits. INTRODUCTION 5^ TABLE III. Chronology of the Kings of Judah and Israel, with Assyrian and Babylonian Synchronisms. r Year of Length of Reign. 1 ; Accession, 1 B.C. Monuments. B.C. 971 Solomon .... 40 932 Rehoboain. . . 17 932 Jeroboain I HI 916 Abijam . . . 3 914 Asa .... 41 913 Nadab . . 2 911 Baasha. . 24 888 Elah. . . 2 887 Zimri, Omri 12 876 Ahab . . 22 874 Jehoshaphat . ^5 855 Ahaziah . 2 Battle of Kaikar> . . . 854 854 Jehoram . 12 8.?o Ji'horam . . 8 843 Ahaziah. . . I 1 843 Jehu. . . 28 Jehu's tribute to Assyria \ 842 843 Athaliah . . 73 837 Jehoash , . . 40 816 Jehoahaz . Jehoash . 17 800 i6 798 Amaziah . . 91 790 Azariah . . . .52 785 Jeroboam 11 41 749 Jotham (with Azariah) h^ 745 Zechariah, Shallum 7 mo. 745 Menahem .... 10 739 Jotham (alone) 55 Menahem pays tribute ' 738 736 Pekahiah . 2 7i5 735 Ahaz. . . . 16 Pekah . . 47 Galilee depopulated by Tiglath-pileser». . . 733 732 Hoshea //» Assyrians capture Damas- cus^o Fall of Samaria" . . . 732 732 720 Hezekiah 29 Sennacherib's Invasion '-. 701 692 Manasseh 55 Z Amon 3 Josiah 31 667 Jehoahaz { 3 ino. 607 Jehoiakim ] 11 Battle of Carcheniish •' . 605 597 jehoiachin 3 mo. 597 Zedekiali u Fall of Jerusalem 1' . . 587 NB. Italic figures are used to mark lengths of reign which have been altered from the Hebrew. ^ » See p. 243 f. -'' p. 45. '"p. 369.' "pp. 43. 372 ' PP-45, 347; cf. 2 K. xi. 3, 4. pp. 45, 360. '^ pp. 44, 362. PP:.45. 365- '•^ p. 385*. E 2 p. 364- p. 427. ' P- 4,v pp.44, 373 f. pp. 430, 433. 52 1 AND II KINGS NOTATION OF SOURCES A. Extracts from the Annals of the reign of Solomon (in 1 K. iii-x). See page 8i f. C. Court history of David— the main source of i K. i, ii. Page 57. D. Passages assigned to the Deuteronomic Compiler of Kings (including the * Framework '). Pages 12, 14. D ^ Passages assigned to the second Deuteronomic Editor. Page 21. Ej. Passages from the Biography of Elijah (in i K. xvii ff.). Page 28. Es. Passages from the Biography of Elisha (in 2 K. ii ff.). Page 28. I. A I '. Passages from the Biography of Isaiah (in 2 K. xviii- xx). Page 29. J. Judaean Narratives (in 2 K. xii, xvi, xxii f.). Page 29. KI. Excerpts from the * Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel.* Pages 23, 26. KJ. Excerpts from the ' Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah.' Pages 23, 26. N. Northern Narratives, for the period from Ahab to Jehu (i K. XX, &c.). Page 28. P. Glosses of an Editor occupying the standpoint of the Priestly Code. Page 31. S. Extracts from the ' Book of the Acts of Solomon ' (in I K. iii-xi). Page 82. T. Account of the Temple and Palace Buildings (i K. vi, vii). Pages 82, 103. Z. Post-Redactional Additions and Interpolations. Page 30 ff. P Passages of uncertain Character or Origin. INTRODUCTION 53 LIST OF WORKS MOST FREQUENTLY REFERRED TO, WITH ABBREVIATIONS. LXX. The Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint). See p. 33 if. LXX (B). Swete's edition of the same (1887), reproducing the Text of the Vatican MS. (B). LXX (L). Lagarde's edition— Ltbrorum Veteris Testamettti Canonicornm Pars Prior Graece (1883)— giving the supposed text of the Recension of Lucian. See p. 36. JoSEPHUS^, Ant. : Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities. Bell. Jud. : ,. On the Jewish War. cont. Ap. '. ,, Against Apion. Thenius, O., Die Biicher der Konige erkldrt, 2nd ed. (1873). Klostermann, a., Die Biicher Samuelis tind der Konige (1887). Benzinger, L, Die Biicher der Konige erkldrt (1899). KiTTEL, R., Die Biicher der Konige Ubersetzt mid erkldrt (1900). Farrar, F. W., TTie First (Second) Book of Kings (Expositor's Bible) (1883-94). Burney, C. F., Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Kings (1903). Driver, S. R., Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, 6th ed. (1897). KuENEN, A., Historisch-cn'tisch Onderzoek naar het Ontstaan en de Verzatnelir\g van de Boeken des Ouden Verbonds, Part I (1887). Wellhausen, J., Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Biicher., 2nd ed. (1889). Wellhausen, J., Israelitische und Jiidische Geschichte, 3rd ed. (1897). EwALD, H., The History of Israel— Eng}. Trans., 2nd ed. Chiefly vol. iv. (1878). WiNCKLER, H., Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen (1892). Stade, B., Akademische Reden und Abhandlungen (1899), pp. 143 ff. (Der Text des Berichtes iiber Salomos Bauten. I KOn. 5-7 ; Anmerkungen zu 2 KOn. 10-14 5 Anmerkungen zu 2 KOn. 15-21). ^ References are to Niese's edition (i887-95\ 54 I AND II KINGS Benzinger, I., Hebn'nsc/ie A rc/id'ologte (i8g^^. Smith, G. A., Historical Geography of the Holy Land (1894^ Buhl, F., Geographic des alten Paldstina (1896). HiLPRECHT, H. v., Explorations in Bible Lands during the Nineteenth Century (1903). OTJC-, Smith, W. R., The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, and ed. (1892). „ The Prophets of Israel, 2nd ed. (1895).. „ The Religion of the Semites, 2nd ed, (1894). KIB. ScHRADER, E. , Keilinschrtftliche Biblioihek ( 1 889-) . COT. The Cuneiform Insm'ptions and the Old Testament. Translation by O. C. Whitehouse of the 2nd ed. of E. Schrader's Die Keilinschnfien und das Alte Testament (1883). The references are to the pages of the German edition, which are numbered on the margin of the Engh'sh. KA T^. 3rd German edition of the same work, by H. Zim- mern and H. Winckler (1902-3). CIS. Corpus Insa'iptionum Scmiticarum. ZA . Zeitsch rift fit r A ssyriologte. ZA TW. Zeitschrift fiir Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft. DB. Dictionary of the Bible, edited by J. Hastings, D. D. EB. Encyclopaedia Bihlica, edited bv T. K. Cheyne, D.D.. and I. S. Black. LL.D. THE BOOK OF THE KINGS REVISED VERSION WITH ANNOTATIONS THE FIRST BOOK OF THE KINGS [C] Now king David was old and stricken in years ; 1 i, ii. The Accession of Solomon. According to the present arrangement of the text these two chapters form an appropriate introduction to the account of Solomon's reign in chs. iii-xi ; and this was certainly the intention of the editor who separated the books of Samuel and Kings ^ In its original context, however, the narrative belonged to the history of David rather than to that of Solomon. It continues the long account of David's court affairs which we find in 2 Sam. ix-xx ; and in the primary document from which it was taken it must have been the immediate sequel of these chapters. That document is amongst the best specimens of Hebrew historical writing which we possess. It is evidently written from first-hand information about the course of events, and with intimate knowledge of the manners and inner life of the court. The narrative is full of life and colour, the style is graphic and lucid, the obscurity in which some important points are involved being due to the author's familiarity with scenes and conditions which are imperfectly understood by us. The writer's treatment of his subject is marked by singular impartiality and independence ; he allows facts to speak for themselves ; and it is only by reading between the lines, and imputing to him a subtlety of which he was probably innocent, that modern commentators fancy they can discover indications of his own personal bias. The passage falls naturally into three main divisions : (i) ch. i ; (2) ch. ii. 1-12 ; and (3) ch. ii. 13-46. (i) i. The Contest for the Succession. In order to understand the situation we must bear in mind that the succession to the crown was as yet unregulated either by principle or precedent. There were perhaps three views current. ( i) The idea that the monarchy was elective. Saul and David had both been elected by representatives of the people, and although this idea nowhere appears in the narrative before us it had not fallen altogether into desuetude ; for on the death of Solomon an ^ See Introd. p. 4. In Lagarde's edition of the Lucianic recen- sion of the LXX the third book of ' Kingdoms' commences at ii. 12 of the Hebrew (and English) text. 58 I KINGS 1. 2. C and they covered him with clothes, but he gat no heat. Wherefore his servants said unto him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin : and let her stand before the king, and cherish him ; and let her lie attempt was again made by the northern tribes to assert the principle of an elective monarchy. (2) The law oi primogeniture^ firmly established in Hebrew jurisprudence, created a strong pre- sumption in favour of the oldest son of the previous king as we see from the case of Jonathan). (3) At the same time the king's right to nominate his successor was generally recognized (i. 20, 27). The confusions here described arose from the conflict of the second and third of these principles. As the oldest surviving son of David, Adonijah naturally looked on himself as the heir to the throne, and was accepted as such by the people (ii. 15). On the other hand, David had determined that Solomon should succeed him ; although a promise to that effect is nowhere recorded, and apparently no steps had been taken to make it public. — That is the prima facie sense of the narrative ; and it may fairly claim to be the view which the historian intended to present, and which he himself honestly held. It is maintained, indeed, by some eminent critics that the author favoured the cause of Adonijah, believing Solomon's pretensions to be absolutely unfounded ; and that he reveals the true state of the case by letting it appear that the alleged promise to Bath-sheba was an invention of Solomon's partisans imposed on the enfeebled memory of the king. For reasons stated below, that theory is here rejected as inherentli* improbable and inconsistent with the straightforward simplicity of the narration. i. 1-4. David's decrepit old age. The narrative of 2 Sam. xx is here resumed after an interval of perhaps a few years. The verses contain a short description, necessary to the understanding of what follows, of the state of matters at David's court during the last months of his life. The sudden collapse of the king's strength is represented as due to senile decay. His actual age appears from ch. ii. ii, 2 Sam. v. 4 f. to have been only a little over seventy years. There is nothing very extraordinary in a failure of bodily vigour at that time of life ; and certainly no need for the odious explanations sometimes put forward to account for it. The subsequent narrative nowhere implies that the king's mental powers were enfeebled. 1. old and stricken in years : ' an old man advanced in years ' (lit. 'days'). For the expression cf. Hen. xviii. n, xxiv. i; Joshua xiii. i, xxiii. i, 2. 2. On the ' primitive and not ineffectual remedy ' here proposed I KINCiS 1. 3-5. C 59 in thy bosom, that my lord the king may get heat. So ?, they sought for a fair damsel throughout all the coasts of Israel, and found Abishag the Shunammite, and brought her to the king. And the damsel was very fair ; and she 4 cherished the king, and ministered to him ; but the king knew her not. Then Adonijah the son of Haggith 5 exalted himself, saying, I will be king : and he prepared the reader may consult the references in Farrar, Books 0/ Kings, i. p. 6a. 3. Abishag' the Shunammite: a native of Shunem, the modem village ofSolam, about five miles north of Jezreel, situated on a hill-slope looking south-west over the valley of Esdraelon. It has been imagined that Abishag's beauty became traditional, and suggested long afterwards the title ' Shulammite ' for the heroine of the Song of Solomon (Cant. vi. 13). 4. the long knew her not. The clause is commonly supposed to refer to Adonijah's later desire to possess Abishag, and to have been written to clear him in advance of the suspicion of thereby aiming at the throne (see on ii. 17). It is doubtful if the words could cover any such motive. i. 5-8. Adonijah's pretensions to the crown. Adonijah was the fourth of David's sons, born in Hebron (2 Sam. iii. 4 ; i Chron. iii. 2), and therefore at this time about thirt3'-five 3'ears of age. After the deaths of Amnon and Absalom, he was the oldest survivor of the royal family, the second son, Chileab (2 Sam. iii. 3, or Daniel, I Chron. iii. i), having apparently died young. Of his ;;nother Haggith nothing is known. Resolved to keep his claims well in the eye of the public, the prince follows the example of Absalom in the assumption of semi-royal state. He forms a party in the court, his chief supporters being Joab, the commander-in-chief, and Abiathar the priest — two of David's most loyal followers. On what grounds these men supported Adonijah we cannot conjecture ; they may have honestly believed that he was the fittest candidate, and that they were acting in the true interests of the dynasty. They knew at all events that there was a party opposed to Adonijah, from whose leaders they carefully concealed their plans. 5. exalted himself . . . king : or, perhaps, ' was puffing him- self up with the notion that he was to be king.' The form of expression in the original does not suggest a sudden resolve on Adonijah's part to seize the throne prematurely, but rather a fixed idea in his mind that the succession was legitimately his (\\. 15^. Nothing more than this is involved in the procuring of chariots 6o I KINGS 1. 6-9. C him chariots and horsemen, and fifty men to run before 6 him. And his father had not displeased him at any time in saying, Why hast thou done so ? and he was also a very goodly man; and he was born after Absalom. 7 And he conferred with Joab the son of Zeruiah, and with Abiathar the priest: and they following Adonijah 8 helped him. But Zadok the priest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and Nathan the prophet, and Shimei, and Rei, and the mighty men which belonged to David, 9 were not with Adonijah. And Adonijah slew sheep and and horsemen, &c. ; it is of a piece with the conduct which David had tolerated for four years in the case of Absalom (2 Sam. XV. I, 7). to run before him : ' runners,' i. e. footguards. 6. had not displeased (pv pained) him (all his life, marg.) : had allowed him to do as he pleased. LXX inserts a similar remark about the training of Amnon in 2 Sam. xiii. 21. and he was also : better, ' and he also was ' — like Absalom (2 Sam. xiv. 25). The verse thus gives three explanations of the presumptuous behaviour of Adonijah — the foolish indulgence of his father, his handsome figure, and his seniority. 8. Zadok, colleague and rival of Abiathar in the priesthood, is first mentioned in 2 Sam. viii. 17, then in xv. 243*., as custodian of the ark ; Benaiah was commander of the household troops (2 Sam. viii. 18) ; while Kathan is the well-known prophet. Of Shimei, and Bei, nothing is known ; the text is very uncertain. the migfhty men: Heb. GibborUn (heroes). These were probably David's old comrades in arms (see 2 Sam. xxiii. 8ff.), who formed a sort of bodyguard, and naturally had a position of influence in the court. That they were identical with the Krethi and Plethi (see on verse 38), as is thought by some, is a view for which little evidence can be adduced. i. 9, ID. The proclamation of Adonijah. The outcome of the conferences with Joab and Abiathar seems to have been a project to precipitate matters by at once proclaiming Adonijah king. The sacrificial feast described in the verses can hardly have any other meaning than this : it is so represented by Nathan, not only in his interview with the king (verse 25), but also in his conversation with Bath-sheba (verse 11) ; and there are no sufficient grounds for the suspicion that he wilfully exaggerated the significance of the incident. The feast took place at some ancient sanctuarj' of I KINGS 1. 10,11. C 61 oxen and failings by the stone of Zoheleth, which is beside En-rogel; and he called all his brethren the king's sons, and all the men of Judah the king's servants : but Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah, and the mighty 10 men, and Solomon his brother, he called not. Then 11 Nathan spake unto Bath-sheba the mother of Solomon, Jerusalem (W. R. Smith, Rel. of Sent? p. 172, n. 3), where there was a sacred stone (Zoheleth) and a sacred well (En-rogel). 9. En-rogel has been usually identified with the so-called Well of Job (Bty-^Eyyilb), south of the city, at the junction of the Kidron and Hinnom valleys. A good many recent writers (following Clermont-Ganneau) take tlie stone of Zoheleth (i. e. the Serpent's stone) to be the modern ez-Zehweleh, a rock-hewn stair in the face of the Mount of Olives, right opposite and quite near to the Virgin's Spring (see on verse 33) ; in which case En-rogel must be the Virgin's Spring itself. But it is plain from this chapter that if En-rogel be the Virgin's Spring, Gihon must be sought else- where ; and the identification of Gihon with the Virgin's Spring rests on stronger grounds than that of Zoheleth with ez-Zehweleh. There remains of course the possibility that in the environs of ancient Jerusalem there may have been other springs which are now dried up. all the men of Judah, &c. It is a curious fact that both Absalom and Adonijah seem to have relied most on David's own tribesmen for support to their treasonable designs. i. 1 1 -14. The counterplot in favour of Solomon. The moving spirit is Nathan, who had been David's prophetic adviser from an early period of his reign in Jerusalem (2 Sam. vii), and through whom the name Jedidiah is said in 2 Sam. xii. 25 to have been conferred on Solomon. The traditional view that he had super- intended the education of Solomon rests on a misinterpretation of that verse, as if it read, * he (David) gave him into the hand of Nathan.' Partiality for a favourite pupil cannot, therefore, have been the motive of Nathan's action ; the simplest explanation is probably the best, viz. that he was aware of David's decision in favour of Solomon and approved of it. It is true that there is no record of such a decision in the previous history ; and the question is much discussed whether it be not a pure invention vVhich Nathan and Bath-sheba succeeded in palming off on the credulity of the king. That theory is no doubt capable of being presented with some plausibility ; but in truth the situation is more intelli- gible on the assumption that the promise was really given. The central fact is the formation of a party in the interest of Solomon 62 I KINGS 1. 12-15. C saying, Hast thou not heard that Adonijah the son of Haggith doth reign, and David our lord knoweth it not ? 12 Now therefore come, let me, I pray thee, give thee counsel, that thou mayest save thine own life, and the 13 life of thy son Solomon. Go and get thee in unto king David, and say unto him, Didst not thou, my lord, O king, swear unto thine handmaid, saying, Assuredly Solomon thy son shall reign after me, and he shall sit 14 upon my throne ? why then doth Adonijah reign ? Be- hold, while thou yet talkest there with the king, I also 15 will come in after thee, and confirm thy words. And Bath-sheba went in unto the king into the chamber: (verse 8), v^rhose pretensions to the throne must have rested solely on a nomination by his father. How could such a party justify its existence ? It must at least have given ok/ that Solomon had been privately nominated, so that if there be fraud in the case it must be of somewhat older standing than the theory supposes, though in fact the writer gives no hint that the suspicion of fraud was in his mind at all. The opposite faction may have disbelieved the statement, but could hardly have known it to be false ; and there is no reason to suppose that the historian adopted their view. We have therefore to consider which of two things is less improbable — that the younger son, without a shadow of right, should challenge the position of the older ; or that the natural heir should seek to assert his claims against an alleged arbitrary nomination by the reigning monarch. The difficulty of the latter alternative is further diminished by the fact that David had obviously lacked the courage to promulgate his decision ; and that again is in keeping with the weak indulgence he had always shown to his older children, and to Adonijah in particular (verse 6). 11. Adonijah . . . doth reigrn: ' hath become king.' See verse 25. 12. save thine own life . . . : by defeating the scheme of Adonijah, whose first step, if successful, would be to remove his rival and enemies. 14. and confirm thy words : not about the alleged oath (which Nathan did not confirm), but the statement that Adonijah had been proclaimed (verse 25). i. 15-21. Bath-sheba's intcyvieiv with the king. Bath-sheba's presentation of the case seems less subtle than that suggested to her by Nathan. Instead of asking, ' Why has Adonijah become I KINGS 1. 16-21. C 6$ and the king was very old; and Abishag the Shunam- niite ministered unto the king. And Bath-sheba bowed, 16 and did obeisance unto the king. And the king said, What wouldest thou ? And she said unto him, My lord, 1 7 thou swarest by the Lord thy God unto thine handmaid, sayings Assuredly Solomon thy son shall reign after me, and he shall sit upon my throne. And now, behold, 18 Adonijah reigneth ; and thou, my lord the king, knowest it not : and he hath slain oxen and fatlings and sheep in 19 abundance, and hath called all the sons of the king, and Abiathar the priest, and Joab the captain of the host : but Solomon thy servant hath he not called. And thou, 20 my lord the king, the eyes of all Israel are upon thee, that thou shouldest tell them who shall sit on the throne of my lord the king after him. Otherwise it shall come 21 to pass, when my lord the king shall sleep with his fathers, that I and my son Solomon shall be counted king ? ' (verse 13), as if to insinuate that David must somehow be responsible, she simply states the fact, and assumes that the king is ignorant of it. Her allusion to the oath w^ith regard to Solomon is also perfectly direct and straightforward ; and both lead up to the appeal to the king to give effect to his former purpose, and save her and her son from the fate that threatens them. 18. and thou . . . knowest it not. Not a surprised interroga- tion, but a circumstantial clause = ' without the knowledge of my lord the king.' The marginal reading 'and now * {'attd for 'atid), though supported by Hebrew MSS., is inferior, and is unknown to the ancient Versions. 20. There is more to be said for the marginal 'now' in this verse : the king must now decide whether he will fulfil his oath by making known his will, or supinely acquiesce in Adonijah's usurpation. 21. The connexion is obscure in the original, but is probably correctly expressed by the otherwise of R.V. : ' in the event of no decided action being taken by the king, it shall come to pass,* &c. shall be counted offenders : lit. ' shall be sinners.' In early religion the sinfulness of an action is not determined solely by 64 I KINGS 1. 22-27. C 22 offenders. And, lo, while she yet talked with the king, 23 Nathan the prophet came in. And they told the king, saying, Behold, Nathan the prophet. And when he was come in before the king, he bowed himself before the 24 king with his face to the ground. And Nathan said, My lord, O king, hast thou said, Adonijah shall reign after 25 me, and he shall sit upon my throne? For he is gone down this day, and hath slain oxen and fatlings and sheep in abundance, and hath called all the king's sons, and the captains of the host, and Abiathar the priest; and, behold, they eat and drink before him, and say, 26 God save king Adonijah. But me, even me thy servant, and Zadok the priest, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, 27 and thy servant Solomon, hath he not called. Is this thing done by my lord the king, and thou hast not shewed unto thy servants who should sit on the throne its moral quality, but also by its consequences (cf. Gen. xliii. 9, xliv. 32 ; Num. xxii. 34). i. 22-27. Nathan's intervieiv. The point of the prophet's skilful, and not too ingenuous, appeal lies in the insinuation that, to judge from appearances, David must have been acting behind the backs of his confidential advisers. Nathan cannot believe the king would do such a thing, yet he cannot imagine any other explana- tion of Adonijah's conduct ! It is noticeable that he never once refers to the oath to Bath-sheba. To avoid the semblance of collusion he pretends to look at the matter from a purely official point of view. 23. The ceremonious announcement of the prophet is to allow Bath-sheba to retire (verse 28), in accordance with Eastern etiquette. 25. For tlxe captains of the host, read, with LXX (L), ' Joab, the commander-in-chief.' There was but one commander-in-chief. God save . . . : better, * Long live King Adonijah ! ' There is no reason to suppose that the prophet is here drawing on his imagination in order to prejudice the king against Adonijah ; nothing is more natural than that he should have kept himself informed by the reports of spies of the doings at the Serpent's Stone. 27. Otherwise : < If this thing has been brought about . . . then I KINGS 1. 28-33. C 65 of my lord the king after him ? Then king David 28 answered and said, Call me Bath-sheba. And she came into the king's presence, and stood before the king. And the king sware, and said, As the Lord liveth, who 29 hath redeemed my soul out of all adversity, verily as I 30 sware unto thee by the Lord, the God of Israel, saying, Assuredly Solomon thy son shall reign after me and he shall sit upon my throne in my stead ; verily so will I do this day. Then Bath-sheba bowed with her face to 31 the earth, and did obeisance to the king, and said. Let my lord king David live for ever. And king David said, 32 Call me Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada. And they came before the king. And the king said unto them. Take with you 33 the servants of your lord, and cause Solomon my son to ride upon mine own mule, and bring him down to i. 28-31. David confirms his oath to Bath-sheba. 29. For the form of the oath, cf. 2 Sam. iv. 9. i. 32-40. The anointing of Solomon. David gives minute and explicit directions for the immediate installation of Solomon as his successor. By putting these orders in the mouth of the king the writer shows how far it is from his intention to represent him as mentally incapable. The essential and decisive feature of the coronation ceremonies was the act of anointing. It consisted in pouring sacred oil on the head of the monarch, and was probably in ordinary cases performed by a priest. The primary meaning of the rite seems to have been to establish a relation between the king and the deity, in virtue of which his person was considered inviolable (i Sam. xxiv. 6, xxvi. 9). But with this there was early associated the other idea of the communication of the Divine Spirit, to whose indwelling all kingly virtues were ascribed (i Sam, xvi. 13). SeeW. R. Smith, Rel. of Sent. ^ pp. 233, 384; and Weinel in ZA TJVfor 1898. The lack of this indispensable function blighted Adonijah's prospects of the throne. 33. the servants of your lord : the bodyguard, associated, as in 2 Sam. xx. 6 f., with the Cherethites and Pelethites (see below). mine own mule (fem.). The mule is first mentioned in the reign of David as the riding beast of the royal family (2 Sam. xiii. 29, xviii. 9). Common people still used asses (ii. 40 ; 2 Sam. F 66 I KINGS 1. .:>4-3S. C 34 Gihon : and let Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anoint him there king over Israel : and blow ye with the 35 trumpet, and say, God save king Solomon. Then ye shall come up after him, and he shall come and sit upon my throne; for he shall be king in my stead: and I have appointed him to be prince over Israel and over 36 Judah. And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada answered the king, and said. Amen : the Lord, the God of my lord 37 the king, say so too. As the Lord hath been with my lord the king, even so be he with Solomon, and make his throne greater than the throne of my lord king 38 David. So Zadok the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and the Cherethites and the Pelethites, went down, and caused Solomon to ride upon king David's mule, and brought him to Gihon. xvii. 23), while the war-horse was only introduced under Solomon. These changes mark the rapid advance which the country made in material civilization in the early daj's of the monarchy. Gihon, where the anointing was to take place, must have been another sanctuary of ancient Jerusalem (see on verse 9"). The indications point to its being identical with the Virgin's Spring {Bir Sitti Maryani) in the Kidron valley, at the foot of the south-east hill on which David's citadel stood (cf. 2 Chron. xxxii. 30, xxxiii. 14), (See Plan of Jerusalem.) It is about 700 yards north of Job's Well, and by so much nearer the palace — an impor- tant consideration in view of the haste with which the ceremony had to be carried through. 36. the LOBD . . . say so too. The Hebrew gives a weak sense ; the true text is perhaps preserved by LXX (L) : < May Yahweh confirm the words of my lord the king '.' 38. Cherethites aud . . . Pelethites: ' Krethi and Plethi,' foreign mercenaries who formed the garrison of the capital, and the standing nucleus of David's army (cf. 2 Sam. viii. 18, xv. 18, xx. 7, 23). The Krethi are mentioned in i Sam. xxx. 14 as a tribe in the Negeb ; Plethi is possibly a corrupt pronunciation q{ Plhhtim (Philistines). It was evidently the discipline and fidelity of these troops that saved the situation for Solomon. * In the Heb., change iC!^*' p to pMl and 'nSw to narn^». I KINGS 1. p,9-4|. C 67 And Zadok the priest took the honi of oil out of the zo Tent, and anointed Solomon. And they blew the trum- pet ; and all the people said^ God save king Solomon. And all the people came up after him, and the people 40 piped with pipes, and rejoiced with great joy, so that the earth rent with the sound of them. And Adonijah and 41 all the guests that were with him heard it as they had made an end of eating. And when Joab heard the sound of the trumpet, he said, Wherefore is this noise of the city being in an uproar ? While he yet spake, behold, 42 Jonathan the son of Abiathar the priest came: and Adonijah said. Come in; for thou art a worthy man, and bringest good tidings. And Jonathan answered and 43 said to Adonijah, Verily our lord king David hath made Solomon king : and the king bath sent with him Zadok 44 the priest, and Nathan the prophet, and Benaiah the 39. out of the Tent : doubtless the tent on Zion in which the ark was placed (2 Sam. vi. 17), though some think a sacred tent at Gihon is intended. 40. piped with pipes. LXX, with a small change of text, reads 'danced in dances,' which is perhaps preferable. i. 41-49. The collapse of Adonijah'' s conspiracy. The guests at En-rogel had reached the end of their protracted carousal, when Joab's practised ear caught the note of the trumpet. His aston- ished question is answered by the arrival of Jonathan the son of Abiathar, who is effusively but anxiously hailed as a 'worthy man ' and an auspicious messenger. Jonathan's report goes beyond what has been previously related ; but not necessarily beyond what he had ascertained to have happened. It is part of the writer's art to carry forward his narrative in the speeches of the actors (so in verse 25). The result is that the assembly breaks up in confusion. 42. On Jonathan, see 2 Sam. xv. 27 ff., xvii. 17 flf. a worthy man : originally ' man of valour,' then ' man of substance,' the expression had come to be used as a vague term of approbation, sometimes = ' a capable person ' : Gen. xlvii. 6 ; Exod. xviii. 21 ; and cf. the fern., Prov. xxxi. 10. F 2 68 I KINGS 1. 45-52. C son of Jehoiada, and the Cherethites and the Pelethites, and they have caused him to ride upon the king's mule : 45 and Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet have anointed him king in Gihon : and they are come up from thence rejoicing, so that the city rang again. This 46 is the noise that ye have heard. And also Solomon 47 sitteth on the throne of the kingdom. And moreover the king's servants came to bless our lord king David, saying, Thy God make the name of Solomon better than thy name, and make his throne greater than thy throne : 48 and the king bowed himself upon the bed. And also thus said the king. Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, which hath given one to sit on my throne this 49 day, mine eyes even seeing it. And all the guests of Adonijah were afraid, and rose up, and went every man 50 his way. And Adonijah feared because of Solomon ; and he arose, and went, and caught hold on the horns 51 of the altar. And it was told Solomon, saying. Behold, Adonijah feareth king Solomon : for, lo, he hath laid hold on the horns of the altar, saying, Let king Solomon swear unto me this day that he will not slay his servant 52 with the sword. And Solomon said, If he shall shew himself a worthy man, there shall not an hair of him fall to the earth : but if wickedness be found in him, he 47. bowed himself upon the bed: cf. Gen. xlvii. 31 (J). i. 50-53. AdonijaKs life spared. With a clemency rarely dis- played by Eastern despots, Solomon promises to spare Adonijah, on condition of his future good behaviour. 50. On the altar as asylum, see Exod. xxi. 12-14 '• the only historic instances of the institution in Israel are those of Adonijah here, and Joab in ii. 28. The precise significance of the horns of the altar is obscure (see W. R. Smith, ReL of Sem? p. 436, n. 2) ; but it is clear that special sanctity inhered in them ; and that in a sense the efficacy of the altar was concentrated there (Exod. xxix. 12 ; Lev. iv. 7ff.)- 51. this day: render with marg. * first of all.' I KINGS 1. 53—2. I. C 69 shall die. So king Solomon sent, and they brought him 53 down from the altar. And he came and did obeisance to king Solomon : and Solomon said unto him, Go to thine house. Now the days of David drew nigh that he should die ; 2 53. Qo to thine house : a command to retire into private life. (2) ii. 1-12. DavicTs last charge to Solomon. With regard to the genuineness of these verses, great diversity of opinion prevails among recent critics. That verses 2-4 are Deuteronomistic is universally admitted ; and it is equally certain that verses 10-12 in their present form are from the hand of the compiler of Kings. The important question is whether the remain- ing verses (i, 5-9) were found in the primary source to which ch. i and ii. 13 if. belong, or were composed at a later time in order to acquit Solomon of direct responsibility for the death of Joab and Shimei. The arguments for the second view are chiefly these : /irst, that the real motive for the execution of Joab was his complicity in the plot of Adonijah : hence, so far as he is concerned, verses 5-9 are unhistorical ; and second, that the writer of verses 13-46 evidently takes that view, so that he at least cannot be the author of verses 5-9. But against this it has to be noted (i) that the reasons assigned for the executions in verses 31 ff., 44 ff., are in perfect agreement with verses 5-9. It is replied, indeed, that these were but the official pretexts by which Solomon justified his action ; but that the writer regarded them in that light is a purely gratuitous assumption, and affords no real ground for denying to him the authorship of verses 5-9. (2) In the case of Shimei no motive is even suggested except the alleged 'official pretext.* He is never mentioned as an accomplice of Adonijah — an omission which would be inexplicable if the author knew that he was put to death for the same offence as Joab '. (3) The theory offers no explanation of the charge concerning the sons of Barzillai (verse 7), the fulfilment of which is not referred to in the sequel. (4) It is very difficult to believe that any Hebrew writer would have sought to exculpate Solomon by throwing a far blacker stain ^ The argument here is complicated by the fact that in the LXX the instruction regarding Shimei is repeated immediately before verse 36. Since it is unlikely that the same passage should have occurred twice in the original LXX, it is urged that this points to an earlier recension of the text in which Shimei, but not Joab, was marked out for vengeance by David. But in view of the evident superiority of the Hebrew text in chs. i, ii, it is hazardous to base an argument on a hypothetical recension imperfectly preserved in the Greek Version. 70 I KINGS 2. 2-4. C D 2 and he charged Solomon his son, saying, I go the way of all the earth : [D] be thou strong therefore, and shew 3 thyself a man ; and keep the charge of the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgements, and his testimonies, according to that which is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and 4 whithersoever thou turnest thyself: that the Lord may on the memory of David. The only assumption at all plausible would be that it was done under the influence of a late tendency to glorify Solomon as a prince whose annals were unstained by bloodshed (i Chron. xxii. 8-10). But even that suggestion is negatived by the circumstance that no effort is made to absolve him from the blood of his brother Adonijah. On purely historical grounds, therefore,, the case against the genuineness of verses 5-9 does not appear to be made out. On moral grounds, it might be a satisfaction to get rid of an incident so incongruous with the chivalrous magnanimity of David's character. Yet we must remember that the passage finds an exact parallel in his terrible reprisal on Saul's house for the massacre of the Gibeonites (2 Sam. xxi). David was after all a child of his age, liable to be swayed by the superstitious beliefs then prevalent, which quenched his nobler impulses and made ideal ethical conduct impossible. (See further on verses 6 and 8.) ii. 1-4. General charge io personal piety. The section is almost entirely written by the compiler ; verses 2*^-4 especially exhibiting in nearly every phrase the characteristic style of the Deuteronomic school. Note the parallels pointed out below. 1. drew nigh tliat he shoiUcl die: cf. Gen. xlvii. 29 (J^ ; Deut. xxxi. 14. 2. §ro the way of all the earth : as Joshua xxiii. 14 ^a Deuter- onomic passage). be . . . strong: Joshua i. 6 fT. 3. keep the charge : Deut. xi. i ; Joshua xxii, 3. walk in his ways : Deut. viii. 6, x, 12, xi. 22, &c. keep his statutes : Deut. iv. 40, vii. 11, x. 13, &c. his testimonies : Deut. iv. 45, vi, 17, 20. written in the law of Moses: i. c. the Book of Deuteronomy, the only part of the Pentateuch to which this title is ever applied by the compiler of Kings. Comp. Deut. xvii. 18-20, where the diligent study of the book is specially enjoined on the king. that thoix mayest prosper: Deut. xxix. 9 : Joshua i. 7. I KINGS 2.5-7. DC 11 establish his word which he spake concerning me, saying, If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail thee (said he) a man on the throne of Israel. [C] Moreover thou knowest also 5 what Joab the son of Zeruiah did unto me, even what he did to the two captains of the hosts of Israel, unto Abner the son of Ner, and unto Amasa the son of Jether, whom he slew, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war upon his girdle that was about his loins, and in his shoes that were on his feet. Do therefore according to thy wisdom, and let not his 6 hoar head go down to the grave in peace. But shew 7 4. his word which he spake concerning- me. The reference is to 2 Sam. vii. 12 ff., the contents of which are freely reproduced in the remainder of this verse. with all their heart and with all their sonl : Deut. iv. 29, vi. 5, X. 12 ; Joshua xxii. 5, &c. ii. 5-9. Specific charges regarding individuals. 5. 6. Joah is marked for vengeance on account of the treacher- ous assassinations of 'the two commanders-in-chief of Israel' — Abner (2 Sam. iii. 27) and Amasa (xx. 8-10). The clause and set (so we must render as in marg.) the blood of war in peace is omitted by some of the best MSS. of the LXX, possibly on account of the harshness of the Hebrew phrase. The best reading might be that of LXX (L), ' and avenged the blood of war in peace,' which describes exactly the murder of Abner : it was a base and treacher- ous revenge for the death of Asahel, who had been killed in fair fight. The words may, however, be a gloss. In the following clause it is better (with tlie same authority) to read * innocent blood' for blood of war : perhaps also ' my girdle . . ., my loins . . ., my sandals . . .,' &c. This at least emphasizes the point that the murders were committed under circumstances that gave colour to the suspicion that David himself was privy to them. 6. Do therefore . . . wisdom : i. e. find some specious pretext for bringing Joab to his death (cf. verse 9). g-o down to Sheol: see verse 9. It is difficult for us to estimate fairly the measure of blame attaching to David in this transaction. Since Joab's crimes had been to his advantage, the accusation of personal vindictiveness may be ruled out of con- 72 I KINGS 2. 8, 9. C kindness unto the sons of Barzillai the Gileadite, and let them be of those that eat at thy table : for so they came 8 to me when I fled from Absalom thy brother. And, behold, there is with thee Shimei the son of Cera, the Benjamite, of Bahurim, who cursed me with a giievous curse in the day when I went to Mahanaim : but he came down to meet me at Jordan, and I sware to him by the Lord, saying, I will not put thee to death with 9 the sword. Now therefore hold him not guiltless, for sideration, unless we are to go behind the narrative and suppose him to have been actuated by a desire to avenge the death of Absalom, or by a vague resentment at the masterful ascendency which Joab had so long exercised over him. We must rather assume that David was influenced by a genuine fear lest the guilt of unrequited murder should bring disaster on his kingdom (see verses 31, 33) ; and the question is how far that anxiety justified him in inciting Solomon to an act of vengeance which he had lacked either the power or the courage to execute himself. On the most lenient view it must be frankly acknowledged that David's conduct is abhorrent to our ideas of justice and honour; and it is doubtful if it would not have been condemned by the highest moral standard of his own time. But while we admit the stain on the memory of the great king, we have no right to den}' to him the possession of all nobler qualities of character, or (like Renan to speak of this incident as a revelation of ' the black perfidy of his hypocritical soul ' {Histoire du pcnple d' Israel, ii. p. 92). 7. the sons of Barzillai (see 2 Sam. xvii. 27 ff., xix. 33 ff.) are to continue the recipients of a royal pension : this, and not actual fellowship at table, is supposed to be the meaning of the expression of those that eat at thy tahle. But see 2 Sam. ix. 7 ff"., xix. 28. 8, 9. Shimei the son of Oera: see 2 Sam. xvi. 5 ff., xix. 16 ff. Bahurim: on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho (2 Sam. iii. 16, xvi. 5, xvii. i8} ; the exact site is not certainh' known. a grievous (or potent) curse. The curse once uttered was conceived as having an objective existence, and endowed with self-fulfilling energj', which it might retain indefinitely, unless it could be rolled back on him who uttered it. That this was the idea in David's mind may be inferred from verses 44 f. I will not . . . sword. The oath of David as recorded in 2 Sam. xix. 23 is not capable of the sinister construction which is here suggested, viz. that Solomon was not bound by its literal terms. It may be the case ' Ewald, History, iii. p. 214; that the I KINGS 2. 10, II. CD 73 thou art a wise man ; and thou wilt know what thou oughtest to do unto him, and thou shalt bring his hoar head down to the grave with blood. [D] And David lo slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David. And the days that David reigned over Israel n were forty years : seven years reigned he in Hebron, and thirty and three years reigned he in Jerusalem. exercise of the prerogative of mercy was understood to expire with a change of sovereign ; but here again it must be confessed that David's superstitious foreboding leads him to commit an action which to our minds is utterly dishonourable : he ' keeps the word of promise to the ear, and breaks it to the hope.' 9. thou art a wise man : see on verse 6. brinsr his hoar head down to Sheol (marg.) with blood: Sheol, the underworld, the realm of shades, is the Hebrew equiva- lent of the Homeric Hades. It is the universal gathering-place of the souls of the departed, to which good and bad alike ' go down ' at death. The verse expresses a common belief that the shade preserves the appearance of the living man, or more accurately the appearance with which he made his exit from this world. Shimei's bloodstained hair remains a witness for ever to the dishonoured death he had died. Cf Gen, xxxvii. 35, xUi. 38, xliv. 29, 31 (J). ii. 10-12. Concluding notice of David'' s reign. We have here the first occurrence of the compiler's 'framework' (Introd., p. loff.). The original document must no doubt have contained at this point a notice of the death of David. 10. Is the stereotyped formula in which the death of the kings of Judah is recorded (cf xi. 43, xiv. 31, &c.). slept (strictly 'lay') with his fathers. The expression is obviously derived from interment in the family sepulchre (Gen. xlvii. 30), and in its literal sense is inapplicable to David, whose ancestors must have been buried in Beth-lehem. But there are many passages besides this which prove that the expression had been extended, and, so to speak, spiritualized, in the sense of reunion in Sheol (e. g., Deut. xxxi. 16). The whole conception of Sheol, indeed, was largely a projection of the earthly burying place into the sphere of the unseen. the city of David : the new city built on the site of the old Jebusite fort which had been captured by David (2 Sam. v. 9). As to its situation, see Appendix, Note i. 11. Cf. 2 Sam. v. 5. 74 I KINGS 2. 12-15. DC 12 And Solomon sat upon the throne of David his father ; 13 and his kingdom was estabhshed greatly. [C] Then Adonijah the son of Haggith came to Bath-sheba the mother of Solomon. And she said, Comest thou peace- 14 ably ? And he said, Peaceably. He said moreover, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And she said. Say on. 15 And he said. Thou knowest that the kingdom was mine, and that all Israel set their faces on me, that I should reign : howbeit the kingdom is turned about, and is (3) li' i3~46' Removal of SoloniorC s Enemies. ii. 13-25. The fate of Adonijah. The defeated candidate for the throne seeks an interview with Bath-sheba, now the queen- mother, desiring her to use her influence with Solomon on his behalf. Bath-sheba is completely won over by his pathetic appeal : he speaks as a man resigned to the loss of the great ambition of his life, and with only one small wish left — to re- ceive the beautiful Abishag in marriage. The admirable detach- ment and impartiality of the narrator allows this request to make on us the same impression as it made on Bath-sheba, and actually leaves us in some uncertainty whether Adonijah cherished the treasonable design which Solomon attributed to him. The proba- bility, however, is that he was not so innocent as Bath-sheba imagined. According to an ancient Semitic custom, which survived in Arabia down to the time of Mohammed (W. R. Smith, Kinships, p. 86flf.), the wives of a man deceased passed with the other property to his heir. Similarly among the Hebrews great importance was attached, in the case of a royal succession, to the possession of the wives and concubines of the late monarch (see 2 Sam. iii. 7, xii. 8, xvi. 21 f.). Hence to grant Adonijah's wish would strengthen immensely his claim to be regarded as David's lawful heir ; and since he had already the right of primogeniture in his favour, and was supported by influential men, Solomon's position might easily have been rendered un- tenable. He accordingly refuses the request, and sentences his brother to death ; a sentence carried out by Benaiah as captain of the bodyguard. 13. Comest thou peaceably? * Is this a friendly visit? ' The astonishment and alarm of the question are natural in the strained relations between the two factions. 15. the kingdom was mine. That Adonijah was really looked on as the heir-presumptive is virtually admitted by Solomon in verse 22, ' he is my elder brother.' I KINGS 2. 16-33. C 75 become my brother's : for it was his from the Lord. And now I ask one petition of thee, deny me not. And 16 she said unto him, Say on. And he said, Speak, I pray 17 thee, unto Solomon the king, (for he will not say thee nay,) that he give me Abishag the Shunammite to wife. And Bath-sheba said, Well; I will speak for thee unto 18 the king. Bath-sheba therefore went unto king Solomon, 19 to speak unto him for Adonijah. And the king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down on his throne, and caused a throne to be set for the king's mother; and she sat on his right hand. Then 20 she said, I ask one small petition of thee ; deny me not. And the king said unto her, Ask on, my mother : for I will not deny thee. And she said, Let Abishag the 21 Shunammite be given to Adonijah thy brother to wife. And king Solomon answered and said unto his mother, 22 And why dost thou ask Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah ? ask for him the kingdom also ; for he is mine elder brother ; even for him, and for Abiathar the priest, and for Joab the son of Zeruiah. Then king 23 Solomon sware by the Lord, saying, God do so to me, 19. As the queen-mother, Bath-sheba enjoys a dignity in the court which had not belonged to her while David was alive : contrast the ceremony of this reception with the intei-view of i. 15, 16. For bowed himself unto her, we should read with LXX. ' kissed her.' 20, 21. With a certain consciousness of her new importance, Bath-sheba presents Adonijah's petition as her own personal request. 22. The king's anger breaks out in an ironical question : * Why ask Abishag only 1 Why not the kingdom at once ? ' See above. even for him : unintelligible. With a slight change of text we may read, ' and on his side are Abiathar . . . and Joab.' Solomon finds in the incident evidence of a fresh conspiracy ; and this supplies him with the desired occasion for proceeding against Joab. 76 I KINGS 2. 24-27. CD and more also, if Adonijah have not spoken this word 34 against his own hfe. Now therefore as the Lord hveth, who hath estabhshed me, and set me on the throne of David my father, and who hath made me an house, as he promised, surely Adonijah shall be put to death this 25 day. And king Solomon sent by the hand of Benaiah the son of Jehoiada ; and he fell upon him, that he died. 26 And unto Abiathar the priest said the king, Get thee to Anathoth, unto thine own fields ; for thou art worthy of death: but I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because thou wast afflicted in all 27 wherein my father was afflicted. [D] So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord ; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake 23. against Ms own life : better, ' at the cost of his life,' ii. 26, 27. The banishment of Abiathar. His life is spared, ostensibly for his long fidelity to David, although, for that matter, Joab's devotion had been still more conspicuous. The king was no doubt influenced by other reasons as well ; partly the know- ledge that Abiathar was a much less dangerous enemy than Joab, and partly perhaps a regard for the sanctity of his office. He is banished to his patrimonial estate at Anathoth. 26. The words at tMs time ought to be taken (as by LXX) with the previous clause, ' thou art worthy of death this day, but I will not,' &c. Anathoth is the modern 'Andtd, two and a half miles north- east of Jerusalem. How Abiathar came to have lands there we do not know ; but the place remained for many centuries the residence of a priestly family, from which sprang the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. i. i). 2*7. While Abiathar is removed from the royal sanctuary, the original narrative said nothing of a degradation from the priest- hood, for this verse must be an editorial insertion. It is based on I Sam. ii. 27-36, which, in its present form at least, can hardly have been written earlier than Josiah's reformation. The purpose of the gloss is not so much to call attention to the fulfilment of a prediction as to vindicate the legitimacy of the Zadokite priest- hood, which, humanly speaking, owed its elevation lo this political measure of Solomon. See on verse 35. I KINGS 2. 28-32. DC 77 concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh. [C] And the 28 tidings came to Joab : for Joab had turned after Adonijah, though he turned not after Absalom. And Joab fled unto the Tent of the Lord, and caught hold on the horns of the altar. And it was told king 29 Solomon, Joab is fled unto the Tent of the Lord, and, behold, he is by the altar. Then Solomon sent Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, saying, Go, fall upon him. And 30 Benaiah came to the Tent of the Lord, and said unto him, Thus saith the king. Come forth. And he said, Nay ; but I will die here. And Benaiah brought the king word again, saying, Thus said Joab, and thus he answered me. And the king said unto him. Do as he 31 hath said, and fall upon him, and bury him ; that thou mayest take away the blood, which Joab shed without cause, from me and from my father's house. And the 3 a Lord shall return his blood upon his own head, because ii. 28-34. ^^^^ ^"^ of Joab. On hearing the rumour of these occurrences, Joab had sought shelter at the altar ; and there, without further trial, he is cut down by the order of Solomon. 28. See i. 50. The parenthetic sentence for Joab had turned explains (somewhat superfluously) how and why the rumour affected Joab : that it gives the author's view of the reason for his condemnation, as opposed to the official justification in verses 31 f., is not so evident. the Tent of the LORD is the tent which David had erected for the ark (i. 39 ; 2 Sam. vi. 17). 29. The story is amplified in the LXX by a long addition in the middle of the verse, which may be quoted, although it adds nothing to the sense : ' Then Solomon sent to Joab saying, Wherefore hast thou fled to the altar ? And Joab said, Because I feared before thy face, and I fled to the Lord. And Solomon sent Benaiah,' &c. 31. and bury him. Joab is to be spared the last indignity of being denied the rites of sepulture. 32. his blood upon his own head: a common, but not meaningless, metaphor. It expresses the idea that blood thus righteously shed in the administration of justice creates no new 78 I KINGS 2. 33-36. C he fell upon two men more righteous and better than he, and slew them with the sword, and my father David knew it not, to wit^ Abner the son of Ner, captain of the host of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, captain 33 of the host of Judah. So shall their blood return upon the head of Joab, and upon the head of his seed for ever : but unto David, and unto his seed, and unto his house, and unto his throne, shall there be peace for ever 34 from the Lord. Then Benaiah the son of Jehoiada went up, and fell upon him, and slew him ; and he was 35 buried in his own house in the wilderness. And the king put Benaiah the son of Jehoiada in his room over the host : and Zadok the priest did the king put in the 36 room of Abiathar. And the king sent and called for Shimei, and said unto him, Build thee an house in blopd-feud : the otherwise endless vendetta is stayed. Compare the opposite case in the next verse. 34. Like Samuel (i Sam. xxv. i), Joab is buried iu his own house, which was in the wilderness of Judca (see the graphic description in G. A Smith, Hist. Geog., p. 312 ff.). Joab's house and family grave would naturally be in the neighbourhood of Beth-lehem. 35. The installation of Zadok, here inserted by an editor, was an event of extraordinary significance in the religious history of Israel. In the first instance, it was nothing more than the selection of a particular Levitical line as custodians of the royal sanctuary ; but with the growing importance of the Jerusalem temple the influence of its priesthood steadily increased ; and that influence seems, on the whole, to have been exercised in the true interests of the national religion. The High Priesthood appears to have remained in the family till the murder of Onias in b.c. 171 (2 Mace. iv. 34). Even after the restoration of Jewish inde- pendence, the name Zadokite survived as the designation of the sect of the Sadducees, who were originally the old temple aris- tocracy, who adhered as a body to the policy of the priest-princes of the Asmonean house. ii. 36-46. The reckoning with Shimei. He is summoned from Bahurim and ordered to take up his residence in Jerusalem, where his movements could be closely watched ; and is made to swear, I KINGS 2. 37-43. C 79 Jerusalem, and dwell there, and go not forth thence any whither. P'or on the day thou goest out, and passest 37 over the brook Kidron, know thou for certain that thou shalt surely die: thy blood shall be upon thine own head. And Shimei said unto the king, The saying is 38 good : as my lord the king hath said, so will thy servant do. And Shimei dwelt in Jerusalem many days. And 39 it came to pass at the end of three years, that two of the servants of Shimei ran away unto Achish, son of Maacah, king of Gath. And they told Shimei, saying, Behold, thy servants be in Gath. And Shimei arose, and 40 saddled his ass, and went to Gath to Achish, to seek his servants : and Shimei went, and brought his servants from Gath. And it was told Solomon that Shimei had 41 gone from Jerusalem to Gath, and was come again. And the king sent and called for Shimei, and said unto 42 him, Did I not make thee to swear by the Lord, and protested unto thee, saying, Know for certain, that on the day thou goest out, and walkest abroad any whither, thou shalt surely die? and thou saidst unto me, The saying that I have heard is good. Why then hast thou 43 on pain of death, not to pass the limits of the city. (The brook Kidron is mentioned as the boundary he would have to cross to get back to his old haunts and connexions among the Benjamites.) For three years he observed the compact ; then his restless spirit found a slight occasion for an excursion in the direction opposite to that which he was expected to take. The affair is duly reported to Solomon ; and Shimei is condemned to death. 39. Acliish, sou of Maacah, king- of Gath. In i Sam. xxvii. 2 we read of an Achish , son of ' Maoch ' ; and though more than forty years had elapsed, the same king must probably be meant ; and the names should doubtless be read alike in the two passages. 42. protested unto thee: 'solemnly admonished thee.' The last clause, and thou saidst . . . g'ood, is not found in the LXX, perhaps owing to a mistake of the translator. If genuine, it should be rendered : 'Good is the matter! I have heard/ which is Hebrew for ' Very good ! I obey.' (Cf. verse 38.) 8o I KINGS 2. 4^-46. C not kept the oath of the Lord, and the commandment 44 that I have charged thee with ? The king said moreover to Shimei, Thou knowest all the wickedness which thine heart is privy to, that thou didst to David my father : therefore the Lord shall return thy wickedness upon 45 thine own head. But king Solomon shall be blessed, and the throne of David shall be established before the 46 Lord for ever. So the king commanded Benaiah the son of Jehoiada ; and he went out, and fell upon him, that he died. And the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon. 44. Behind the technical offence lies a graver charge, which is the real ground of his condemnation. The words which thine heart is privy to (Jit. ' knoweth ') seem to represent a variant of the preceding clause. shall return : better perhaps, '■ hath returned ' (so LXX, &.c.^. Shimei's infatuated conduct was Yahweh's sentence on his wickedness. 45. king* Solomon shall he blessed : by the removal of the curse from his house (see on verse 8). 46. And the kingdom. The sentence is inserted by the LXX (in a corrupt form) in the middle of verse 35. It is hard to say which may have been its original position. Note oil the LXX of chapter it. One of the most important peculiarities of the Greek text of Kings is found in the latter part of chap, ii, in the form of two very long additions, one between verses 35 and 36, and the other after verse 46. (It has to be remembered that the last clause of verse 46 is transferred to the middle of verse 35 ; see the last note.) The additional verses are numbered in Swete's edition by the letters of the alphabet, as ii. 35 *- ^ ° . . . " ; and ii. 46 * . . . ^ : and this notation is adopted in the following notes, in the few instances where it is necessary to refer to the passages. Each insertion begins with a notice of Solomon's wisdom and power ; and then passes on to a series of fragmentary data, such as we frequently find in the Hebrew of chaps, iii-xi. Tlie first (35 '"°), ends with an account of David's charge regarding Shimei, which naturally leads up to the narrative of the death of the latter, as in verses 36-46. The second insertion ends with a verse (46^), which corresponds generally with iv. i of the Hebrew ; but in I KINGS 3. I. A 8i [AJ And Solomon made affinity with J^haraoh king of 3 the Vatican MS. (LXX (B) ), this is followed by a break in the continuity, which shows tliat the LXX text has been abruptly dropped (probably at the end of a page) to make way for the present Hebrew text. It is impossible here to discuss the intricate problems of textual history which are suggested by these variations. The hypothesis that the LXX represents an independent recension, older than the Hebrew, cannot be es- tablished. With very few exceptions the inserted notices all occur in one place or another of the Hebrew of iii-xi ; and most o^ the facts can be explained by assuming that they are an attempted rearrangement of the material supplied by the Hebrew for the history of Solomon. At the same time, their secondary character does not destroy their value for the criticism of the text. The compilation must have been made from an earlier form of the Hebrew ; and in some cases has preserved a better reading. It is possible also that it underwent expansion here and there, and that in its amplified form it came into the hands of a later scribe, who used it to annotate his Hebrew MS. iii-xi. The Reign of Solomon. The account of Solomon's reign occupies (if we include i. ii) more than a fourth part of the two Books of Kings ; and is arranged upon a method almost peculiar to this section. Instead of the graphic continuous narratives which form the basis of the history of David, we have (in iii-xi) a lifeless and somewhat confused assortment of very heterogeneous material, ' determined less by chronological sequence than by community of subject' (Driver). The selection of material seems to have been influenced largely by two leading points of view : a sense of Solomon's importance as the founder of the temple ; and admiration of him as the beati ideal of wisdom and regal magnificence. The first of these appealed most strongly to the Deuteronomic editors, as we may judge from the disproportionate space (more than half the section") allotted to the building and inauguration of the sanctuary (v. I — ix. 9). The second appears in the older authorities ; and also in some late additions which celebrate the splendour of Solomon's rule in terms which occasionally exceed historical probability. The literary analysis of the section is extremely complicated. Setting aside post-redactional glosses and insertions of various kinds, we can distinguish three kinds of material which enter into the composition : — (i) A statistical or annalistic account of Solomon's kingdom, commencing at iv. i and extending to iv. 28, resumed in ix. 10-28, and concluding with x. 14-29 (A). It is a reasonable assumption 82 I KINGS 3. I. A Egypt, and took Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her that these detached notices are based in the first instance on the state records of the reign, although the form and connexion in which they now appear must be due to the labours of successive editors. It is uncertain whether the description of the temple buildings and utensils in vi, vii is taken from the same source, or from an independent document (T) preserved in the temple archives. (2) A series of narratives (S), partly historical, describing important events in the reign, and partly biographical, illustrative of Solomon's wisdom and greatness : iii. 4-13, 16-28, v. i — vi. i, viii. 1-13. X. 1-13, the basis of xi. 1-8, xi. 14-22, 26-31, 40. It is not to be assumed that all these passages are derived from a single document, or belong to one age : the story of the queen of Sheba (x. 1-13) has certain traces of later authorship (see p. 166); while the account of Jeroboam (xi. 26 ff.), which anticipates xii, shows that some at least of the sources were not peculiar to the history of Solomon, but belonged to historical works of more comprehensive scope. (3) The Deuteronomic supplements (D), which occur partly in the form of short interpolations, and partly as longer compositions: iii. 3, 14 f., V. 4f., vi. 11-13, viii. 14-61, ix. 1-9, xi. 9-13, 32-39? ^ 1-43. Of these again some parts appear to be pre-Exilic, and others Exilic or post-Exilic. The most interesting question which here arises concerns the relation of (i) and (2) to the work cited in xi. 41 as the Book of the Acts of Solomon. Since it contained some account of Solomon's 'wisdom,' it may be presumed at least to have included certain anecdotes of the kind mentioned under (2). Now there is evidence that some of these narratives had been combined with annalistic material in the sources which lay before the compiler ; and a peculiar use of the particle 'then' (iii. 16, viii. i, 12, ix. 11, 24, xi. 7) suggests that the combination had been effected in a docu- ment of the same general character as the chronicles of the kings of Israel and Judah. It is possible, therefore— though far from certain — that this was the history of Solomon referred to. But that all the notices grouped under (i) had been thus treated we can hardly assume, in view of the extremely fragmentary nature of the compilation and the numerous displacements revealed by a comparison of the Hebrew text with the LXX. It seems better, accordingly, to denote these by a special symbol (A), and to use (S) for the more continuous narratives. It is from the pre-Deuteronomic sources that we must start if we are to form a historical estimate of the character and policy of Solomon. There is no doubt that these writers present his government on the whole in a favourable light. We cannot be I KINGS 3. I. A 83 into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the Lord, and wrong in thinking of the reign as a period of rapidly advancing civilization, of great material prosperity and outward splendour ; nor in attributing all this mainly to the initiative and enterprise of the monarch. Solomon was a man of brilliant genius and resource, inspired by a passion for self-aggrandizement which found an out- let in the ostentatious luxury of his court and the costly building projects that made his name famous. He was quick to perceive the opportunities offered to the newly consolidated nationality of Israel by its geographical position and political relations ; and he knew how to utilize these advantages in opening up new sources of revenue. But the history enables us to see at the same time that his rule was by no means an unmixed blessing to his subjects. It shows that under him the empire of David began to crumble ; that his government, if essentially just, was despotic and oppressive ; and that his selfish ambitions exhausted the financial resources of the country. And the silence of the historians is perhaps even more eloquent than their speech. It is significant that they have little to tell of true moral greatness, or any application of his fabulous wealth except the barren and extravagant display of an oriental court. We can readily understand that Solomon, with his purely intellectual eminence and his soaring cosmopolitan ideas, excited the admiration rather than the aff*ection of his people ; and that his harsh and unsympathetic administration pro- duced a smouldering discontent which broke out in open rebellion immediately after his death. iii. Introducioyy Narratives. iii. I. Solomon's marriage with an Egyptian princess.—The verse hardly stands here in its proper position. In the LXX it is united with ix. 16 of the Hebrew, and the two are inserted after iv. 34 of the E. V. (between verses 14 and 15 of ch. v in the Hebrew). In that connexion the incident would belong to the annalistic account of Solomon's reign which commences at iv. i ; and, on the whole, this may be presumed to have been its original setting. The history of Solomon will then have begun in the usual way, with the compiler's verdict on his religious attitude, in verse 3. 1. made affinity with: 'became the son-in-law of.' The Pharaoh referred to must have been a predecessor of Shishak (xiv. 25), the founder of the twenty-second dynasty ; and there- fore one of the last kings of the twenty-first (Tanitic) dynasty. Winckler (KAT^, p. 236) points out that, according to a passage in the Tel-Amarna tablets, it was impossible for an Egyptian princess to marry a foreigner ; hence he argues that there must G 2 84 I KINGS 3. 2-4. AZDS the vail of Jerusalem round about. [Z] Only the people sacrificed in the high places, because there was no house built for the name of the Lord until those days. [D] And Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David his father : only he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places. [S] And the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there ; be a confusion here between Mizraim (Egypt) and the Arabian kingdom of Muzri. The passage occurs in a correspondence between the kings of Egypt and Babylon, in which the former refuses his daughter to the latter on the ground that such a thing had never been done. His royal correspondent, however, appears to treat the refusal as a diplomatic evasion. In any case, it hap- pened four or five centuries before the time of Solomon. (Sec KIB, V. p. 8f.) On the wall of Jerusalem see ix. 15. iii. 2, 3. Religious judgements on Solomon. The word * only ' in verse 2, qualifying nothing in the preceding context, indicates that there has been some textual disturbance, which is probably to be explained as follows : — The Deuteronomic compiler is respon- sible for verse 3 alone, which expresses, in the terms usually applied to the good kings of Judah, a general commendation of Solomon's conduct (see xv. 14 ; 2 Kings xii. 3, &c., &c.). Verse 2 was first written as a marginal comment by a later scribe, who supposed that the second half of verse 3 referred merely to the sacrifice at Gibeon, and wished to justify Solomon by pointing out that this was due to the temple not being built. Eventually the gloss was incorporated in the text in its present unsuitable position. Verse 2, however, still represents the Deuteronomic point of view : the law of the one sanctuary did not come into practical operation until the temple was built. The older narra- tive (verse 4) accepts the worship of the high places as a matter of course. 3. loved the LORD, walkinsT : a Deuteronomic phrase ; Deut. x. 12, xi. 22, &c. sacrificed and burnt incense: strictly, 'slaughtered and turned into (sacrificial) smoke ' ; an expression of frequent occur- rence in the Deuteronomic portions of Kings (xi. 8, xxii. 43 ; a Kings xii. 3, &c.). iii. 4-15. Solomon's initiatory sacrifice and vision at Gibeon. Solomon appears to have celebrated his accession by a great I KINGS 3. 5, 6. S D 85 for that was the great high place : a thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer upon that altar. In Gibeon 5 the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night : and God said, Ask what I shall give thee. And 6 Solomon said, Thou hast shewed unto thy servant David my father great kindness, [D] according as he religious ceremony at the most frequented sanctuary in the vicinity of Jerusalem. On the following night Yahweh appears to him in a dream, and offers the fulfilment of whatever request he may make. The incident has a profound interest and signifi- cance. The youthful monarch, solemnized perhaps by the im- posing service in which he had been engaged, and impressed by a sense of the responsibilities of government, puts aside the pros- pect of earthly greatness, and definitely chooses as his portion the wisdom and righteousness necessary for the right discharge of his exalted duties. His unselfish aspiration is rewarded by a promise not only of the wisdom he had asked, but of wealth and honour and long life. It is noteworthy that the two recorded Divine communications to Solomon take place, not through the medium of prophecy, but through dreams in a sacred place (cf. ix. I, 2). In the whole history of Solomon there is no instance of prophetic influence on his policy, such as Nathan and Gad had exerted in the reign of David. The passage contains numerous traces of the hand of the compiler, especially in verses 6 and 14 ; but the basis of the narrative is undoubtedly ancient. See Burney, p. aSff., who gives a careful comparison of the text with the parallel in 2 Chron. i. 3-13. 4. Gibeon, the modern el-Jib, was in the territory of Benjamin, some six miles north-west of Jerusalem. It was the great (i. e. * chief) higrh place, possibly on account of its central position, and its proximity to the capital. Mgli place (Heb. hdmdK) is the ancient and technical name (found also on the Moabite Stone) of the local Canaanitish sanc- tuaries, which had been adopted by the Israelites, and consecrated to the worship of Yahweh. Every town and village had such a place of sacrifice, situated on the * height ' on whose slope the town was built (i Sam. ix. loff".). In the Chronicler's version of the incident (2 Chron. i. 3 ff.), a different reason is given for the choice of Gibeon for the sacrifice, viz. that the Mosaic tabernacle and the brazen altar were there, though the ark was in Jerusalem. That explanation is certainly unhistorical ; but it is one which arose naturally from the fixed belief that sacrifice elsewhere than at the one legitimate sanctuaiy had always been impossible. 6. The phraseology here is mostly Deuteronomic. 86 I KINGS 3. 7-1 T. DS walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee; and thou hast kept for him this great kindness, that thou hast given him a son 7 to sit on his throne, as it is this day. [S] And now, O Lord my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father : and I am but a Htde child ; I 8 know not how to go out or come in. And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for 9 multitude. Give thy servant therefore an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and evil ; for who is able to judge this thy great 10 people? And the speech pleased the Lord, that Solomon 11 had asked this thing. And God said unto him, Because thou hast kept : resei-ved this as thy crowning act of goodness to David ; cf. i. 48. 7. I am but a little child is of course a hyperbolical expres- sion for inexperience. The actual age of Solomon at his accession is not stated. If the numbers in xiv. 21 and xi. 42 be correct, he had already a son ; and his vigorous action in ch. ii certainly suggests that he had passed beyond boyhood. Tradition makes him to have been really a child. Some copies of the LXX insert in ii. 12 a notice that he was twelve years old ; Josephus {Ant. viii. 211) says he was fourteen, giving him, however, a reign of eighty years. to g-o out or come in : i. e., to discharge the duties of one's station (i Sam, xviii. 16). 8. cannot be . . . counted for multitude : cf. viii. 5 ; Gen. xvi. 10, xxxii. 12. 9. an tinderstandincr heart : ///. ' a hearing heart ' (as marg.) ; i. e. a receptive mind, one that listens and considers before it decides (cf. 2 Sam. xiv. 17 ; Prov. xxi. 28). to judsre has here almost the sense of ' to govern,' the ad- ministration of justice being the principal function of the king in time of peace. 10. 11. To have perceived the supreme importance of this quality, as contrasted with external greatness and military glory, is the ethically valuable element in Solomon's choice which makes it pleasing to God. I KINGS 3. 12-16. SDS 87 thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life ; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgement; behold, I 12 have done according to thy word : lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart ; so that there hath been none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. And I have also given thee 13 that which thou hast not asked, both riches and honour, so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee, all thy days. [D] And if thou wilt walk in my 14 ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen thy days. [S] And Solomon awoke, and, behold, it was a dream : 15 and he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and offered up burnt offerings, and offered peace offerings, and made a feast to all his servants. Then came there two women, that were harlots, unto 16 12. an uuderstaudiugf heart: better, 'a discerning mind'; the marginal reference * hearing ' is a mistake. 13. all thy days : this senseless clause should be omitted with the LXX. 14. See on ii. 2-4. 15 is generally considered to be the work of a still later writer, who thought that if Solomon had committed the irregularity of sacrificing at a high place, he would be sure to put matters right by a sort of indemnifying ceremony at the proper place. But the first sentence must be from the old source ; and for the rest, there is perhaps nothing very improbable in the statement that the return to Jerusalem was signalized by fresh sacrifices before the ark, where there seems to have been an altar (ii. 29). The phrase ' ark 0/ the covenant of Yahweh ' may be Deuteronomic ; but the addi- tion has crept into the text in other early passages, and there is no reason why it might not have done so here. iii. 16-28. An instance 0/ So/oMon^s sagacity. The story comes in here appropriately as an illustration of the endowment which 88 I KINGS 3. 17-21. S 17 the king, and stood before him. And the one woman said, Oh my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house ; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house. 18 And it came to pass the third day after I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also ; and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, 19 save we two in the house. And this woman's child died 20 in the night ; because she overlaid it. And she arose at midnight, and took my son from beside me^ while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her 21 dead child in my bosom. And when I rose in the Solomon had obtained in answer to his prayer. To us it is in- teresting as showing the kind of quality which the early Hebrews popularly called ' wisdom ' (Jiokmah), and which was so greatly esteemed among them. It is not the faculty of philosophical reflection, nor is it essentially a moral virtue ; ' the wisdom which the East admires* is * the clever judicial decision, the faculty of cloth- ing a practical experience in a rule of life or a witty saying, the acuteness which can solve an enigma' (Duncker). That blending of insight, shrewdness and tact which penetrates the disguises of human action, and plays deftly on the true motives which lie beneath, is the wisdom of Solomon ; and Jewish legend relates many examples, more extravagant than this, of his peculiar gift. Grotius called attention to an interesting parallel in Diodorus Siculus : Ariopharnes, king of Thrace, had to decide which of three pretenders was really the son of the dead king of the Cimmerians ; he discovered the tmth by ordering them to pierce the bod}' of the father with a spear, when of course the true son refused. (Quoted by Thenius.) 16. Then. The other instances of this use of the word (see on p. 82 above) are viii. i, 12, ix. 11, 24, xi. 7, xvi. 21. xxii. 49; 2 Kings viii. 22, xii, 17, xiv. 8, xv. 16, xvi. 5. ' In many cases the notices introduced by it lack any definite point of attachment in the preceding narrative : at the same time, their directness of statement and terseness of form suggest the inference that they may be derived immediately from the contemporary annalistic records' (Driver, Tutrod.'^ p. 203). Driver considers the usage to be a characteristic of the compiler; but it is equally probable that it belongs to the style of the documents he emploj'ed. 18. no stranger : so that the case cannot be decided by evidence. I KINGS 3. 22-28. S 89 morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead : but when I had considered it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, which I did bear. And the other 22 woman said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And this said, No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they spake before the king. Then said the king, The one saith, 23 This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead : and the other saith, Nay ; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living. And the king said. Fetch me a sword. 24 And they brought a sword before the king. And the 25 king said. Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other. Then spake the 26 woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, Oh my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said. It shall be neither mine nor thine; divide it. Then the king answered and said, Give her 27 the living child, and in no wise slay it : she is the mother thereof. And all Israel heard of the judgement 28 which the king had judged ; and they feared the king : 21. considered it: better, 'looked at it narrowly' (as Isa. xiv. 16). 22, 23. The LXX omits the sentence And this said ... my son in verse 22, and in the following verse reads, ' Thou sayest . . . and thou sayest,' instead of The one saith . . . and the other saith. The Hebrew is preferable in both cases: in the first, because it depicts better the unseemly wrangling of the two women before the king : and in the second, because a soliloquy of Solomon on the peculiar situation is the most suitable prelude to verse 24. 26. her bowels yearned : lit. ' grew warm ' or ' tender ' ; cf. Gen. xliii. 30 (J). 27. give her the living" child. Since the pronoun does not refer to the last speaker, it may be better to read, somewhat as LXX, ' Give it to her who says. Give her the living child . . . : she is its mother.' 90 I KINGS 4. 1-3. SA for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgement. 4 [A] And king Solomon was king over all Israel. 2 And these were the princes which he had ; Azariah the 3 son of Zadok, the priest ; Elihoreph and Ahijah, the sons of Shisha, scribes ; Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud, the 28. the wisdom of Ood: better, ' Divine wisdom.' iv. AiDtalisttc accotoit of Soloiiion's Kingdom. The chapter consists for the most part of a series of extracts from the official Annals of Solomon's reign : these (though interspersed with a few notices of later date) continue to the end of verse 28. Since a heading similar to verse i precedes the list of David's officials in 2 Sam. viii. 15, it seems a plausible con- jecture that it forms the introduction to an independent account of the reign, transferred bodily either from the State documents, or from some abridgement of them which had been published (so Kittel). iv. 2-6. List of Solomoii^ s Ministers. The list occurs twice in the LXX ; once in the present connexion, and again as part of the long addition in ch. ii (ii. 46 ^) ^ The variations of the three texts are very considerable ; but in the first case the divergences from the Hebrew can, on the whole, be fairly explained by scribal errors either in the Hebrew or the Greek. In the other case, however, the discrepancies are very remarkable and perplexing. Benzinger has hazarded the bold suggestion that we have really to do with two independent compilations, based on two different official lists, one belonging to an earlier and the other to a later period of the reign. It is also of interest to compare the corre- sponding lists for the reign of David, which are found in 2 Sam. viii. 17 f., and xx. 23-26. 2. princes : (Heb. sdrim, often rendered ' captains ') is the technical designation of the high civil and military officials of the monarchical regime. Here it denotes the Ministers of State, or heads of departments. the ^chief) priest is Azariah the son of Zadok, hence the list cannot be from the very beginning of the reign (see ii. 35). 3. The scribes, or • secretaries ' (///. * writers ') would be the officials to whom was entrusted the conduct of correspondence, the keeping of records, the preparation of documents, &c. The office would seem, like the priesthood, to have been hereditary; for Shisha, the father of EUhoreph (LXX, ' Eliaph ' or 'Eliab') ^ See the note on p. 80 f. I KINGS 4. 4-7. A 91 recorder ; and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the 4 host ; and Zadok and Abiathar were priests ; and Azariah 5 the son of Nathan was over the officers ; and Zabud the son of Nathan was priest, and the king's friend ; and 6 Ahishar was over the household ; and Adoniram the son of Abda was over the levy. And Solomon had twelve 7 and Ahijah, can easily be recognized through all its protean disguises as the name of David's secretary (Seraiah, 2 Sam. viii. 17 ; Sheva, xx. 25). In the LXX of ii. 46'* the father still holds the office. The business of the recorder (maskir, lit. 'remembrancer') was probably to bring important matters of State to the notice of the king. The office is still held by Jehoshapbat, as under David (2 Sam. viii. 16, xx. 24). 4*. The commander-in-chief is Benaiah, as in ii. 35. But here we cannot ignore the surprising variation of the LXX (ii. 46**), which makes Benaiah still captain of the guard, and names ' a son of Joab ' as commander-in-chief. It is barely possible that this represents the distribution of offices at an early period of Solomon's reign, if we assume that the appointment mentioned in ii. 35 was not made immediately on the death of Joab, which it must be confessed is little probable. 4** is a particularly stupid interpolation (after a Sam. viii. 17), absolutely irreconcileable with ii. 35. 5 *. over the officers : or governors ; see on verse 7 below. 5^ . Render, and Zabud . . . , a priest, was the king''s friend, unless we are to follow the LXX and omit * priest ' entirely. The duties of this functionary (cf. 2 Sam. xv. 37, xvi. 16) are quite unknowm to us. The office is mentioned in the Tel-Amarna tablets as familiar in the petty courts of Palestine in the fifteenth century b.c. (see KIB, v. p. 215). Cf. also Maspero, in Records of the Past', ii. p. 18. 6 *. over the household : superintendent of the palace, or major-domo. Adoniram (abbreviated to * Adoram') still occupied the office at Solomon's death (xii. 18). 6 ^. the levy (Heb. mas) is a collective noun denoting labour- bands raised under the system of the corvee or forced labour, which apparently was introduced by David (2 Sam. xx. 24% but enormously extended by Solomon for the execution of his public works (cf. verse 27 f., ix. 15, and Exod. i. 11 ; Judges i. 28). The word is supposed to be borrowed from Egyptian. iv. 7-19. List of Provincial Governors. The country was 92 I KINGS 4. 8-1 1. A officers over all Israel, which provided victuals for the king and his household : each man had to make pro- 8 vision for a month in the year. And these are their 9 names : Ben-hur, in the hill country of Ephraim : Ben- deker, in Makaz, and in Shaalbim, and Beth-shemesh, 10 and Elon-beth-hanan : Ben-hesed, in Arubboth ; to him 1 1 pertained Socoh, and all the land of Hepher : Ben- abinadab, in all the height of Dor ; he had Taphath the divided into twelve administrative districts — nine west, and three east of the Jordan — under as many Collectors or Prefects, each of whom was charged with the provision of the royal table for one month in the year. The system seems to have been instituted by Solomon ; and it is noteworthy, as illustrating the centralizing tendencies of the monarchy, that in the division of the country the tribal boundaries are mostly ignored. The high rank and re- sponsibility of the officers is shown by the fact that two of them are expressly said to have been sons-in-law of the king. The list is very confused and incomplete. *J. The word for officers i^nizzdhmx) occurs only in the history of Solomon, but a closely allied form (^nezib) is occasionally found in the same sense elsewhere. It means 'appointed.' 8. First District, tlie hill country of Ephraim, administered by a certain son of Hur. It is noticeable that all the officers are mentioned by their patronymic, the personal name being some- times inserted and sometimes omitted. 9. Second District, on the west side of the Judaean mountains ; where Shaalbim may be SelbJt, in the ancient territory of Dan (Joshua xix. 42) ; Beth-shemesh is certainly 'Ain Shews, on one of the roads from Jerusalem to Jaffa. A place Makaz is not known. Elon and Beth-hanan are two places ; the former was also in Dan (Joshua xix. 43) ; the latter has been conjecturally localized far to the south, at Beit Haitun, a few miles north-east of Gaza. 10. T/iird District, in the south of Judah, more central than the second, including Arubboth (unknown) and Socoh, which is one or other of two villages bearing the modern name of Shi- weikeh. The northernmost, in the Wadi es- Stint, is too near Beth- shemesh ; hence the other, lying about ten miles south-south-west of Hebron, is most probably the place here meant. Hepher is mentioned in Joshua xii. 17 as the seat of a Canaanitish kingdom, presumably in this same region. 11. Foiuih District, allotted to a son-in-law of Solomon, was in the rich undulating Plain of Sharon — the higfh land of Dor (= Tonittra on the coast) — between Carmel and the sea. I KINGS 4. 12-15. A 93 daughter of Solomon to wife : Baana the son of Ahilud, 12 in Taanach and Megiddo, and all Beth-shean which is beside Zarethan, beneath Jezreel, from Beth-shean to Abel-meholah, as far as beyond Jokmeam : Ben-geber, 13 in Ramoth-gilead ; to him pertained the towns of Jair the son of Manasseh, which are in Gilead ; even to him pertained the region of Argob, which is in Bashan, three- score great cities with walls and brasen bars : Ahinadab 14 the son of Iddo, in Mahanaim : Ahimaaz, in Naphtali ; 15 12. Fifth District, falling to Baaua the son of Ahilud (a brother of the * recorder ' ?— see verse 3) ; it takes in the Plain of Esdraelon, where Taanach and Megriddo (JLejjun) are situated ; and also the eastern extension of that valley towards the Jordan, beneath Jezreel (Zer'tn) from Beth>shean {Beisdn), as far south as Abel-meholah. Zarethan and Jokmeam have not been certainly identified. 13. Sixth District, most northerly of the three Trans-Jordanic districts, having its centre in Bamoth-Gilead. The site of this important frontier town has, unfortunately, not yet been determined (see on xxii. 3). The common identification with es-Salt places it much too far south for our passage ; for the region of Arg-ob (Deut. iii. 4, 13, 14) was in Bashan, and therefore (roughly speak- ing) north of a line drawn from the Jebel Hauran to the Lake of Galilee ; but in what part of that extensive district it is to be located we do not know. The verse contains two glosses : the first ('to him . . . Gilead') is wanting in the LXX ; the second ('threescore great . . . bars ') is based on Deut. iii. 4, 5. 14. Seventh District, also east of the Jordan, with its dep6t at Mahanaim, which was apparently the capital of Gilead. The site is again uncertain. The most attractive identification seems that of Robinson and Buhl, who place it at Mahne, a few miles north- east of the town of Ajlun. (But see G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog.j P- 587.) 15-17. Eighth^ Ninth and Tenth Districts. Recrossing the Jordan, we come to Naphtali (next to the Sea of Galilee and the upper Jordan), Asher (between that and the Mediterranean), and Issachar (further south in the corner between the Sea of Galilee and the vale of Jezreel). 15. Ahimaaz, the only governor whose father is not named, is possibly the son of Zadok (2 Sam. xv. 27) ; he also was a son-in- law of Solomon. 94 I KINGS 4. 16-20. A Z he also took Basemath the daughter of Solomon to wife : 16 Baana the son of Hushai, in Asher and Bealbth : [7, isjehoshaphat the son of Paruah, in Issachar : Shimei the 19 son of Ela, in Benjamin : Geber the son of Uri, in the land of Gilead, the country of Sihon king of the Amorites and of Og king of Bashan ; and he was the 20 only officer which was in the land. [Z] Judah and 16. Hushai may be the friend of David (2 Sam. xv, 32, &c.). A place Bealotli is not known : MSS. of the LXX (B and A) read 'Maaleh' or G. r. S (?) 7 103 besides Solomon's chief officers that were over the work, 16 three thousand and three hundred, which bare rule over the people that wrought in the work. And' the king 17 commanded, and they hewed out great stones, costly stones, to lay the foundation of the house with wrought stone. And Solomon's builders and Hiram's builders 18 and the Gebalites did fashion them, and prepared the timber and the stones to build the house. [?] And it came to pass in the four hundred and 6 16. See on ix. 23. For 3,300, Chron. and LXX (B) have 3,600 ; one officer to every fifty of the total body of labourers. 17. hewed out : * quarried.' The stones were costly on account of their size. to lay the foundation : see vii. 10. wrougfht stone : (Heb. gazith). There were several degrees of finish : sometimes only the four fitting surfaces were accurately squared and dressed, leaving the outer surface in the rough ; very often the margins of the outer face were finely chiselled to a breadth of a few inches ; and at other times the whole outer surface (with or without a depressed margin) was smoothed. 18. the Gebalites : men of Gebal, now Jebeil, the Byblus of the Greeks, about twenty miles north of Beirut. Assuming the correctness of the text, these Gebalites must have been famous stone-masons of Phoenicia, specially engaged by Solomon. The LXX, however, reads a verb ; and it has been thought that an otherwise unknown technical term of masonry may be the original reading : 'And Solomon's and Hiram's masons hewed them, and provided them with bordcra.'' vi. Description of the Temple Buildings. The document from which this account is taken was in all probabihty written by a contemporary of Solomon ; but is hardly likely to have belonged to the State records of the kingdom. The writer was evidently thoroughly familiar with the temple, while his descriptions of the other royal buildings (vii. i if.) are so vague as to suggest that he had never seen the inside of them. Such a paper would not naturally be preserved in the palace archives : more probably its author belonged to the ranks of the priesthood. Although the general outlines are clear enough, the details are frequently quite unintelligible : this is due partly to the highly technical character of the description, but partly also to the con- dition of the text, which is amongst the w orst preserved portions lo4 1 KINGS G. 1. ? eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's of the O. T. Light is thrown on many points by the much more lucid description of Ezekiers temple, which, though only an ideal, is evidently based for the most part on reminiscences of the first temple. The passage may be divided into six sections, as follows: (i) the main structural features of the temple building, with its portico and side-chambers, 2-10 ; (2) the internal arrangement of the house and its decoration. 15-22 ; (3) description of the cheru- bim, 33-28 ; (4) the doors, 31-35 ; (5) the inner court, 36 ; and (6) chronological notices, 37, 38. Verses i, 7, 11-14 arc editorial additions ; and minor glosses and interpolations are very numerous. vi. I. Date of the Foundation of the Temple. Twelve genera- tions after the Exodus, in the second month of the fourth year of Solomon, the work was commenced. The verse is assigned to an editor on several grounds : {a) The Hebrew word for * month ' {hodesh) is different from that used in the old documents {yetah, ^T- 37? 38, viii. a). Moreover, the practice of numbenng the months seems to have been introduced on]\' towards the age of the Exile. (J?) The round number 480 v twelve generations: has been thought to belong to an artificial chronological scheme, which assigned an equal duration to the interval between the founding of the first and that of the second templet (c) The chronological statement of the primary document occurs in verses 37. 38 (where it breaks the connexion) ; it probably stood origin- ally here, and was afterwards displaced in favour of verse i. (dj The verse stands in the LXX in another and obviousli' un- suitable place ^ ^ The sum of the reigns of the kings of judah in the framework amounts precisely to 430 years; if we add the 50 years of Exile, we have a second period of 4S0 years from the foundation of Solomon's temple to the return from captivity. See further, Burney, p. 58ff. * The LXX gives an entirely different arrangement in the end of ch. V and the beginning of ch. vi, which is here quoted in full for the sake of comparison. The order is : v. iS**, vi. i, v. 17, iS', vi. 37, 38, vi. 2. After verse 16 the LXX proceeds: *And they prepared the stones and the timber for three years. [Omit vi. i]. And they brought great costly stones for the foundation of the house, even hewn stones. And the sons [read builders] of Solomon and the sons [builders] of Hiram hewed them and laid them. In the fourth year he laid the foundation of the house of the Lord in the month Xeisan and the second month. In the eleventh year, in the month Baad I KINGS 6. 3, 3. ? T 105 reign over Israel, in the month Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord. [Tj And the house which king Solomon built for the 2 Lord, the length thereof was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof twenty cubits^ and the height thereof thirty cubits. And the porch before the temple of the 3 in the fourth year : see on verses 37, 38. vi. a- 10. Main stnidural features of the buildings with its porch and side-chambers. The temple was a rectangular building, measur- ing sixty cubits in length (east to west), twenty in breadth (north to south), and thirty in height ; these, of course, are /«5/ ^S. rt k Q. s J3 i^- •o
  • (4) various minor utensils, 40, We have next (5) an inventory of these productions of Phoeni- cian workmanship, 41-47 ; (6) an enumeration of the golden vessels and implements of the temple, 48-50 ; and (7) a short notice of the depositing of the utensils, along with the treasures bequeathed by David^ in the temple, 51. There is no reason to doubt that the passage belonged to the same ancient source as the account of the buildings in vi. 2— vii. la, to which, however, verses 47-50 may be an addition by a later hand. Some touches of style are common to the two pieces ; and the peculiar arrangement is amply explained by the consideration mentioned in the Introductory Note to ch. vii. On the other hand, the abrupt mention of the summons to Huram-abi, as if it had been an afterthought, seems to show that this section was un- known to the writer of ch, v ; otherwise the Tyrian workman would probably have been referred to in the preliminary negotia- tions with Hiram. This difficulty seems to have been felt by the chronicler, who accordingly works the mission of Huram-abi into his account of the correspondence (2 Chron. ii. 7, 13, 14). 122 I KINGS 7. 14-16. T T4 Tyre. He was the son of a widow woman of the tribe of Naphtali, and his father was a man of Tyre, a worker in brass ; and he was filled witli wisdom and understanding and cunning, to work all works in brass. And he came 15 to king Solomon, and wrought all his work. For he fashioned the two pillars of brass, of eighteen cubits high apiece : and a line of twelve cubits compassed either 16 of them about. And he made two chapiters of molten vii. 13, 14. The Artist. 13. Hiram: from a Chron. ii. 13, iv. 16 it has been inferred that his real name was Huram-abi (= ' Huram is my father'), which was first shortened to Huram, and then changed to Hiram through a confusion with the name of the king. This is better than to suppose with Barnes {Couib. Bible, Chronicles, p. 148) that in these places Hiram the king calls his subject * Huram my father,' as a title of honour. 14. According to 2 Chron. ii. 14, Huram-abi's mother was of the tribe of Dan, the tribe to which the similarly gifted Oholiab belonged (Exod. xxxi. 6). His occupation was, as usual, heredi- tary ; and perhaps his skill also, his father before him having been a noted worker in brass. vii. 15-22. The great Twin-pillars, and their Chapiters. The pillars are eighteen cubits high, and twelve in circumference (though LXX has fourteen). The thirty-five cubits of 2 Chron. iii. 15 must be an error of some scribe who added length and circumference together and included the height of the chapiters. On the position of these monuments, and their symbolic signifi- cance, see on verse 21. The textual deficiencies in the opening verses have to be remedied by the help of two parallel passages, a Chron. iii. 15-17, and especially Jer, lif. 21-23 (= a Kings XXV. 17). 15. Por he fashioned: better, as LXX, ' And he cast.' of eighteen cubits, &c. The marginal rendering, which alone is correct, reveals here a lacuna in the text ; for to say that o)ie pillar was eighteen cubits long and the other twelve cubits in circumference would be an odd way of expressing the fact that they were alike. The defect can be supplied from the LXX, which agrees with Jer. Iii. 21. Read accordingly : ' eighteen cubits was the height of one pillar, and a line of twelve cubits compassed it about, and the thickness of the pillar was four finger- breadths. It was hollow ; and so the second pillar.' The thick- ness of the metal would be about 2} inches. I KINGS 7. 17,18. T T23 brass, to set upon the tops of the pillars : the height of the one chapiter was five cubits, and the height of the other chapiter was five cubits. There were nets of 17 checker work, and wreaths of chain work, for the chapiters which were upon the top of the pillars ; seven for the one chapiter, and seven for the other chapiter. So he iS made the pillars ; and there were two rows round about upon the one network, to cover the chapiters that were upon the top of the pillars : and so did he for the other 16. The pillars are surmounted by chapiters, each five cubits high (the diameter is nowhere indicated). In the description which follows, three things are to be distinguished : (i) the chapiter itself; (2) a network which covered it ; and (3) festoons of pomegranates attached somehow to the network (cf. verses 41, 42). It is extremely difficult to form any conception of the shape and general appearance of these ornaments. From verse 41 we learn that the ' chapiters ' themselves were globular in form ; but this, of course, does not necessarily imply that they were strictly spherical. The ' network ' we may suppose to have been closely fitted to the surface of the spheroids. Further, we gather from verse 42 that there were for each chapiter two chains of pomegranates, on each of which 100 apples were strung : these we imagine to have hung loosely from or over the network (see below on verse 18). If the reader will think of two enormous pine- apples, with the leaves removed, he will perhaps have some notion of the form and reticulated appearance of these strange objects. IT. The verse reads in the LXX : 'And he made two nets to cover the chapiters of the pillars, even a net for the one chapiter and a net for the other chapiter.' This text is very nearly correct ; only, by taking from verse 18 a clause which is out of place there, we may read instead of ' chapiters of the pillars,' ' chapiters which were on the top of the pillars,' as in the Hebrew of this verse. The phrases of checker work and wreaths of chain work are merely explanatory glosses to the rare word for nets. The diflference between ' nets ' and seven involves the change of only a single consonant in the Hebrew. 18. So he made the pillars is evidently wrong. The words * pillars ' and ' pomegranates ' appear to have exchanged places in the verse (see marg.) ; hence the original opening was : 'And he made the pomegranates.' The clause to cover . . . pillars is a misplaced fragment of verse 17 (see on the verse above), and must therefore be omitted here. With these alterations the verse 124 I KINGS 7. i9-2f. T T9 chapiter. And the chapiters that were upon the top of the pillars in the porch were of lily work, four cubits. ao And there were chapiters above also upon the two pillars, close by the belly which was beside the network : and the pomegranates were two hundred, in rows round about 21 upon the other chapiter. And he set up the pillars at the porch of the temple : and he set up the right pillar, yields a fairly good sense ; but a still better is obtained by taking in a slightly modified form of 20 *> (which is wanting in the LXX). It then reads thus : ' And he made the pomegranates, and that in two rows over the one network ; and the pomegranates were two hundred, in rows round about the one chapiter : and so he made for the other chapiter.' There were, then, 100 pomegranates in each row. That they were not strung tightly round the chapiter seems to follow from the interesting notice in Jer. lii. 23, which apparently means that of the 100 pomegranates, ninety-six ' hung free.' That would imply that they were arranged in festoons, looped up at four points, at each of which one pomegranate was fixed. 19, 20, and 22 are hardly intelligible, and are probably nothing but a congested mass of marginal glosses. Verses ig and 22 * appear to be variants, and the only thing that causes hesitation in rejecting both is the statement about the lily work, which is too distinctive to be lightly disregarded. That the chapiters them- selves were lily-shaped (verse 19) is indeed irreconcileable with verse 41. Taking 22*^ as the original form of the doublet (^LXX seems to have done so), we might possibly understand it to mean that the rounded ends of the chapiters rested in borders of lily work upon the top of the pillars. Of the words in the porch . . . fonr cubits (which stand together in the Hebrew, verse 19) nothing whatever can be made. Verse 20% so far as it is intelligible, is wholly superfluous at this point ; the words close by . . . network represent a corrupt and untranslateable text ; while 20 ^ has already been incorporated in verse 21. The description was evidently meant to close with 21, where the position and the names of the two pillars are indicated. They were set up at the porch of the temple, no doubt one on each side of the entrance. rigrht and left mean, in accordance with usage, ' south ' and ' north ' respectively. An important question is whether they stood in the doorway, supporting the lintel of the porch, or quite clear of the building, some distance in front. A perfectly definite state- ment on this point is not found in the O. T. ; though 2 Chron. I KINGS 7. 22. T 125 and called the name thereof Jachin : and he set up the left pillar, and called the name thereof Boaz. And upon 22 iii. 17 is perhaps in favour of the second alternative. But the mere absence of any hint that they formed part of the structure is itscK significant. What weighs most strongly in favour of the other view is the fact that detached frontal pillars were a common feature of ancient sanctuaries in Western Asia and also in Baby- lonia. Herodotus (ii. 44.) mentions two such pillars in the temple of Melkarth at Tyre ; and others are known to have existed at Paphos, Hierapolis, and elsewhere. Representations of them are found on ancient coins, &c. ; and on a fragment of a glass dish (of third or fourth century), discovered in Rome in 1882, there is a bird's-eye view of the temple at Jerusalem with the two pillars standing quite apart from the building (Benzinger, Archdologie, p. 251). See W. R. Smith, Rel. of Sent.'- ^ p. 208, 488 ; Chipiez et Perrot, Hist, de PArf, iii. p. 119 ff. ; Sayce, Early Religions of Egypt and Babylonia, p. 454, 459 f. The probability, therefore, is that the pillars stood isolated in the court, and near the entrance of the porch. The names Jachin and Boaz are to us unintelligible. Jachin (' He shall establish,' marg., or ' Stablisher') occurs as a Divine name on a Phoenician inscription {CIS, i. 10 ; see Winckler, KA T^, p. 224) ; and it has been pointed out that it would be the equivalent in Phoenician of the Hebrew * Yahweh.' Boaz is still moils enigmatical ; the marginal interpretation, *In it is strength,' is very precarious. See further below. What, now, ia the significance of these objects ? If, as we have just argued, the^' served no architectural purpose, we are almost compelled to recognize in them some symbolical or religious meaning. Perhaps the most likely view is that they were artifi- cial imitations— translations into metal— of the sacred stones or obelisks (niazzebdh), which appear to have been an indispensable part of the equipment of an ancient Semitic sanctuary. Originally these stones were regarded as the abode of the divinity ; and long after that primitive stage of religion had been outgrown, they retained their place as symbols of his presence. That the pillars might have this significance is shown by the statement of Hero- dotus (ii. 44) that at Tyre the god Melkarth was worshipped in the form of two such pillars. Still more instructive would be the fact that, according to Sayce, the twin pillars of Babylonian temples represented two gods ; one of whom was Tammuz, and the other was called Nin-gis-zida, which Sayce renders * The lord of the firmly-planted stake.' He considers that Jachin is a very passable translation of Nin-gis-zida ; and suggests that Boaz may be a corruption of Tammuz (loc. cit., p. 460). Kittel throws out the conjecture that the mysterious names may have been those of two 126 I KINGS 7. 23, 24. T the top of the pillars was hly work : so was the work of 23 the pillars finished. And he made the molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and the height thereof was five cubits : and a line of thirty cubits 24 compassed it round about. And under the brim of it round about there were knops which did compass it, for ten cubits, compassing the sea round about : the knops ancient mazzebas which had stood from time immemorial on the site now occupied by Solomon's temple. It is more probable that their introduction was a purely conventional imitation of Phoenician and Babylonian sanctuaries. Whether any special symbolism was embodied in the ' chapiters ' is a question that has hardly been considered by commentators ; yet it is extremely unlikely that their curious design was in its origin merely decora- tive. W. R. Smith argued with amazing ingenuity and erudition for the theory that they had the form of cressets, and that one of them was used for burning the fat of the sacrifices, that in fact this was the only brazen altar of the temple prior to the time of Ahaz (Rel. of Sent. 2, Note K). But that view is attended by many difficulties, and has found little support, (See below on verse 41.) vii. 23-26. The Brazen Sea. (Cf. 2 Chron. iv. 2-5.) This was a huge circular basin, measuring ten cubits in diameter and five in depth, and said to have been capable of containing 2,000 baths. It was richly ornamented ; and the casting of it must have been an even greater triumph of the founder's art than that of the pillars. It was supported on the backs of twelve brazen oxen, which stood facing outwards, three towards each cardinal point of the compass. 23. from brim to brim : i. e. in diameter, probably the inside measurement. a line of thirty cubits. The proportion of circumference to diameter is not matliematically exact : the LXX has ' thirty-three cubits,' which is too much. 24. knops : see vi. 18, The w^ord is connected with that for ^ gourds ' ; but whether it was the fruit or the flowers (colocynth flowers) that was imitated in the ornamentation is uncertain. for ten cnbits. The marginal rendering, * ten in a cubit,' is grammatically inadmissible ; but the phrase is very perplexing. Stade thinks that a scribe intended to write the circumference from verse 23, but by mistake inserted the diameter instead. compassing" . . . abont : is wanting in LXX (B), and perhaps better omitted as a variant of the preceding clause. I KINGS 7. .5-27. T 127 were in two rows, cast when it was cast. It stood upon 25 twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east : and the sea was set upon them above, and all their hinder parts were inward. And it was an handbreadth thick ; and the brim 26 thereof was wrought like the brim of a cup, like the flower of a lily: it held two thousand baths. And he 37 cast when it was cast : i. e. in one mould with the basin, unlike the ornaments of the chapiters of the pillars. 26 precedes S5 in the LXX — an order which at once commends itself as natural. The thickness of the casting was an handbreadth, = four finger-breadths (verse 15), or about three inches. like the hrim of a cup, like the flower of a lily : i. e. widening towards the surface. two thousand baths : 2 Chron. iv. 5 has 3,000 ; but even the lower number seems exaggerated. Taking the bath as sixty- five pints (Kennedy, DB, iv. p. 912), it would amount to about 16,250 gallons, whereas the sea, even if it had been cylindrical, w^ould not have held more than 11,000 gallons. Probably 1,000 baths would have been near its actual capacity. The ' sea ' was to stand in the south-east portion of the temple court (verse 39). As to its use or meaning, nothing whatever is said in this account ; and though the chronicler (2 Chron. iv. 6) ex- plains that it was used by the priests to wash in, it remains highly probable that (like the pillars) it was copied from Phoenician or Babylonian models, and had originally some symbolic significance. Kosters {Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1879, p. 455^0 seems to have been the first to suggest that it expressed a cosmological idea, being a representation of the World-ocean {Tehom), out of which, in the Babylonian Creation-Epos, Marduk formed the habitable world, after a conflict with the Dragon {Ti^amdt), the mythological personification of the primaeval chaos. That theory still lacks conclusive evidence ; but it derives some support from the fact that in the temple of Marduk in Babylon there was an artificial sea (ta-am-iu), along with a dragon {KIB, iii. p. 143). In Solomon's temple the dragon is suppressed, but the sea remains to symbol- ize perhaps Yahweh's power over the ocean, a theme frequently dealt with in the poetic mythology of the O. T. (See further, Sayce, Early Religions of Egypt and Babylonia, p. 458 f. ; Gunkel, Schdpfung und Chaos, p. 27 f., 153 ; Jastrow, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria^ p. 653). vii. 27-39. ^-^'^ ^"^'' Lavers tvith their wheeled Carriages. These 128 I KINGS 7. 27. T made the ten bases of brass ; four cubits was the length of one base, and four cubits the breadth thereof, and were to stand five on the north and five on the south side of the temple building (^verse 39). According to 2 Chron. iv. 6, they were for washing things pertaining to the burnt-offering ; this appears to imply that they were employed to convey water from the sea to the great altar. Whether the statement is historically accurate, or whether in addition to their utilitarian purpose the vessels had also a symbolic meaning, we cannot at present determine. Kosters, following out his conception of the symbol- ism of the brazen sea, regards them as emblems of the clouds, the carriers of the upper waters of the firmament (Gen, i. 6, 7). The description of these articles is the most difficult part of the chapter ; and we have no means of controlling the extremely confused text by comparison with parallel passages. The problem has been considerably simplified by the recent discovery at Larnaka in Cyprus) of a miniature specimen of the apparatus here described. It is a small bronze carriage (about 15 inches high, and 9 square) mounted on four wheels, the square upper frame supporting a cylindrical ring, which was adapted to receive a rounded vessel. (A reproduction will be found in Burney's Notes, p. 91.) Its size is thus only about one -ninth of the huge erections we are now to consider ; but it evidently represents the class of implements to which they belong, and is at present the best guide we have to the construction and appearance of the laver-carriages of the temple. Before this discovery most writers found it necessary to distinguish three main parts of the struc- ture : (i) the carriage proper {mekondh), mounted on wheels; (2) an upper framework {ken), resting on the mekondh, and carrying a circular rim, in which stood (3) the laver itself (kiyyoy). Now the Larnaka model has no room for the second framework ; and it is improbable that it ever existed except in the imagination of commentators. Of course, the textual facts which led to its being postulated remain. But Stade has shown, by a renewed examination of the passage {ZATIV, 1901, p. 145-92), that the details of the description can all be explained by the newly discovered implement, on the assumption that some of the prin- cipal parts are described twice over) in other words, that the passage before us has been produced by the interweaving of two independent and slightly divergent accounts of the same objects. In tlie Notes that follow Stade's reconstruction is in the main adhered to, though hesitation is expressed with regard to one or two points of detail. 27 presents no difficulty. It gives the dimensions of the carriage in which the laver was set, 4 cubits in length and breadth, I KINGS 7. 2P. T 129 three cubits the height of it. And the work of the bases 2I was on this manner : they had borders ; and there were and 3 in height. The measurements of the LXX (5 cubits long, by 4 broad, and 6 high) are erroneous. The word for "base {mekondh) might be better rendered 'stand.' The same word (makdnat) is said to be found on Minaean inscriptions in Arabia, designating a framework for supporting a laver (Hommel, in Explorations in Bible Lands^ p. 750). 28. The carriage (base) must obviously have been constructed with four corner-posts, connected, on each of the four sides, by two or more transverse bars. But whether these essential parts of the framework are denoted by the borders {jnisgeroih) and ledgfes {shelabbim) oiih.\sv&r%e is doubtful: they might be mentioned merely for the sake of the ornamentation upon them (to be described in the next verse). A word similar to shelabbim is used in the Talmud of the steps of a ladder ; hence it would naturally mean here ' cross- pieces ' ; whether the cross-pieces were upright or horizontal will depend on the position assigned to the misgeroth. We may look first at Stade's interpretation. The %nis- geroih he explains, after the analog}' of the ' border ' of the shewbread table of the tabernacle (Exod. xxv. 25, 27), as narrow horizontal plates of metal extending between two posts, and forming the upper and lower bars of the frame {a, a in the figure). Taking these as the two sides of the ladder, the cross- pieces [shelabbim) are an un- defined number of vertical pieces {b, b) uniting the upper and lower bars. Unally, he supposes a second set of misgeroth (c, c, c), those, namely, which are said in this verse and the next to be between tbe ledg'es (shelabbim). One objection to this view is that, judging from 2 Kings xvi. 17, the misgeroth must have been structurally unimportant, since Ahaz seems to have removed them without material injury to the fabric. Partly for this reason, other writers prefer the sense ' panels ' for misgeroth (see R. V. marg.), taking the shelabbim to be either the corner-posts or the whole metal framework, whose intervals are conceived as fitted with thin plates of brass. So far as verse 28 is concerned, that would be a satisfactorj'- explanation ; but it leads to confusion when we attempt to carry it through the following verses (see verses 31, 32). On the whole, therefore, Stade's construction is to be preferred ; unless we were to assume that the word misgeroth occurs in two K N, J^ 1 1 t (f c. ■ c c <^ c n 1 1 r, k/ \4 13© I KINGS 7. 29, 30. T 29 borders between the ledges : and on the borders that were between the ledges were lions, oxen, and cherubim ; and upon the ledges there was a pedestal above : and beneath the lions and oxen were wreaths of hanging work. 30 And every base had four brasen wheels, and axles of brass : and the four feet thereof had undersetters : be- neath the laver were the undersetters molten, with wreaths different senses in the two parallel accounts. Stade himself hints at this as a possible solution, pointing out that in verse 36 (which is obviously the parallel to verse 29) the word Ifihoth (plates) might be the equivalent of the niisgeroth of verses 28, 29. But he justly observes that such a divergence in the use of a technical term is not probable. An excellent suggestion (though it accentu- ates the difficulty referred to above) has been made by Burney. Substituting shelabbim for misgeroth at the beginning, he renders : 'They had (upright) supports, and there were border-frames between the supports.' Besides removing a grammatical irregu- larity, this construction has two distinct advantages : {a) it introduces the important corner-posts into the description ; and (6) it gets rid of Stade's second set of misgeroth altogether. 29. The ' borders ' between the supports, as well as the supports themselves, were decorated with figures of lions, oxen and cherubim. Ornamentation of a similar character is seen on the Larnaka model. and npon the ledges. . . . Render (inserting • and ' with the LXX) : ' and upon the supports likewise ; and above and below the lions and oxen.' The following word is corrupt. Instead of were wreaths of we may (with Burney) read ' and cherubim,' which is necessary after * lions and oxen,' and for hanging* work render 'was bevelled work,' the edges of the misgeroth being ' bevelled in the form of steps.' 30. Each stand rested on four wheels, with axles of brass, probably one axle to each pair of wheels (so on the Larnaka wagon). The feet of the stand would naturally mean the dov^mward prolongations of the four corner-posts, in the ends of which the wheels were fitted. At first sight it seems equally natural to identify the undersetters Hit. ' shoulders,' marg.) with the diagonal braces represented in the model as connecting the feet with the lower bars of the framework (see on vii. 2 '. But in that case their number would be not four but eight. Moreover, the next phrase lieneath the laver would require us to suppose that the * shoulders ' were braces extending inwards towards the centre I KINGS 7. BT,32. T 131 at the side of each. And the mouth of it within the 31 chapiter and above was a cubit : and the mouth thereof was round after the work of a pedestal, a cubit and an half : and also upon the mouth of it were gravings, and their borders were foursquare, not round. And the four 32 of the base of the stand, beneath the bottom of the lavers when in position. Unfortunately the closing words (rendered, with wreaths at the side of each), which might have thrown some light on the structure, are hardly intelligible ; while apart from them the statement that ' the shoulders were cast ' conveys little meaning. Stade's view of the construction is very different. He takes the feet to be the corner-posts as a whole, and explains the ' shoulders ' as the projecting upper ends of the posts, which in the model are surmounted by figures of small birds. It has been proposed to change ' feet ' to * corners ' in accordance with verse 34. The reader may choose ! 31. Here at least the description certainly passes to the upper part of the stand. By the mouth of the stand is meant a circular ring of brass, held by the four bars of the upper frame, and rising above them to the height of one (?) cubit (see below). Its purpose was of course to receive the laver ; its diameter was therefore 4 cubits (verse 38), exactly the length of one side of the square frame in which it was contained (verse 27). The word chapiter must be a mistake, since no chapiters are mentioned in the whole description. Stade, following Ewald, reads 'shoulders,' which suits his view of what the shoulders were, and no doubt strengthens the presumption that that view is correct. The only alternative would be to substitute 'borders,' which would give perhaps an even better sense. The numeral before cubit has been dropped out : we should probably insert 'one' (but see on verse 35). The beginning of the verse should thus be translated : ' And its mouth within the shoulder-pieces (?) and upward was one cubit.' round after the work of a pedestal: i.e. made as pedestals were made ; but what that means we do not know. The words a cubit and a half cannot be explained : they may have crept in by mistake from the next verse. gravings. These covered the projecting part of the ring (mouth) on its outer side. and their borders were fourscLuare, not round. If we might substitute ' its ' for ' their,' the clause has a good sense where it stands ; it reminds us that while the mouth was round, the frame in which it was set was square. But Stade is possibly right in thinking that the clause is the immediate continuation of verse 27, and that ' their ' refers to the stands of verse 27. The intervening K 2 132 I KINGS 7. 33, 34. T wheels were underneath the borders ; and the axletrees of the wheels were in the base : and the height of a 33 wheel was a cubit and half a cubit. And the work of the wheels was like the work of a chariot wheel : their axletrees, and their felloes, and their spokes, and their 34 naves, were all molten. And there were four under- verses (28 — ' gravings ' in 31) he regards as a secondary account of the laver-carriages, partly parallel to the main description (which is complete in itself) in verses 27, 31^, 32-39. Another division, however, is possible, and seems equally satisfactory. Leaving 31** where it stands, we might take verses 27-31, 37-39 as the main account, and verses 32-36 as the secondary parallel. In any case it is tolerably plain that verses 32-36, to which we now proceed, are a duplicate of 29-31 ; they describe the same objects (wheels, shoulder-pieces, mouth, ornamentation) ; though with differences in the details and in the terminology. 32, 33 give a fuller description of the ' wheels ' than verse 30. They were underneath tlxe borders (see on verse 28) ; i. e. their height did not reach to the lower part of the framework. and the axletrees . . . base : perhaps, ' and the holders of the wheels were in the stand.' axletrees is a doubtful rendering of the Hebrew word, which means ///. ' hand ' ; because we cannot tell whether the wheel revolved on the axle (like an ordinary cart-wheel), or whether the axle itself revolved in bearings (as in a locomotive) ; in the latter case (which is the more probable view) the ' hand ' might be the ring through which the axle passed. We must understand the statement to mean that the ' hands ' were in those extensions of the corner-posts of the base which were called its ' feet ' in verse 30. Stade thinks that ' hands ' is the technical designation of the diagonal braces mentioned in the notes on verse 30 ; but that is rather forced : although the hands were in the base, it appears from verse 33 that they belonged specially to the wheels. The height of each wheel was i^ cubits. Neither the length of the ' feet ' nor the height of the frame above the ground is any- where specified. In the Larnaka model the height of the upper bar of the frame from the ground is nearly two and a half times the depth of the framework itself: if we suppose the proportions to have been similar in Solomon's vessels, the upper bar would have stood about 7^ cubits (12 to 13 ft.) high. 33. The construction of the wheels resembled, part for part, that of a chariot-wheel ; only, ' the whole was foundry- work.' axletrees : ' holders,* as before. I KINGS 7. 35-37. T 133 setters at the four corners of each base : the undersetters thereof were of the base itself. And in the top of the 35 base was there a round compass of half a cubit high : and on the top of the base the stays thereof and the borders thereof were of the same. And on the plates of the stays 36 thereof, and on the borders thereof, he graved cherubim, lions, and palm trees, according to the space of each, with wreaths round about. After this manner he made 37 34. undersetters: 'shoulder-pieces,' see on verse 30. at the four . . . base might be rendered, * for the four corner-pieces of one stand.' The word for corners (pinnoth) here replaces that for 'feet' (pe'dmoth) in the parallel account (verse 39), and being equally vague in meaning leaves the same uncertainty as to where the shoulder-pieces were. The last clause may be read : ' The shoulder-pieces were part of the stand ' ; either cast in one piece with it, or rigidly attached. 35. See above on verse 31. In the first clause the subject is omitted in the original ; we must insert either ' mouth ' or 'pedestal,' in accordance with verse 31 (so Stade), and render: ' And in the top of the stand there was a mouth (pedestal), half a cubit in height, circular round about.' The height given is only half of what was taken to be the original text of verse 31. Perhaps it should be ' a cubit and a half.' The remainder of the verse defies reasonable explanation. Stade thinks the last words, the stays ('hands') thereof . . . same, belong to the parallel account, and finds a place for them in verse 30 after axles of brass : but the difficulty is not appreciably lessened by this trans- position. 36 appears to be the parallel to verse 29. So far as it can be translated, it reads : 'And he engraved on the plates cherubim, lions, and palm trees.' The words omitted, of the stays thereof, and on the borders thereof, are due to a mistaken repetition from the line above ; the end of the verse, according to the space . . . about, may be corrected in accordance with verse 30, and trans- lated : ' with wreaths at the side of each.' plates (/«/;o^A = tablets) is probably a comprehensive designa- tion of the flat surfaces on the side of the stand, including both the ntisgeroth and the shelabbim of verse 29 : on the possibility that they might be ' panels,* see on that verse. It is true that the ornamenta- tion differs from that of verse 29 by the substitution of palm-trees for oxen ; but the discrepancy hardly requires us to refer the descriptions to two different objects. 134 I KINGS 7. 38, 39. T the ten bases : all of them had one casting, one measure, 38 and one form. And he made ten lavers of brass : one laver contained forty baths ; and every laver was four cubits : and upon every one of the ten bases one laver. 39 And he set the bases, live on the right side of the house, and five on the left side of the house : and he set the sea on the right side of the house eastward, toward the south. 37. The description given applies to all the ten stands ; Ihey are uniform in every respect. and one form : omitted by LXX. 38. To each stand a circular laver is made, fitting the mouth- piece on the top, 4 cubits in diameter, and capable of holding 40 baths (about 375 gallons) of water. 39. See introductory note to verses 27 ff. We conclude the somewhat intricate exposition of this section with a continuous translation of the text as amended, disentangling the two parallel accounts in separate columns : — (27) And he made the stands, ten in number, of brass ; one stand was four cubits in length, four cubits in breadth, and three cubits in height. (28) And the construction of the stand (s) was as follows ; they had upright supports ; and borders between the supports. (29) And on the borders that (32^ And the four wheels were between the supports were underneath the borders ; were lions, oxen, and cherubim, and the holders of the wheels and upon the supports in like were in the stand : and the manner ; and above and below height of one wheel was one the lions and oxen and cherubim and a half cubits. (33) And the was bevelled work. (30) And make of the wheels was like the for one stand there were four make of a chariot wheel : their wheels of brass, with axles holders, and their felloes, and of brass ; and its four feet their spokes, and their hubs, had shoulder-pieces under- allwasfoundr3'-work. (34) And neath the laver (?). (31) And there were four shoulder-pieces its mouth-piece within the for the four corners of one stand : shoulder-pieces (? borders) and its shoulder-pieces were part of upward was one cubit ; and its the stand. (35) And in the top mouth-piece was circular, after of the stand was a mouth-piece, the workmanship of a pedestal : half a cubit in height, circular and upon its mouth-piece also round about. (36) And he en- were gravings ; but its (?) bor- graved on the plates cherubim, ders were square, not round. lions, and palm-trees, with wreaths at the side of each. I KINGS 7. 40-44. T 135 And Hiram made the lavers, and the shovels, and the 40 basons. So Hiram made an end of doing all the work that he wrought for king Solomon in the house of the Lord : the two pillars, and the two bowls of the chapiters 41 that were on the top of the pillars ; and the two networks to cover the two bowls of the chapiters that were on the top of the pillars ; and the four hundred pomegranates 42 for the two networks ; two rows of pomegranates for each network, to cover the two bowls of the chapiters that were upon the pillars ; and the ten bases, and the ten 43 lavers on the bases ; and the one sea, and the twelve 44 (37) Thus he made the ten stands : all of them had one casting, and one measure. (38) And he made the ten lavers of brass, &c. vii. 40. The Smaller Utensils. For lavers read (with LXX and parallel passages) * pots.' (Cf. verse 45.) shovels : utensils for cleaning the altar (Exod. xxvii. 3, Sec), basons : used in the sacrificial ritual for catching the blood and dashing it on the altar. vii. 41-47. Inventory of Hiiram-abi's Works. The list on the whole corresponds with the preceding detailed descriptions; but there are peculiarities of phraseology which go to show that the passage is taken from an independent but ancient and valuable source. This conclusion is confirmed by an important addition of the LXX in verse 45, which appears to have been omitted by the Hebrew in order to bring about perfect harmony with what has gone before. 41. the two bowls of the chapiters are doubtless the two chapiters themselves (as distinct from the ornamental network) ; but this is the only place where we are informed that they were globular in shape. The word {gitUdh) ordinarily means '■ bowl ' in Hebrew ; but in Assyrian it is said to be used of the rounded ornament of a pillar (Jensen, ZA, IX. p. 133) ; and this is no doubt the sense here. W. R. Smith held that the chapiters were really bowl-shaped cressets, with the network stretched over their open mouths like the grating of an altar-hearth ; and argued that they were original!}' intended for burning the fat of the sacrifices (see above, p. 126, and ReL of Sent.'-, Note K). 42. The close of the verse, to cover . . ., is perhaps a repetition of the similar words of verse 41, 136 I KINGS 7. 45-48. T 45 oxen under the sea ; and the pots, and the shovels, and the basons : even all these vessels, which Hiram made for king Solomon, in the house of the Lord, were of 46 burnished brass. In the plain of Jordan did the king cast them, in the clay ground between Succoth and 47 Zarethan. And Solomon left all the vessels tmweighed, because they were exceeding many : the weight of the 48 brass could not be found out. And Solomon made all the vessels that were in the house of the Lord : the 45. After house of the LORD, LXX continues : * and the forty-eight pillars of the house of the king and of the house of the Lord : all the works of the king did Hiram make entirely of brass.' Although we have no mention elsewhere of brazen pillars in the palace or the temple, the words are probably genuine ; a certain irregularity in the Hebrew text points to an omission. The next four or five verses are in some disorder : see at the close. 46. Huram-abi's foundry was in the Jordan valley, the nearest place probably where clay suitable for the great moulds could be found. (G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog., p. 488.) For the kingf read ' he ' (LXX) ; the subject of the sentence being obviously Huram-abi. in the clay ground : lit. * in the thickness of the soil ' (so LXX) ; but the text is doubtful. It is perhaps better to amend and read with Moore {Judges, p. 212 f.) and Benzinger : * at the ford of Adamah,' Adamah, ' the city beside Zarethan ' (Joshua iii. i6), is probably the modern ed-Damieh, on the west bank of the Jordan, twenty-four miles from its mouth. Succoth is on the other side of the river (Gen. xxxiii. 17 ; Joshua xiii. 27 ; Judges viii. 4, 5). A good road for the transport of the vessels to Jerusalem was essential ; and this was secured by choosing a situation near one of the principal crossing-places of the Jordan. 47. The quantity of brass consumed was so great that no attempt was made to keep a record of its weight. vii. 48-51. The Golden Utensils for the Interior of the Temple. The passage is usually regarded by critics as a late addition to the original account of the temple furniture. The chief arguments for this opinion are : (a) the improbability of so lavish an expenditure of gold on articles like hinges, &c. ; (6) the mention of a golden altar within the temple, of which there is no historical evidence in pre-Exilic times; (c) the discrepancy between verse 48 and vi. 20 fT., where the name 'altar' is applied to the shewbread table, and no other altar is spoken of. It is urged that if all these articles had I KINGS 7. 49, 50. T 137 golden altar, and the table whereupon the shewbread was, of gold ; and the candlesticks, five on the right side, 49 and five on the left, before the oracle, of pure gold ; and the flowers, and the lamps, and the tongs, of gold ; and 50 the cups, and the snuffers, and the basons, and the spoons, and the firepans, of pure gold ; and the hinges, both for the doors of the inner house, the most holy place, and for the doors of the house, to wit^ of the been inside the temple, the proper place to mention them would have been in ch. vi, along with the cherubim and the altar of cedar. {d) It excites suspicion that the vessels are merely enumerated, without any description of their appearance or mention of their maker, a reticence which is doubly surprising in contrast with the elaborate account of the brazen vessels made by Huram-abi. These considerations are perhaps sufficient to show that the verses do not belong to the document from which the previous descriptions are taken. At the same time, the use of the word dehir^ and the mention of ten candlesticks (as contrasted with the one candelabrum of the tabernacle and the second temple), proves that the account rests on some knowledge (whether personal or traditional) of the arrangements of the pre-Exilic temple. It is probable, in short, that such articles did exist in Solomon's temple ; though it is doubtful if they were made by Solomon. Cf. 2 Kings xii. 13, xxv. 14 ff. ; Jer. Hi. 18 ff. 48. the golden altar is the altar of incense, which stood within the tabernacle (Exod. xxx. i ff., xxxix. 38) along with the table for the shewbread {lit. * bread of the presence,' Exod. xxv. 23 ff.). That the latter institution was ancient is known from i Sam. xxi. 4 ff. ; the incense altar, on the contrary, is unknown in pre-Exilic history, and is not mentioned even by Ezekiel. It occurs first in secondary strata of the Priestly Code (Exod. xxx, xxxix); and of course existed in the second temple (i Mace. i. 21, iv. 49 f.). 49. the candlesticks (rather, ' lampstands ') stood before the oracle {debir) ; i. e., apparently, along the partition-wall;, five on each side of the door. These candlesticks are nowhere else mentioned except in Jer. Hi. 19 and 2 Chron. iv. 7, 20 (but cf. xiii. n), and i Chron. xxviii. 15 (where silver candlesticks are spoken of along with them). Elsewhere we read of onl3' one candlestick with seven lamps (represented, as is well known, on the Arch of Titus). The writer, therefore, cannot have drawn his information from post-Exilic times. the flowers are the flower-like ornaments of the candlesticks, in which the lamps rested (see Exod. xxv. 31 ff.). 138 I KINGS 7. 51—8. I. TS 51 temple, of gold. Thus all the work that king Solomon wrought in the house of the Lord was finished. And Solomon brought in the things which David his father had dedicated, even the silver, and the gold, and the vessels, and put them in the treasuries of the house of the Lord. 8 [S] Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel, 51. The work being completed, Solomon brings the consecrated gifts of his father David, and deposits them in the txeasxiries (perhaps the side-chambers) of the new sanctuary. tlie thing's . . . dedicated : ///. * the sacred things of David his father.' The vessels (or ' weapons ' ?) might include shields and other trophies of victory, tribute-gifts, &c., such as we read of in 2 Sam. viii. 7 ff. : verse 11 says expressly that they were dedicated to the Lord. The text of verses 46-51 is hardly in its original condition. The LXX gives a better sequence by transposing verses 46 and 47 ; and has a much superior reading of the first half of verse 47. The words 'And Solomon left,' which most naturally mean 'And Solomon deposited,' and cannot possibly be translated Meft un- weighed,' are transferred in LXX (L) to the beginning of verse 48. where they find a suitable context. (See the exhaustive Note of Burney, p. 99 ff.) Making these changes, and omitting verses 48'*-5o as a gloss, the close of the passage reads as follows : — * (47) There was no weight to the brass which he (i. e. Huram- abi) made into all these vessels, because it was very great : the weight of the brass was not ascertained. ^46) In the plain of Jordan did he cast them, at the ford of Adamah between Succoth and Zarethan. (48) And Solomon deposited the vessels which he had made in the house of Yahweh. 151) Thus all the work that Solomon wrought in the house of Yahweh was finished. And Solomon brought in the consecrated things of David his father, the silver, and the gold, and the vessels, placing them in the treasuries of the house of Yahweh.' viii. 77/1? Dedication of the Temple. In the present form of the narrative the inaugural ceremony appears as a great complex function in three acts : the removal of the ark to its new abode (verses i-ii', ; the orations and prayer of Solomon (12-61'.; and, finall3'. the dedicatory sacrifices and celebration of the annual festival ,6a-66). The critical analysis I KINGS 8. I. PS 139 [P] and all the heads of the tribes, the princes of the fathers' houses of the children of Israel, unto king Solomon [S] in Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the covenant of the Lord out of the city of David, which is of the chapter, however, discloses a more profound and instructive division, by which the historical exposition of the passage must be guided. The whole section, namely, from verse 14 to verse 61, is demonstrably Deuteronomic from beginning to end, and must have been composed and inserted by the compilers of the Book of Kings. Removing this long expansion, we have left in verses 1-13 the original account of the transference of the ark, closing with the only authentic utterance of Solomon on this occasion (verses 12 f.). It is probable (though not certain) that the conclusion of this ancient narrative lies in verses 62-66. Thus we are led to the following threefold division of the chapter : (i) the old account of the ceremonies connected with the placing of the ark in the temple, verses 1-13 ; (2) the speeches put by the Deuteronomic writers into the mouth, of Solomon, verses 14-61 ; (3) the account — partly ancient— of the dedicatory sacrifices and the festival, verses 62-66. viii. 1-13. The transportation of the Ark : Solomon's poetic Dedication. (Cf. 2 Chron. v. 2— vi. 2.) The section has been somewhat freely interpolated, partly by the Deuteronomic com- pilers, but still more by a later editor, whose point of view is that of the Priestly Code. Many of these additions are wanting in the LXX, which represents (especially in the first five verses) a shorter and purer text than the Hebrew. When these are eliminated, there remains a kernel of narrative which satisfies every test of antiquity and historicity which we can reasonably apply. There is a prima facie probability that the long records of the building of the temple in ch. v-vii were followed by an account of its dedication ; and there is no reason to doubt that the verses before us were taken from some ancient document. 1,2. In the shorter recension of the LXX the verses read : * Then king Solomon assembled all the elders of Israel in Zion to bring up the ark of the covenant of Yahweh from the city of David, which is Zion, m the month Ethanim.' The elders of Israel are the representatives of the old tribal aristocracy — tlie lieads of tri"bes and princes of fathers' houses (i. e. * chiefs of families '), as is quite correctly explained in the gloss which follows. The terms of the gloss, however, are distinctive of the Priestly Code. The reading Jerusalem of the Hebrew text is preferable to the ' Zion ' of LXX. the city of David, which is Zion : (see on ii. 10). The name I40 I KINGS 8. 2, 3. S AND P 2 Zion. [P] And all the men of Israel assembled them- selves unto king Solomon at the feast, [S] in the month 3 Ethanim, [P] which is the seventh month. [S ?] And all the elders of Israel came, [P ?] and the priests took up Zion was originally restricted to the site of the Jebusite fort on the lower southern spur of the eastern hill of Jerusalem, on the higher northern plateau of which the temple now stood (note the expression * bring up '). In later times it was extended to the temple hill generally, and eventually to the whole city. 2. On the montli Ethanim, and the gloss which is the seventh month, see on vi. 37, 38. at the feast. Throughout the O. T. the feast par excellence is the autumn festival, the ' feast of ingathering at the end of the year.' In later times it was certainly held in the seventh month (Lev. xxiii. 34 ff. ; Num. xxix. 12 ff.) ; and in spite of xii. 32 there is no clear evidence that this was not always the custom in the southern kingdom (see the note on the verse). The time of the festival is nowhere prescribed in the pre-Exilic legislation (Exod. xxiii. 16, xxxiv. 22 ; Deut. xvi. 13) ; and the truth may be that it varied at different sanctuaries according to the season of the fruit-gathering. There is, therefore, no difficulty in supposing that the festival actually fell in the seventh month. The phrase is wanting in the LXX, and may of course be a gloss ; but the fact remains that the dedication did coincide with * the feast ' (see verse 65). A more serious difficulty arises from the com- •' parison of this notice with vi. 38. If the temple was not finished till the eighth month, how could the dedication take place in the seventh? The simplest explanation, though critics are slow to entertain it, is that the dedication was postponed to the year following the completion of the house (so Farrar, i. p. 167). It is quite conceivable that vi. 38 refers only to the building, and that Huram-abi's works were not ready till some months later. Kittel, who assigns vi. 2— vii. 12 and vii. 13-51 to different sources, holds that viii. 1-13 is the continuation of the latter, which he supposes to have followed a different tradition as to the date of the comple- tion of the temple from vi. 38. That is not a probable view, because ch. viii presupposes a knowledge of ch. vi but not of vii. 13 ff. As a last resource it is proposed (Stade, Benzinger, &c.) to delete the phrase ' in the month Ethanim ' as a gloss, and retain ' at the feast,' with the understanding that the feast was observed in ancient times in the eighth month. But that is a very arbitrary proceeding, in view of the pre-Exilic phraseology of the clause. 3, 4. Here again the text shows unmistakcable traces of post- Exilic redaction. First of all, the statement that the Tent of I KINGS 8. 4-6. S AND P 141 the ark. [S ?] And they brought up the ark of the Lord, 4 [P] and the tent of meeting, and all the holy vessels that were in the Tent; even these did the priests and the Levites bring up. [S] And king Solomon and all 5 [P] the congregation of [S] Israel, [P] that were assem- bled unto him, were with him [S] before the ark, sacri- ficing sheep and oxen, that could not be told nor num- bered for multitude. And the priests brought in the ark 6 of the covenant of the Lord unto its place, into the oracle of the house, [P] to the most holy place, [S] even under Meeting and its vessels were brought up to the temple along with the ark cannot be historical. The sources of Kings know of no sacred tent except that made by David for the ark (see on i. 39) ; but this is never called ' Tent of Meeting,' and would hardly have been thought worthy of being transported to the new sanctuary. The Tent of Meeting can mean nothing else than the tabernacle * which Moses made in the wilderness ' (i Chron. xxi. 29), which late writers like the chronicler supposed to be still in existence in the time of Solomon. Hence that whole clause, although it is found in the LXX, must be removed. Similarly, the distinction between priests and Iievites in the end of verse 4 implies the standpoint of the Priestly Code (see Driver, Dent. p. 219) ; and this clause also must be omitted, as in the LXX. What now remains of the two verses consists of two doublets : (a) ' And all the elders of Israel came and brought up the ark of Yahweh ' ; and (6) 'And the priests took up {or, carried) the ark.' It is difficult to say which of these represents the original text. The LXX retains only {b) ; yet, on internal grounds, we are disposed to regard (a) as the better reading. We may suppose {b) to have been a marginal correction to remind the reader that the ark must have been actually carried by priests ; and the LXX translators, recognizing that one or other of the two readings was superfluous, may have adopted the more precise statement and let the other drop. 5. The numerous sacrifices were probably offered at stages on the route, as at David's removal of the ark to the metropolis (2 Sam. vi. 13). The verse should probably be read as simplified in accordance with the LXX : * And the king and all Israel (went) before the ark, sacrificing sheep and oxen,' &c. 6. The priests deposit the ark in the place prepared for it in the debir of the temple. The words to the most holy place are a Priestly gloss (as in vi. 16). 142 I KINGS 8. 7-1 r. SDS 7 the wings of the cherubim. For the cherubim spread forth their wings over the place of the ark, and the cherubim covered the ark and the staves thereof above. 8 And the staves were so long that the ends of the staves were seen from the holy place before the oracle; but they were not seen without : and there they are, unto 9 this day. There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone which Moses put there at Horeb, [D] when the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel, 10 when they came out of the land of Egypt. [S] And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy place, that the cloud filled the house of the Lord, 1 1 so that the priests could not stand to minister by reason of the cloud : for the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord. 7, 8. The exact position of the ark under the wings of the cherubim is carefully defined. The meaning of verse 8 seems to be that the ark lay east and west, in such a position that its staves could just be seen in the darkness of the inner chamber from the main hall, but did not extend beyond the door. In Exod. xxv. 15 it is directed that the staves of the ark should not be removed. The words and there they are unto this day are not in the LXX, but are doubtless genuine : the temptation to omit them in later times is obvious. 9. The contents of the ark. Why the writer says it contained nothing but the tables of stone we cannot tell, unless there was a current impression that it held something else. As to what the ark really did contain at this time, see Kennedy in DB, i. p. 151. It may be noted that the expression ' Ark of the covenant of Yahweh ' seems to have originated in the Deuteronomic school of writers ; and the latter part of this verse shows clearly what was meant by it. It is necessary to insert a phrase from the LXX, and read (after Horeb) : 'the tables of the covenant which Yahweh made with . . . Egypt.' (Cf. verse 21.) 10, 11. The introduction of the ark into the shrine is followed by the appearing of the glory of Yahweh in the form of a cloud, the ancient symbol of the theophany (Exod. xxxiii. 9 ff.). It is the visible token that Yahweh has taken up His abode in the new temple. I KINGS 8. 12, T?,. S 143 Then spake Solomon, The Lord hath said that he 12 would dwell in the thick darkness. I have surely built 13 thee an house of habitation, a place for thee to dwell 12, 13 contain, in a mutilated text, the pregnant formula of dedication uttered by Solomon on this occasion. The complete poetic form of the quatrain can be recovered by the help of the LXX, which puts the verse after verse 53 (an additional proof that the text of the chapter has been dislocated by the insertion of verses 14 ff.), and adds a note to the effect that the words were taken from the ' Book of Songs.' Wellhausen has plausibly conjectured that this is a mistake for 'Book of Jashar^,' an old collection of poetry which contained Joshua's apostrophe to the sun and moon at Gibeon (Joshua x. 13), and David's elegy on Saul and Jonathan (2 Sam. i. 18). Of the various reconstructions of the text that have been proposed, we here follow that given by Cheyne in Origin of the Psalter, pp. 193, 212; it may be translated thus : — ' The sun has Yahweh set in the heavens ; He (himself) has resolved to dwell in thick darkness : Built have I a lofty mansion for thee, A place for thee to dwell in for (all) ages.' A singular interest attaches to this obscure and perhaps fragmen- tary epigram, _/7r5/ as an authentic document of the early Hebrew conception of the nature of Yahweh, and second as an expression of the religious idea embodied in the erection of the temple. The striking contrast in the first two lines, ' between the sun in his glorious heavenly mansion and the cloud-inhabiting Creator ' (Cheyne), reveals even at this early period a belief in Yahweh as the Creator of the universe ; and also a sense of the paradox involved in building a habitation for a Being so glorious and powerful. The higher religious minds of Israel had therefore advanced beyond the conception of a merely tribal or national Deity to that of a God who, under self-imposed limitations, is the Maker and Lord of Nature. The last two lines apply this thought to the building of the temple : the dark inner shrine is a suitable dwelling-place for the Being who has chosen to shroud Himself in thick darkness ; while the external magnificence of the structure as a whole is worthy of Him who has fixed the sun in the heavens. The theology of the passage may be expressed in these three propositions : (i) the temple is literally the dwelling-place of Yahweh ; (2) Yahweh is at the same time the Creator of the world ; (3) the darkness in which He dwells symbolizes the ^ itrJ'^rr misread by transposition as yni^rt. 144 I KINGS 8. 14, 15. SD 14 in for ever. [D] And the king turned his face about, and blessed all the congregation of Israel : and all the 15 congregation of Israel stood. And he said, Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, which spake with his mouth unto David my father, and hath with his hand fulfilled mystery of Divinity, the contrast between His nearness to Israel and His essential power and majesty. In so far as the founding of the temple impressed this profound idea of God on the mind of the nation, it was an event of the first importance in the history of the O. T. religion. viii. 14-61. The Orations of Solomon. Cf. 2 Chron. vi. 3-42. It was a common practice of ancient historians to throw their own interpretation of a historical situation into the form of speeches supposed to have been delivered at the time by the leading personages of the story. The compiler of Kings here avails himself of this literary license, in order to give expression to his own view of the supreme significance of this great event in the history of his people. The passage is remark- able for the orderly arrangement of thought ; and it exhibits all the oratorical power which characterizes the Deuteronomic school of writers. It consists of three parts: (i) Solomon's address to the people, verses 15-21; (2) his Dedicatory Prayer, 22-53 ; and (3) the Benediction, 54-61. There are some indications that the literary unity of the composition is not perfect. The position of verses 12 f. in the LXX, between verses 53 and 54, and the omission of the last section in Chronicles, are difficult to account for except on the assumption of some very extensive re-an-angements of the text in late times. Moreover, some allusions (e. g. 25 ff.) assume the existence of the Monarchy and the temple, while others (46 ff.") have been thought to presuppose the experience of the Exile. But these differences do not interfere with the general conclusion that the passage as a whole is Deuteronomic. That is abundantly proved by the numerous coincidences in style with the Book of Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic parts of Joshua. Of these, a list is given in Driver's Introduction^, p. 200 f.; see also Burney in DB, ii. p. 859 ff., and more fully in his Notes, p. ii5fr. viii. 14-21. The Address to the People. This is mainly a recapitu- lation, based on 2 Sam. vii. sff., of the providential circumstances which had led up to the building of the temple. 15, 16. A free rendering of 2 Sam. vii. 6f., but with an im- portant modification from the Deuteronomic point of view. The I KINGS 8. 16-21. D 145 it, saying, Since the day that I brought forth my people 16 Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build an house, that my name might be there ; but I chose David to be over my people Israel. Now it was in the heart of David my father to build 17 an house for the name of the Lord, the God of Israel. But the Lord said unto David my father. Whereas it 18 was in thine heart to build an house for my name, thou didst well that it was in thine heart : nevertheless thou 19 shalt not build the house ; but thy son that shall come forth out of thy loins, he shall build the house for my name. And the Lord hath established his word that he 20 spake; for I am risen up in the room of David my father, and sit on the throne of Israel, as the Lord promised, and have built the house for the name of the Lord, the God of Israel. And there have I set a place 21 for the ark, wherein is the covenant of the Lord, which meaning in Samuel is that Yahweh had dwelt in a tent since the Exodus, and did not wish to be installed in a ' house of cedar.' Here, on the contrary, the idea is that the period since the Exodus had been a transition period, during which Yahweh had not indicated the place where His temple was to be erected. The standpoint is obviously that of Deut. xii. 11, &c. that my name might he there. See below on verse 29. but I chose David. Read, inserting a clause from LXX and 2 Chron. vi. 6, 'but (now) I have chosen Jerusalem that my name might be there, and I have chosen David.' David's city and David's dynasty are frequently associated as theocratic institutions; they are twin pledges of Yahweh's covenant relation to Israel. 17-19. The building of the temple is the realization of a cherished design of David, which was overruled at the time, for reasons not here stated (see on verse 3). Verse 19 refers to 2 Sam. vii. 13, where it is simply stated that the temple was to be built by David's son. That verse, however, is evidently itself a Deuteronomic interpolation in 2 Sam. vii, for it is clear that the whole drift of Nathan's oracle is as little favourable to the building of a temple by Solomon as it is to David's proposal to build one himself. 21. wherein is the covenant of the LORD. See on verse 9. 146 I KINGS 8. 22-27. D he made with our fathers, when he brought them out of the land of Egypt. 2 3 And Solomon stood before the altar of the Lord in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread 23 forth his hands toward heaven : and he said, O Lord, the God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven 24 above, or on earth beneath ; who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants, that walk before thee with all their heart : who hast kept with thy servant David my father that which thou didst promise him : yea, thou spakest with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine 35 hand, as it is this day. Now therefore, O Lord, the God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that which thou hast promised him, saying, There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel ; if only thy children take heed to their way, to 36 w-alk before me as thou hast walked before me. Now therefore, O God of Israel, let thy word, I pray thee, be verified, which thou spakest unto thy servant David 27 my father. But will God in very deed dwell on the viii. 22-53. "^^^ Prayer of Dedication. It is delivered by Solomon standing in front of the altar, with hands outstretched to heaven — the universal ancient attitude in prayer (Exod. ix. 29 ; Isa. i. 15 ; 2 Mace. iii. 20, &c. : see Riehm, Handworterbttch, p. 485 ff.). viii. 23-26. Prayer for the fulfilment of the promise to David (2 Sam. vii. 12 ff.). 24, indeed, speaks of the promise as already fulfilled in the establishment of Solomon's kingdom, and the completion of the temple ; but 25, 26 contemplate a larger fulfilment in the maintenance of the newly-founded dynasty. viii. 27-30. The burden of all the following petitions is here ex- pressed in general terms, viz. that the temple may ever be the guarantee of intercourse between heaven and earth, the symbol and pledge of the answer to prayer. 27. But will God in very deed. In what sense can this house be thought of as the dwelling-place of the infinite and omnipresent I KINGS 8. 28-30. D 147 earth ? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded ! Yet have thou respect unto the prayer of thy 28 servant, and to his supplication, O Lord my God, to hearken unto the cry and to the prayer which thy servant prayeth before thee this day : that thine eyes may be 29 open toward this house night and day, even toward the place whereof thou hast said, My name shall be there : to hearken unto the prayer which thy servant shall pray toward this place. And hearken thou to the supplication 30 of thy servant, and of thy people Israel, when they shall Yahweh ? LXX and Chronicles have, dwell with men on the earth. The question leads up to a conception of God's dwelling in the temple, more spiritual than that which prevailed in earlier times (verse 13). It becomes, as it were, the ideal point of contact at which God's thought and man's thought meet and touch each other, and real religious communion is established between them. This is the idea implied in verse 29. Yahweh's eyes are to be open toward this house night and day : when Israel prays toward this place Yahweh will hear *in heaven His dwelling place,' and answer (cf verse 52). In the examples which follow (verses 31 ff.), the prayer is con- ceived sometimes as offered in the temple, sometimes as directed towards it ; in either case the underlying idea is the same. whereof thou hast said, My name shall be there. See Deut. xii. 5, 11, xiv. 23, 24, xvi. 2, 6, 11, xxvi. 2. The association of the Divine name with the sanctuary is mostly Deuteronomic or later (2 Sam. vii, 13 ; i Kings iii. 2, v. 3, 5, &c.) ; but it appears in at least one older passage, Exod. xx. 24 ('where I will cause my name to be commemorated'). The idea probably originated in the liturgical phrase, * to call on the name ' of the Deity (Gen. iv. 26, xii. 8, xiii. 4, &c.). It describes the evocation of the Deity, by the solemn utterance of His name, which is the pre- liminary to every act of worship. Hence, to say that the name of Yahweh is in the sanctuary means practically, and in the first instance, that in that place Yahweh will answer to His name — will reveal His gracious presence in response to the worship of His servants. Whether, or in what degree, the Deuteronomic usage of the expression implies a hypostasis of the name, as a special and local manifestation of the Divine presence, is a question that need not be discussed here. L 2 148 I KINGS 8. 31-35. D pray toward this place : yea, hear thou in heaven thy 31 dwelHng place; and when thou hearest, forgive. If a man sin against his neighbour, and an oath be laid upon him to cause him to swear, and he come and swear 32 before thine altar in this house : then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his own head \ and justi- fying the righteous, to give him according to his right- 33 eousness. When thy people Israel be smitten down before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee ; if they turn again to thee, and confess thy name, and pray and make supplication unto thee in this house: 34 then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which 35 thou gavest unto their fathers. When heaven is shut up, and there is no rain, because they have sinned against 30. when thou hearest, fbrsfive. Every answer to prayer includes the forgiveness of sins. viii. 31 ff. From this point the supplication resolves itself into an enumeration of typical cases — mostly of national distress — in which prayer would be offered toward or in the temple. 31, 32. The case of a curse pronounced in the sanctuary, over a transgressor against whom no legal evidence is procurable : cf. Exod. xxii. 7-12 ; Num. v. sff. The Lord is besought to preside over the ordeal, and judsfe his servants, by giving effect to the curse if the man be guilty *. condemning' . . . justifying": i.e. < declaring guilty* or * righteous ' by the issue of the trial, 33, 34. Defeat of Israel in battle, as a consequence of apostasy from Yahweh. and bring them again unto the land seems to imply the Exile ; but this is inconsistent with pray ... in this house (verse 33). Perhaps we should read, with a change of vowel points, ' and let them remain in the land,' i. e. avert the extreme penalty of exile (so Klostermann, Benzinger). 35, 36. The case of drought : cf. Deut. xi. T3-17. when {or, ^ Many cases of this kind are referred to in the recently discovered code of Hammurabi. See Johns, Oldest Code of Lawst §§20, 131, 22/1 266, &c. 1 KINGS 8. .c^6-4i. D 149 thee; if they pray toward this place, and confess thy name, and turn from their sin, when thou dost afflict them : then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of 36 thy servants, and of thy people Israel, when thou teachest them the good way wherein they should walk ; and send rain upon thy land, which thou hast given to thy people for an inheritance. If there be in the land 37 famine, if there be pestilence, if there be blasting or mildew, locust or caterpiller; if their enemy besiege them in the land of their cities; whatsoever plague, whatsoever sickness there be ; what prayer and supplica- 38 tion soever be made by any man, or by all thy people Israel, which shall know every man the plague of his own heart, and spread forth his hands toward this house : then hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and 39 forgive, and do, and render unto every man according to all his ways, whose heart thou knowest ; (for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men ;) that they may fear thee all the days that they live in the 40 land which thou gavest unto our fathers. Moreover 41 * because ') thou dost afflict them, is better than marg. ' because thou answerest them,' though it may involve a slight change of pointing ; which, however, is warranted by LXX and Vulg. the good way . . . walk. Cf. Jer. vi. 16. viii. 37-40. Famine, Pestilence, and other calamities. 37. locust and caterpiller are probably names of distinct species of locusts (Joel i. 4 : see Driver's Excursus, Camh. Bible, p. 82 ff.). in the land of their cities (marg. 'gates '). Read, with LXX, 'in any of their gates,' a thoroughly Deuteronomic expression (Deut. XV. 7, xvii. 2, &c.). 38. Omit, or by all thy people Israel (LXX). every man the plagfue of his own heart: a peculiar ex- pression, probably = the stroke that affects him personally. The generalized language of the verse seems to show that the praj'er is drawing near its conclusion. viii. 41-43, The Prayer of the Stranger. Cf. Isa. Ivi. 6, 7, Verses ISO I KINGS 8. 42-46. DD« concerning the stranger, that is not of thy people Israel, when he shall come out of a far country for thy name's 42 sake ; (for they shall hear of thy great name, and of thy mighty hand, and of thy stretched out arm ;) when he 43 shall come and pray toward this house ; hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and do according to all that the stranger calleth to thee for ; that all the peoples of the earth may know thy name, to fear thee, as doth thy people Israel, and that they may know that this house 44 which I have built is called by thy name. [D^] If thy people go out to battle against their enemy, by what- soever way thou shalt send them, and they pray unto the Lord toward the city which thou hast chosen, and 45 toward the house which I have built for thy name : then hear thou in heaven their prayer and their supplication, 46 and maintain their cause. If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they 41'' and 42* are omitted by the LXX, which reads : * that is not of thy people, but comes and prays.' The result of these answers to prayer will be to extend the knowledge of Yahweh's name to all the peoples of the earth. 43. tkis house . . . name. Render as in margin. viii. 44, 45. Prayers for Success in War. The verses seem an Exilic parallel to 33 f. It is true that the situation contemplated might be pre-Exilic ; but if it had belonged to the original scheme of the prayer it would naturally have stood alongside of 33 ff. ; the language, moreover, resembles that of the next section, which is still more likely to be Exilic. 44. toward the city . . . house : lit. * in the direction of the city . . . and of the house.' (Cf, verse 48.) The custom of praying with the face turned toward Jerusalem (the Mohammedan kiblah, first borrowed by the Prophet from the Jews, though afterwards modified in favour of Mecca) is not known to have existed before the Exile (see Dan. vi. lo. 45. maintain their cause marg. ' right ") : cf. verses 49, 59. viii. 46-51. Prayers in Exile. I KINGS 8. 47-52. D2 151 carry them away captive unto the land of the enemy, far off or near; yet if they shall bethink themselves in the 47 land whither they are carried captive, and turn again, and make supplication unto thee in the land of them that carried them captive, saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have dealt wickedly ; if they 48 return unto thee with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their enemies, which carried them captive, and pray unto thee toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, the city which thou hast chosen, and the house which I have built for thy name : then 49 hear thou their prayer and their supplication in heaven thy dwelling place, and maintain their cause ; and forgive 50 thy people which have sinned against thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee ; and give them compassion before those who car- ried them captive, that they may have compassion on them : for they be thy people, and thine inheritance, 51 which thou broughtest forth out of Egypt, from the midst of the furnace of iron: that thine eyes may be open 52 48. toward tbeir land : ' in the direction of their land ' (as verse 44). Kittel quotes a parallel from the late Jewish Midrash Sifre 71^ : 'Those who dwell outside the land of Israel turn their faces toward the land of Israel and pray ; those who dwell in the land of Israel turn their faces toward Jerusalem.' 50. give them compassion before (i. e. * make them an object of compassion to*) those who carried them captive. It is remarkable that deliverance from captivity is not expressly mentioned, and if contemplated at all, is looked for only from the generosity of the conqueror. Such a prayer could hardly have originated except under actual experience of exile, without any prospect of immediate relief. 51. the furnace of iron means the furnace in which iron is smelted. The phrase is found in Deut. iv. 20, Jer. xi. 4 ; the image in Isa. xlviii. to, &c. viii. 52, 53. Conclusion of the Prayer. 52 is mutilated at the beginning : that thine eyes may be open cannot be construed as an independent sentence, and is certainly tS2 I KINGS 8. 53-56. D^ unto the supplication of thy servant, and unto the sup- plication of thy people Israel, to hearken unto them 53 whensoever they cry unto thee. For thou didst separate them from among all the peoples of the earth, to be thine inheritance, as thou spakest by the hand of Moses thy servant, when thou broughtest our fathers out of Egypt, O Lord God. 54 And it was so, that when Solomon had made an end of praying all this prayer and supplication unto the Lord, he arose from before the altar of the Lord, from kneeling on his knees with his hands spread forth toward heaven. 55 And he stood, and blessed all the congregation of Israel 56 with a loud voice, saying, Blessed be the Lord, that hath given rest unto his people Israel, according to all that he promised : there hath not failed one word of all not the continuation of verse 51. The original introduction must have been lost. LXX, as well as 2 Chron. vi. 40, have a smoother text. 53 is omitted by the chronicler, who substitutes an imperfect version of Ps. cxxxii. 8-10. viii. 54-61. The Benediction. The section is wanting entirely in 2 Chron. ; and in LXX (as already explained) is separated from the prayer (24-53) t)y the intrusion of verses 12, 13 of the Hebrew. There is a discrepancy between verse 54 and verse 22 (see below), which seems to show that it is later than the pre- Exilic parts of the prayer. Possibly it was added along with verses 44 ff., with which it has some linguistic affinities. 54. from kneelingf on Ms knees. Kneeling is the posture of prayer in i Kings xix. 18, Isa. xlv. 23, Ezra ix. 5, 2 Chron. vi. 13, Dan. vi. 10, Ps. xcv. 6. There is no evidence that the practice was peculiarly post-Exilic. Standing, however, was a common attitude in early times (Gen. xviii. 22, i Sam. i. 26) ; and when the author of verse 22 sa3'S that Solomon ' stood,' he can hardly be supposed to mean the same thing as the writer of this verse, 56. hath g'iveu rest unto his people : an allusion to Deut. xii. 10 (see on v. 4). Although the expression in Deuteronomy might readily be taken to refer to the conquest of the land of Canaan, yet the connexion in which it occurs proves that the writer had really in view the peace secured by the efforts of David, and fully enjoyed under the J-eign of Solomon. I KINGS 8. 57-63. D^SD 153 his good promise, which he promised by the hand of Moses his servant. The Lord our God be with us, as 57 he was with our fathers : let him not leave us, nor forsake us : that he may incline our hearts unto him, to walk in 58 all his ways, and to keep his commandments, and his statutes, and his judgements, which he commanded our fathers. And let these my words, wherewith I have 59 made supplication before the Lord, be nigh unto the Lord our God day and night, that he maintain the cause of his servant, and the cause of his people Israel, as every day shall require : that all the peoples of the earth 60 may know that the Lord, he is God ; there is none else. Let your heart therefore be perfect with the Lord our 61 God, to walk in his statutes, and to keep his command- ments, as at this day. [S D] And the king, and all 62 Israel with him, offered sacrifice before the Lord. And 63 57, 58. The blessing which Solomon invokes for the people is the continued presence of God in their midst, inclining their hearts to keep His covenant, and so realize the Deuteronomic ideal of national righteousness. 59, 60. The maintenance of Israel's right (cf. verses 45, 49) is the manifestation of Yahweh's power, and the demonstration to the world of his divinity. The idea is prominent in Ezekiel and Deutero-Isaiah. 61. Iiet your heairt ... toe perfect: 'undivided,' completely surrendered. viii. 62-66. The Dedicatory Sacrifices and Observance of the Feast, (Cf. 2 Chron. vii. 5-10.) The two events were contemporaneous, but are clearly distinguished in the narrative, the initiatorj'^ sacrifices being described in verses 62-64, and the celebration of the feast in 65, 66. Although the section has certainly passed through the hands of the compiler of Kings, its language is not wholly Deuteronomic ; and it is on every ground probable that the kernel of it comes from the same ancient source as verses 62. offered sacrifice. The word used is the generic term for bloody sacrifices t the various kinds are distinguished afterwards in verses 63, 64. 154 I KINGS 8. 6^. SD Solomon ofilered for the sacrifice of peace offerings, which he offered unto the Lord, two and twenty thousand oxen, and an hundred and twenty thousand sheep. So the king and all the children of Israel dedicated the 64 house of the Lord. The same day did the king hallow the middle of the court that was before the house of the Lord ; for there he offered the burnt offering, and the meal offering, and the fat of the peace offerings : because the brasen altar that was before the Lord was too little 63. peace offerings : see on next verse. The 120,000 sheep are not mentioned in the LXX. So the kingf . . . dedicated. The Hebrew verb rendered * dedicate ' is the rare technical term used of the initiation or formal opening of (e. g.) a new house (Deut. xx. 5) : from it comes Hdnukkdh (Ps. xxx, title), the name of the late Feast of Dedication, instituted by Judas Maccabaeus (i Mace. iv. 5c ff.). Cf. also the initiation of the altar (Num. vii. 10 ; 2 Chron. vii. 9) and the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. xii. 27). The sentence appears to imply that the sacrifices were the essential act of the dedication ceremony; hence they could hardly have been left unmentioned in the original account. 64 explains how it was possible to offer such an enormous quantity of sacrifices in a short time : the altar being too small, the king sanctified the entire area of the middle court in front of the house. did . . . hallow: * sanctify,' set apart as holy. The verse hardly implies that the sanctity of the middle area was perpetuated, or that the writer traces back to this temporary emergency a per- manent arrangement of his own day (so Kittel). the hurut-offering- ('d/a//) is the holocaust, offered entirely to God, and wholly consumed on the altar (///. that which wholly 'goes up' in sacrificial smoke). The meal offering* {ntinhdJi) was originally a present or offering made to God of any kind, whether vegetable or animal ; but in post-Exilic usage it became specialized in the sense of cereal oblation : this is probably the meaning here. Of the peace offerings {sheldmhn, the exact meaning is not certain) only the fat was offered on the altar, the other parts furnishing the material of a sacrificial meal. Verse 63 shows that (as might be expected) the bulk of the sacrifices offered that day were of this class. the hrasen altar. It is certainly surprising that no mention of this important structure occurs in the account of the temple I KINGS 8. 65,66. SD 155 to receive the burnt offering, and the meal offering, and the fat of the peace offerings. So Solomon held the 65 feast at that time, and all Israel with him, a great con- gregation, from the entering in of Hamath unto the brook of Egypt, before the Lord our God, seven days and seven days, even fourteen days. On the eighth day 66 furniture in ch. vii. Most recent scholars suppose that the de- scription of it has been struck out by a late editor, who imagined that the brasen altar of the tabernacle was still in existence, and that no other was needed. The view of W. R. Smith has already been spoken of (above, p. 126). If the latter hypothesis is too ingenious, the other is much too easy (see the convincing argu- ments of Burney, p. 102 f.). The question does not greatly con- cern us here, except in so far as the verse goes to show that whatever the brasen altar was, its function was to receive all sacrifices offered by fire. The brasen pillars could not have been used for that purpose. The truth may be that there was at first no artificial altar in Solomon's temple, the sacrifices being offered on the sacred rock which rises in the middle of the Haram area (see Appendix, p. 441). 65. the feast is the Feast of Tabernacles ; see on verse 2. from the entering- in of Hamath. Hamath is the modern Hamd on the Orontes ; the * entering in,' or ' approach,' of Hamath (which is so frequently given as the northern Hmit of the Holy Land) is probably the pass between Hermon and Lebanon, through which Coele-Syria is entered from the south (Buhl). It does not take us nearly so far north as the city of Hamath itself. the brook of Egsrpt is the Wadi el-Ansh, entering the sea nearly fifty miles south-west of Gaza. Towards the end of the verse the LXX has an addition so characteristically Deuteronomic in its view of the annual festivals that it may reasonably be assigned to the pre-Exilic compiler of Kings : 'before the Lord our God, in the house which he had built, eating and drinking and re- joicing before the Lord our God' (cf. Deut. xii. 7, xvi. 14). And the LXX is certainly to be followed in the omission of the last words : and seven days, even fourteen days, which are flatly contradicted by the opening of the next verse. How they came to be added we can partly see from 2 Chron. vii. 8, 9. There the duration of the feast is given correctly as seven days ; but it is added that the previous seven days had been devoted to the dedication of the altar : the two together make up the fourteen days of our gloss. 66. On the eighth day. In accordance with Deut. xvi. 13, 15 T56 I KINGS 9. I. SD D he sent the people away, and they blessed the king, and went unto their tents joyful and glad of heart for all the goodness that the Lord had shewed unto David his servant, and to Israel his people. [D] And it came to pass, when Solomon had finished the building of the house of the Lord, and the king's house, and all Solomon's desire which he was pleased to the feast lasts seven days, and on the eighth the people are ready to depart to their homes. In 2 Chron,, on the other hand, we read that the eighth day was occupied with a ' solemn assembly.' This corresponds with post-Exilic practice (Lev. xxiii. 36 ; Num. xxviii. 25) ; and accordingly the chronicler postpones the dismis- sal of the people to the twenty-third day of the month, the feast having begun on the fifteenth. and they blessed the king" : or, * bade farewell to the king.' But LXX (B) says, much more naturally, that the king blessed them. So the joyful and auspicious season comes to an end. ix. 1-9. Second Appearance of the Lord to Solomon. The answer to the prayer of ch. viii comes in the form of a night vision, like that which had been granted to Solomon at the beginning ojf his reign. The passage is thus on the one hand the immediate sequel to ch. viii, and on the other a Deuteronomic parallel to iii. 5-14. That it comes from the hand of the compiler is clear, not only from its dependence on ch. viii, but also from its style, which is if possible even more strongly marked by Deuteronomic phrase- ology than viii. 14 ff. (see again, Driver, Inttvd.^, p. 200 f.). The motive for its insertion is most clearly expressed in verses 6-9, which are written from the standpoint of the Exile, and manifestly for the purpose of explaining the great catastrophe of the destruc- tion of the temple. These verses, however, are not quite of a piece with what precedes : they are addressed not to Solomon but to the nation at large ; they make no express reference to the prayer; and introduce the specific charge of polytheism, which is not contained in the more general warning of verses 4, 5. It is not improbable that verses 1-5 were written by the pre-Exilic compiler, while verses 6-9 belong to the second redaction. 1. The revelation comes to Solomon just when he is elated by the successful execution of his architectural projects. desire : an uncommon word, paraphrased in 2 Chron. vii. 11 by * all that came into his heart.' I KINGS 9. 2-7. DD2 157 do, that the Lord appeared to Solomon the second time, 2 as he had appeared unto him at Gibeon. And the Lord 3 said unto him, I have heard thy prayer and thy sup- pHcation, that thou hast made before me: I have hallowed this house, which thou hast built, to put my name there for ever; and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually. And as for thee, if thou wilt 4 walk before me, as David thy father walked, in integrity of heart, and in uprightness, to do according to all that I have commanded thee, and wilt keep my statutes and my judgements ; then I will establish the throne of thy 5 kingdom over Israel for ever; according as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel. [D'^] But if ye shall turn 6 away from following me, ye or your children, and not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before you, but shall go and serve other gods, and worship them : then will I cut off Israel out of the land 7 which I have given them ; and this house, which I have hallowed for my name, will I cast out of my sight ; and 2. as he had appeared . . . Gibeon : i. e. in a dream by night (iii. 5). That Gibeon was also the scene of this second vision is not to be inferred. 3. After before me LXX adds : * (Behold) I have done for thee according to all thy prayer.' The clause is probably genuine. to put. Render, * by putting' my name, &c. (cf. viii. 16, 29). 4. 5. A promise of the establishment of Solomon's kingdom, on condition of his fidelity to the covenant : the answer to the petition of viii. 25 f. (Cf. ii. 4 ; 2 Sam. vii. 13). 6-9. A threat of the dispersion of the nation and overthrow of the temple. The abrupt change from the sing, to the plur. is very remarkable (see above). shall go and serve other g'ods. Both the expression and the idea — that the Exile was a judgement specially on idolatry^ are very characteristic of Deuteronomy. 7. cast out of my sight: lit. 'send away'; but 2 Chron. vii. i'o has the stronger word properly rendered * cast out.' 158 I KINGS 9. 8-10. D"A Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all peoples : 8 and though this house be so high, yet shall every one that passeth by it be astonished, and shall hiss; and they shall say. Why hath the Lord done thus unto this 9 land, and to this house ? And they shall answer, Be- cause they forsook the Lord their God, which brought forth their fathers out of the land of Egypt, and laid hold on other gods, and worshipped them, and served them : therefore hath the Lord brought all this evil upon them. 10 [A] And it came to pass at the end of twenty years, a bjnvord (Jit. 'a teethy saying'): very rare; only Deut. xxviii. 37 and Jer. xxiv. 9. 8. a,nd thougrli this house be so higfh. The Hebrew text (of which the margin gives the correct translation) is quite impossible. We must either substitute for ' high ' a word meaning ' ruins ^ ' ; or (somewhat as 2 Chron. vii. 21) read, ' and as for this high house, every one,'&c.; or (combining both devices, with Thenius), • and this house which is high shall become a heap of ruins.' The first suggestion is best. S**, 9. The astonishment of the heathen finds expression in this question and answer. Note the close resemblance to Deut. xxix. 24-29. ix. 10-28. Miscellaneous Notices, mostly relating to Solomon's Public Works. Here we come to a second group of fragmentary notices, which (like iv. 1-28) have all the appearance of being based on extracts from the Annals of Solomon (see introductory note, p. 81 f.). It is impossible to tell how far the literary form of the passage (which Driver considers to be less complete than that of any other portion of the book) is due to the compiler, and how far to subse- quent rearrangements of the text. In the LXX many of the fragments are placed in quite different connexions ; but it cannot be said that, on the whole, its recension is at all superior to the Hebrew. Burney traces a single original document in verses 10, 17, 18, 19, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24^ (in that order). The connexion thus obtained is undoubtedly a good one : after completing the temple and the palace, Solomon built Gezer, Beth-horon, &c. ; then follows an account of the forced levy raised to carry out these * J'^ for p^'». I KINGS 9. 11,12. A 159 wherein Solomon had built the two houses, the house of the Lord and the king's house, (now Hiram the king of Tyre had furnished Solomon with cedar trees and fir trees, and with gold, according to all his desire,) that then king Solomon gave Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee. And Hiram came out from Tyre to see the works ; and then the account of his maritime enterprise (26-28). The passages which interrupt this connexion are not necessarily' less authentic than the main narrative ; they are, at least in part, genuine excerpts from ancient sources. In the absence of any obvious principle ot arrangement, however, we must here be content to take each notice by itself, disentangling as far as possible the original annalistic statement from the editorial ac- cretions. (The attempt to exhibit the analysis by marginal letters has been renounced as too cumbrous.) ix. 10-14. Cession of Territory to Hiram. The real nature of the transaction is disguised by the parenthesis in verse 11, which gives the impression that the twenty cities were handed over in payment of materials supplied for the royal buildings. But we know from v. 11 that this expense was defrayed by an annual tribute of wheat and oil ; and there is no reason to suppose either that Hiram had raised his terms or that the tribute had fallen into arrears. The matter appears in its true light when we read verse 14 in connexion with 1 1^. Solomon is pressed for want of ready money, and parts with the twenty towns in return for an advance of 120 talents of gold. In later times it seemed incredible that the wealthy and prosperous Solomon should have been reduced to such straits ; and the chronicler simply reverses the relations of the two parties, and says that Solomon fortified the cities which Hiram had ceded to him (2 Chron. viii. 2). 10, 11. A clue to the analysis of the section is furnished by the particle ' then ' in the middle of verse i r. As the continuation of what precedes, its use would be quite anomalous ; on the other hand, it is characteristically employed in one of the primary docu- ments to introduce an entirely new subject (see on iii. 16). We may therefore conclude that the annalistic notice commenced here, Then king Solomon gave Hiram, and that the previous clause (11*) was inserted to supply a connexion. The real continuation of verse 10 is probably found in verse 17. in the land of Galilee : ///. * the Circuit ' ; called in Isa. ix. I * the Circuit of the nations,' because of its mixed population (cf. the German * Heidenmark'; G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. p. 413). From 2 Kings xv. 29 ; Joshua xx, 7, xxi. 32 ; i Chron. vi. 76, it i6o I KINGS 9. 13-15. A cities which Solomon had given him ; and they pleased 13 him not. And he said, What cities are these which thou hast given me, my brother? And he called them the 14 land of Cabul, unto this day. And Hiram sent to the king sixscore talents of gold. 15 And this is the reason of the levy which king Solomon would appear to have been originally pretty nearly co-extensive with the territory of Naphtali (but see on verse 13 below). Before N. T. times the name had been extended to the whole of the northern district of Palestine, north of the plain of Esdraelon. 12, 13. Hiram expresses his discontent with the transfer ; and the circumstance gives rise to a contemptuous epithet for the whole region, which had survived to the writer's own day. The name Kabul, indeed, has survived even to our day as that of a village nine miles south-east of Accho, which is identified with the Cabul mentioned in Joshua xix. 27 as a frontier town of Asher. It is certainly difficult to dissociate the town of Cabul from the land of Cabul here referred to ; though in that case Galilee must, in the time of the writer, have included the tribe of Asher as well as Naphtali. But what popular etymology underlies the idea of contempt imported into the term cannot be made out ; the statement of Josephus (A>it. viii. 142) that Chabolon is Phoenician for ' not pleasing ' deserves no credit. 14. See introductory note above, p. 159. A talent of gold is estimated as equivalent (not in purchasing power, but in weight) to £6,150 sterling (Kennedy, in DB, iii. p. 150). This would make the sum raised by Solomon a little under three-quarters of a million sterling ; its purchasing power would enormously exceed what these figures represent to us. ix. 15-23. The Corvee and the purposes to which it was applied. Two (or rather, three) fragments are here amalgamated in a some- what perplexing fashion, (a) The account of the levy, promised in 15% is given in verses 20-23. Here verses 20-22 are un- historical and late, so that for the annalistic document there remains at most the isolated verse 23, which must have been followed by a list of officers, now lost, (b) Into this notice about the levy has been dovetailed an enumeration of Solomon's buildings and fortifications (15''- 19), in order to explain the necessity for so continuous a drain on the labour resources of the population. (c) In the middle of (6), again, verses 16, 17* are a parenthesis, suggested by the mention of Gezer, but plainly breaking the sequence. Since they are omitted by the LXX in this place, and inserted (along with iii. i) at the end of ch. iv, they evidently I KINGS 9. 15. A 161 raised ; for to build the house of the Lord, and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem, and Hazor, formed a detached notice. In the LXX the bulk of the section (verses 15, 17^-22) is transferred to ch. x ; small portions are repeated in the long addition under ii. 35 ; verse 23 is found only there. (On Burney's rearrangement of the passage, see above, p. 158.) 15*. the reason (better, ' account ') of the levy. See on iv. 9. 15** introduces the enumeration of Solomon's public works, of which the most important (next to the temple and the palace) was doubtless the fortification of Jerusalem, Millo (read 'the Millo') : cf, verse 24, xi. 27, 2 Sam. v. 9 (with pars, in Chron.). These are all the passages where the structure referred to is certainly mentioned : 2 Kings xii. 20 (* the house of Millo ') is doubtful. We read also of a ' house of Millo ' in Judges ix. 6, 20. From its association with the wall of Jerusalem we may with great probability infer that it was some distinctive feature of the defences of the capital ; but of its exact situation, or the kind of structure denoted by the name — whether a * house,' a 'tower,' or an 'embankment' — nothing is known. The word is probably derived from a verb meaning ' to fill,* and is most naturally understood in the sense supported by the Jewish Targum, of a mound or earthwork. In xi. 27 the Millo appears to be de- scribed as ' closing the breach of the city of David.' If it be the case (see Appendix, p. 440) that the city of David was cut off by a small ravine from the temple mount, it would be an important object to connect the two by a hne of fortifications ; and we might conjecture that the Millo was an embankment with a retaining wall which carried the fortification across the ravine. This would agree with 2 Sam. v. 9, which says that David ' built round about from the Millo and inward ' ; i. e. built that portion of the later city which lay to the south of the Millo. The verse does not necessarily imply that the Millo existed before Solomon. The determination of the course of the wall depends on two points, neither of which has been finally settled : first, whether the western hill was included in the fortifications ; and second, how far the 'old wall' described by Josephus in Bell. Jud. v. 146 ff. corresponds with the wall of Solomon. Until these questions have been securely determined it will not be possible to decide with certainty whether the remains of ancient fortifications recently discovered on the south of the city go back to the time of Solomon. (See Benzinger in Explorations in Bible Lands, p. 602 ff.) We have next a list, continued in 17^, of cities built (i. e. forti- fied) by Solomon throughout his dominions. Kazor was in the extreme north of the country, in Naphtali, M i62 I KINGS 9. 16-19. A 16 and Megiddo, and Gezer. Pharaoh king of Egypt had gone up, and taken Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and given it 17 for a portion unto his daughter, Solomon's wife. And 18 Solomon built Gezer, and Beth-horon the nether, and 19 Baalath, and Tamar in the wilderness, in the land, and all the store cities that Solomon had, and the cities for his chariots, and the cities for his horsemen, and that which Solomon desired to build for his pleasure in Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and in all the land of his near Kedesh (2 Kings xv. 29 ; Joshua xix. 36, &c.) ; the exact site is disputed. Mefifiddo : south of the plain of Esdraelon (see on iv. 12). Oezer (TV// Jezer^ south-east of Ramleh) occupies a strong position, guarding the chief access to Jerusalem from the coast : see G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. p. 215 ff. 16, 17*^. An historical notice, explaining how this Canaanitish city came into the possession of Solomon. Of this Egyptian expe- dition to Palestine nothing further is known ; it must surely have had political consequences of a more far-reaching kind than the provision of a dowry for Solomon's wife. The notice is valuable as showing that the Canaanites had in isolated communities preserved their independence against both Hebrews and Philistines down to the age of Solomon. 17^ Beth-horon the nether. The two Beth-horons {Beit'Ur et-tahta, and Beit 'Urel-foka) lie over a mile apart, on the northern- most route from Jerusalem to Joppa, with a difference of elevation of about 500 feet: see G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. p. 210 «. 18. Baalath (Joshua xix. 44) is not known. Tamar in the wilderness. 2 Chron. viii. 4 reads, ' Tadmor in the wilderness,' i. e. the famous Palmyra, 150 miles north-east of Damascus. From this comes the alternative reading given in the margin, which is supported by the ancient versions, and by the traditional pronunciation of the synagogue (the so-called A'(?r. KI (for he was yet in Egypt, whither he had fled from the presence of king Solomon, and Jeroboam dwelt in Egypt, 3 and they sent and called him ;) that Jeroboam and all the congregation of Israel came, and spake unto Re- 4 hoboam, saying, Thy father made our yoke grievous : now therefore make thou the grievous service of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon us, lighter, 5 and we will serve thee. And he said unto them, Depart yet for three days, then come again to me. And the people 6 departed. And king Rehoboam took counsel with the old men, that had stood before Solomon his father while he yet lived, saying, What counsel give ye me to return all . . . Israel : including Judah. The idea seems to be that the demand for the redress of grievances came from the whole nation ; it was only when they came to the election of a king that the schism between Israel and Judah appeared (verse 20). The original document must have contained some explanation of the reasons which led to this extraordinary convention. The parallel account of the LXX (xx. 24 "*) says the assembly was convened by Jeroboam, who had returned from Egypt and fortified himself in his native town of Sareira (24^). The explanation is in itself intelligible ; but it is irreconcileable with the presuppositions of this narrative (see on verse 20). 2, 3* (to 'came') ought to be omitted, with LXX. Verse 2 is inserted by the LXX in a still more unsuitable place (see on xi. 43); but the truth is that the notice does not belong to the present narrative at all. The fact of Jeroboam's return is, of course, assumed ; but he takes no part in the proceedings. 3^ Read, accordingly, 'and they spake'; or, as LXX, 'and the people spake.' 4. made our yoke sfrievous. The yoke is a natural emblem of servitude, which may be easy and reasonable (as Jer. v. 5, Matt. xi. 30), or (more commonly) galling and intolerable (Deut. xxviii. 48 ; Isa. ix. 4 ; Jer. xxviii. 14. and often). The people do not here ask for an entire remission of their burdens, but only for a relaxation of the more oppressive imposts and services — the taxation and forced labour that were crushing the life out of them. 5. yet for three days: better, as LXX, 'until (the end of) three days.' I KINGS 12. 7-13. KI 187 answer to this people ? And they spake unto him, saying, 7 If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day, and wilt serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be thy servants for ever. But he 8 forsook the counsel of the old men which they had given him, and took counsel with the young men that were grown up with him, that stood before him. And he said 9 unto them, What counsel give ye, that we may return answer to this people, who have spoken to me, saying, Make the yoke that thy father did put upon us lighter ? And the young men that were grown up with him spake 10 unto him, saying. Thus shalt thou say unto this people that spake unto thee, saying. Thy father made our yoke heavy, but make thou it lighter unto us ; thus shalt thou speak unto them, My little finger is thicker than my father's loins. And now whereas my father did lade you n with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke; my father chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions. So Jeroboam and all the people came to 12 Rehoboam the third day, as the king bade, saying. Come 7. wilt be a servant . . . they will "be thy servants. The counsel of the old men does not seem to look beyond the exigencies of the moment ; they recommend a politic and conciliatory answer, but not necessarily a considerate administration. 8. the young" men: lit. 'boys' — a contemptuous and hyper- bolical expression, which is surprising if Rehoboam was at the lime forty-one years of age (xiv. 21). The parallel in LXX (B) (xii. 24"') makes him, however, only sixteen at his accession. 10, 11. The two metaphors — the little finger thicker than the loins, and scorpions as contrasted with whips — were of a kind to live in the memory of a high-spirited and liberty-loving people. scorpions. The same name is said to have been given by the Romans to an implement of flagellation. It is described by Ephrem Syrus as a long bag of leather, stuffed with sand, and provided with spikes (Thenius). 12. Omit Jeroboam, and read with LXX. * And all Israel came' (see above on verses 2, 3). i88 I KINGS 12. 1.V18. KIZKI 13 to me again the third day. And the king answered the people roughly, and forsook the counsel of the old men 14 which they had given him ; and spake to them after the counsel of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, but I will add to your yoke : my father chas- tised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions. 15 So the king hearkened not unto the people; for it was a thing brought about of the Lord, that he might establish his word, which the Lord spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat. 16 And when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David ? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse : to your tents, O Israel : now see to thine own house, David. So Israel departed unto their 17 tents. [Z] But as for the children of Israel which dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them. 18 [KI] Then king Rehoboam sent Adoram, who was over 15. a thing brougrht abont: Heb. 'a turn '—of Providence ; as we speak of ' a turn of fortune.' 16. What portion have we? Cf. 2 Sam. xx. i, where the war-cry is sounded in almost identical terms by Sheba the Benjamite, when he headed the last great revolt of Israelites against the Davidic monarchy. The expression to yotir tents, O Israel is doubtless a reminiscence of the nomadic life ; and it is tempting to suppose that it means to take the field in readiness for a campaign. But no evidence can be found in support of this interpretation ; the tent is always simply a synonym for the private dwelling, and therefore we must understand the phrase here as a signal for dispersion, and refusal to obey the call to united action. Hence the last clause, So Israel departed tinto their tents, is either a gloss, or it describes the final upshot of the proceedings. 17 is a late interpolation which is wanting in the LXX : it is perhaps based on the representation of 2 Chron. xi. 16 f., where we read that pious Israelites from the north became naturalized in Judah, in order to worship God according to the law. 18. Adoram ( — Adoniram>, who was over the levy. See on iv. 6, and v. 14. The sending of this unpopular official to quell I KINGS 12. 19-21. KID(?) 189 the levy ; and all Israel stoned him with stones, that he died. And king Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot, to flee to Jerusalem. So Israel rebelled 19 against the house of David, unto this day. And it came 20 to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was returned, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel : there was none that followed the house of David^ but the tribe of Judah only. [D?] And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, 21 the revolt shows how little Rehoboam and his youthful advisers understood the gravity of the situation. Only a speedy flight saves Rehoboam from the infuriated people. 19. unto this day. The event v^as long remembered as the greatest disaster that had ever befallen the house of David : Isa. vii. 17. 20. Jeroboam may have been pulling the wires behind the scenes, but it is only now, and probably after some little interval, that he steps on to the stage and attains the goal of his ambition. the tribe of Judah only. The LXX adds, 'and Benjamin,' in accordance with verses 21, 23 ; but there can be no doubt that the Hebrew represents the older and more accurate tradition. Jerusa- lem was in the territory of Benjamin, and some Benjamite families must have been incorporated in the southern kingdom ; but the tribe of Benjamin as a whole went with the north. See on xi. 30. xii. 2 1 -24 . Civil War averted by a Prophet's Message. Rehoboam's first concern is to recover by force what his ill-advised action had lost. On his return to Jerusalem he sets about raising a great army in order to subdue his rebellious subjects. But the enter- prise is at once abandoned at the instance of the prophet Shemaiah, who shows that it is contrary to the will of Yahweh. The verses are clearly not homogeneous with the preceding section — contrast the inclusion of Benjamin in Rehoboam's kingdom with the explicit statement of verse 20 ; and they present a view of things hardly consistent with the annalistic notice in xiv. 30, which says there was constant warfare between Jeroboam and Rehoboam. The passage belongs to a series of prophetic narratives, which illustrate the influence of the prophets on the policy of the kings. There is nothing to show whether it was inserted by the compiler. I9Q I KINGS 12. 22-25. D(?)KID he assembled all the house of Judah, and the tribe of Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam the son 2 3 of Solomon. But the word of God came unto Shemaiah 23 the man of God, saying. Speak unto Rehoboam the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and unto all the house of Judah and Benjamin, and to the rest of the people, 34 saying. Thus saith the Lord, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren the children of Israel : return every man to his house; for this thing is of me. So they hearkened unto the word of the Lord, and returned and went their way, according to the word of the Lord. 25 [KID] Then Jeroboam built Shechem in the hill 22. Shemaiali is otherwise unknown, although in the parallel narrative of the LXX (xii. 24®) he is the prophet who figures in the mantle-rending incident instead of Ahijah the Shilonite. the man of God : the most general O. T. designation of the prophet. It appears never to be applied to any but prophets, or men regarded as prophets. In Judges xiii. 6, 8 we may suppose that the angel appeared in the guise of a prophet. [Between verse 24 and verse 25 the LXX has a long addition (xii. 24*"^ in Swete), on which see Appendix, Note II.] xii. 25-33. Incidents of J eroboaifCs Reign, (i) The fortification of Shechem on the west, and Penuel on the east, of the Jordan, verse 25 ; (2) the institution of the calf-worship of Beth-el and Dan, a measure prompted by fear lest the superior prestige of the temple at Jerusalem should maintain the religious unity of Israel, and thereby undo the political effects of the revolution, verses 26-30 ; (3) the appointment of a non-Levitical priesthood for the northern sanctuaries, verse 31 ; and (4) the fixing of the autumn festival in the eighth month, verse 32. The section is of mixed origin : the notices are mostly such as might have come ultimately from the annals of the northern kingdom ; but they have been partly recast in the process of compilation. 25. Shechem (see on verse x) was a natural place to choose as a capital, both from its historic importance and because of the part it had played in the revolt. I KINGS 12. 2C-2S. KID 191 country of Ephraim, and dwelt therein ; and he went out from thence, and built Penuel. And Jeroboam said in 26 his heart, Now shall the kingdom return to the house of David: if this people go up to offer sacrifices in the a; house of the Lord at Jerusalem, then shall the heart of this people turn again unto their lord, even unto Reho- boam king of Judah ; and they shall kill me, and return to Rehoboam king of Judah. Whereupon the king took 28 counsel, and made two calves of gold ; and he said unto Penuel was on the east of the Jordan, near the Jabbok (Gen. xxxii. 31 f. ; Judges viii. 8f.); but its site has not been discovered. The clause lie went out from thence can only refer to a transference of the seat of government to the trans-Jordanic region, a change which must have been due to some unrecorded troubles of Jeroboam's reign. It has been plausibly conjectured that it was a consequence of Shishak's invasion (see on xiv. 25) ; but the hypothesis loses much of its attractiveness if it be the case that Penuel itself was one of the cities conquered by Shishak. 26. 27 are assigned by some critics to one of the compilers, but without adequate reason. It is quite credible that even at this early period the temple at Jerusalem had come to be regarded as the chief centre of national worship, and had begun to attract pilgrims from all parts of the country. In such circumstances Jeroboam would have good reason to view with misgiving its rivalry with the ancient sanctuaries of the north, and its influence over the minds of his subjects. 27. and return . . . Judah : may be omitted with the LXX. 28. two calves of gfold. The images were probably in the form of a young ox ; the name * calves * seems to have been an epithet of derision coined by opponents of this species of idolatry, suggested by the diminutive size of the images. The origin of this symbol of Yahweh is still somewhat obscure. That it was an imitation of the Apis- or Mnevis-cult introduced by Jeroboam from Egypt, or surviving among the people since the time of the Exodus (Exod. xxxii), is little probable, the difference being too fundamental between the worship of a living animal as the incarnation of the Deity and the use of an image as His symbol. There is most to be said for the view that the ox was an ancient Semitic emblem of divinity, known to the Israelites especially through the Canaanites, whose Baal is associated with the figure of the ox. In the Babylonian religion the ox was the sacred animal of the Syrian and Babylonian thunder-god Ramman, 192 I KINGS 12. 29-32. KIDZ them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of 29 the land of Egypt. And he set the one in Beth-el, and 30 the other put he in Dan. And this thing became a sin : for the people went to ivorship before the one, even unto 31 Dan. And he made houses of high places, and made priests from among all the people, which were not of the 33 sons of Levi. [Z] And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the and might easily have been transferred to the worship of Yahweh {KAT^y p. 449 f.). It is in keeping with the conservative tendency of Jeroboam's religious policy to suppose that his innovation consisted in giving legal sanction to a type of worship already known and practised in certain sanctuaries of his realm. he said unto them. Read, with LXX, ' to the people. ' It is too mnch. Rather, 'Ye need no longer go up,' &c. (see margin). behold thy gods. Cf. the words of Aaron in Exod. xxxii. 4, 8. The formula has evidently been borrowed in the one passage from the other ; but which of the two is original it is difficult to decide. If any stress could be laid on the plural, the decision must be in favour of this verse (since only one calf was made by Aaron) ; but the construction of the word God (plural of eminence) with a plural verb, though unusual, is not without parallel. 29. Beth-el {Beittn, ten miles north of Jerusalem) and Dan (in the extreme north, near one of the sources of the Jordan, see on XV. ao) were two sanctuaries of immemorial antiquity. 30. the people went . . . Dan. The text is evidently in- complete. We should probably read, <■ And the people went before the one to Beth-el, and before the other to Dan ' (so Burney). Kittel, on the other hand, omits the first half of the verse as a gloss, and takes the rest as a continuation of verse 29, rendering : ' And the people marched before the one as far as Dan ; ' i. e. conducted the image, in a solemn procession, to its future resting- place. 31. houses of higrh places: i.e. probably, temples in the already existing high places (see on iii. 2). from among all the people : ' from the masses of the people.' This was in accordance with early usage (cf. i Sam. i. i IT., 2 Sam. viii. 18, XX. 26). But the preference of Levites for priests, im- plied in the second half of the verse, is also in accordance with early ideas (Judges xvii. 13). 32. The feast referred to is the Feast of Ingathering or of I KINGS 12. 33—13. T. Z 193 eighth month, on the fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he went up unto the altar ; so did he in Beth-el, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made : and he placed in Beth-el the priests of the high places which he had made. And he went 33 up unto the altar which he had made in Beth-el on the fifteenth day in the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised of his own heart : and he ordained a feast for the children of Israel, and went up unto the altar, to burn incense. And, behold, there came a man of God out of Judah 13 Tabernacles : see on viii. 2. The expression like unto the feast tliat is in Judah shows that a general regulation, and not a single observance, is meant. The fixing of this festival in the eighth month probably stereotyped the local custom of the north : whether it be correctly attributed to Jeroboam is another question. The writer has in view the divergence between the Israehtish and (later) Judaean practice ; and traces it to the schismatic policy of Jeroboam. and he went up. The text here is in some confusion. Since this clause is resumed at the beginning of verse 33 it is probable that the intervening words have been interpolated, under the mistaken impression that the reference is to Jeroboam's habitual practice, and not to a particular occasion. The truth is, however, that verse 33 is a transition verse, added to introduce the episode of the next chapter, and describing with much circumlocution the precise situation in which the message of the prophet was delivered, xiii. 1-34. The Man of God from Jttdah. The narrative consists of two parts : (i) The scene before the altar at Beth-el, where the king's illegal sacrifice is interrupted by the oracle of an unnamed man of God from Judah, which is accompanied by a miraculous sign : Jeroboam's arm being paralysed, but healed immediately on the intercession of the prophet. The latter refuses a reward, on the ground that he is under a strict injunction neither to eat bread nor drink water in the land, but to return to his own country by another way, verses i-io. (2) Then follows the account of how he was induced to violate his instructions by an old prophet of Beth-el, who persuaded him to accept his hospitality on the pretext that the invitation was inspired by the word of the Lord. For this act of disobedience the man of God is slain by a lion on the 194 I KINGS 13. 2. Z by the word of the Lord unto Beth-el : and Jeroboam 2 was standing by the altar to burn incense. And he cried against the altar by the word of the Lord, and said, way home, and is afterwards buried in the grave of the prophet who had led him astray, verses Ti-32. The whole story, but especially the latter part, is amongst the strangest in the O. T. As indications of a comparatively late date the following facts are pointed out : (a) the anonymity of the principal personages ; i^b) the anachronism of the reference to Samaria as a province (verse 32", whereas in the time of Jeroboam the city itself was not yet built (see xvi. 34) ; (c) the specific and detailed prognostication of an unimportant incident 350 years before fulfilment (verse 2 , which is without analog}^ in the authentic records of Hebrew prophecy ; (d) the mechanical conception of revelation implied in the hypostatizing of the ' word of the Lord' (verses i, 2, 5, 9, 17, 18, 32^ ; and (e) the non-ethical view of the prophet's relation to his own message, which is so conspicuous in the latter part of the chapter. These features, together with traces of decadence in the style, point to the conclusion that the passage is of late composition, and has been inserted in the book at a time long subsequent to the Deuteronomic redaction. What kernel of historic fact lies beneath the narrative it is quite impossible to determine. Wellhausen's conjecture that it arose out of the mission of Amos to Beth-el under the second Jeroboam has little to recommend it except its ingenuity. More probably it is based on some local tradition which came to light at the time when Josiah destroyed the sanctuary of Beth- el (a Kings xxiii. 16-18). 1. 117 the word of the IiOBD. The idea that the word of Yahweh as uttered by a prophet possesses a self-fulfilling energy is a genuine element of the prophetic theology (see Isa. ix. 8, &c.) ; but the representation throughout this chapter goes much further. The 'word' is conceived as a real mediating agency in the prophet's own intercourse with God. It is hardly too much to say that we have here an anticipation of the later doctrine of the Logos {Memrd), as a being intermediate between God and the world. 2. See on a Kings xxiii. 15-20. Even the most conservativ^e commentators feel the difficulty that lies in the announcement of Josiah so many centuries before his birth, and endeavour to get rid of it by deleting the proper name, or resolving it into some- thing more general (Kohler, Keil, Klostermann). But the naming of Josiah is quite in keeping with the character of the prediction as a whole, and nothing is gained by attempting to minimize so marked a feature. I KINGS 13. 3-?. 2 ip5 O altar, altar, thus saith the Lord : Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name ; and upon thee shall he sacrifice the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men's bones shall they burn upon thee. And he gave a sign the same day, 3 saying, This is the sign which the Lord hath spoken : Behold, the altar shall be rent, and the ashes that are upon it shall be poured out. And it came to pass, when 4 the king heard the saying of the man of God, which he cried against the altar in Beth-el, that Jeroboam put forth his hand from the altar, saying. Lay hold on him. And his hand, which he put forth against him, dried up, so that he could not draw it back again to him. The altar 5 also was rent, and the ashes poured out from the altar, according to the sign which the man of God had given by the word of the Lord. And the king answered and 6 said unto the man of God, Intreat now the favour of the Lord thy God, and pray for me, that my hand may be restored me again. And the man of God intreated the Lord, and the king's hand was restored him again, and became as it was before. And the king said unto 7 the man of God, Come home with me, and refresh thy- self, and I will give thee a reward. And the man of God 8 3. the ashes. The Hebrew word {desheti = 'fatness') denotes technically the products of combustion of the fat and flesh of animals (Jer. xxxi. 40). These had to be carefully collected from the altar, and deposited in a clean place (Lev. vi. 10, 11, &c.) ; and the neglect of this precaution would seem to have been equivalent to the desecration of the altar. 4. The withering of Jeroboam's arm is an absolute miracle, which is not to be explained away as merely a natural consequence of the other miracle— the rending of the altar. 6. Intreat now the favour : lit. 'soften {or, make placid) the face,' i. e. * propitiate ' (Job xi. 19 ; i Sam. xiii. 12, and often). 7 ff. illustrate the fidelity of the man of God to his commission, which is proof against everything but downright deception. O 2 196 I KINGS 13. 9-14. Z said unto the king, If thou wilt give me half thine house, I will not go in with thee, neither will I eat bread nor 9 drink water in this place : for so was it charged me by the word of the Lord, saying, Thou shalt eat no bread, nor drink water, neither return by the way that thou 10 camest. So he went another way, and returned not by the way that he came to Beth-el. 1 1 Now there dwelt an old prophet in Beth-el ; and one of his sons came and told him all the works that the m.an of God had done that day in Beth-el : the words which he had spoken unto the king, them also they told unto 12 their father. And their father said unto them, What way went he? Now his sons had seen what way the 1 3 man of God went, which came from Judah. And he said unto his sons, Saddle me the ass. So they saddled 14 him the ass : and he rode thereon. And he went after 8. If thonwilt give: cf. the words of Balaam, Num. xxii. 18, xxiv. 13. 10. another way : probably in order to evade pursuit : at any rate, in scrupulous compliance with his directions. 11. an old prophet. The distinction between 'man of God' and ' prophet ' (see on xii. 22) is consistently maintained in the remainder of the chapter, the former designation being regularly used of the Judaean prophet, and the latter of the Samaritan. ' Man of God ' is obviousl}' regarded as the higher title, and * prophet ' as the lower ; but wherein precisely the difference -lies does not appear. It might conceivably be a reminiscence of what was in the mind of Amos when he repudiated the professional name of udbV (prophet, see Amos vii, 14). The passage is written to inculcate the duty of unswerving literal obedience to a Divine command ; and there is no doubt that the lesson is conveyed with some psychological insight, though the motive of the diabolical conduct of the aged prophet remains mysterious. one of his sons. The text has simply ' his son ' (as marg.), but it is necessary to read the plural, as LXX, &c. 12. TStovr his sons had seen: marg. 'And his sons shewed him.' This reading involves only the change of a single vowel- point, and is undoubtedly to be preferred. I KINGS 13. 15-21. Z 197 the man of God, and found him sitting under an oak : and he said unto him, Art thou the man of God that camest from Judah? And he said, I am. Then he 15 said unto him, Come home with me, and eat bread. And he said, I may not return with thee, nor go in with 16 thee : neither will I eat bread nor drink water with thee in this place: for it was said to me by the word of the 17 Lord, Thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water there, nor turn again to go by the way that thou camest. And 18 he said unto him, I also am a prophet as thou art ; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the Lord, saying. Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. Buf he lied unto him. So 19 he went back with him, and did eat bread in his house, and drank water. And it came to pass, as they sat at 20 the table, that the word of the Lord came unto the prophet that brought him back : and he cried unto the 2 1 man of God that came from Judah, saying, Thus saith the Lord, Forasmuch as thou hast been disobedient unto the mouth of the Lord, and hast not kept the com- 14. an oak : ' the terebinth ' fsee marg.), possibly the one that marked the grave of Deborah (Gen. xxxv. 8). 16. The words nor go in with thee, and again with thee, are wanting in the LXX. 18. a prophet as thou art. The speaker is naturally ignorant of the distinction referred to above (verse 11). an angel spake unto me. Angels first appear as inter- mediaries oi prophetic announcements in Ezekiel and Zechariah. he lied unto him. The only fault of the man of God was believing the lie, i. e. trusting the second-hand revelation of another man rather than that which had come directly to himself. 20. At table the deceitful prophet receives a genuine revelation, which he is compelled to declare, it is to be hoped with sincere compunction. ai. hast been disobedient unto ('hast rebelled against') the mouth of the LORD. The strong expression is similarly used of the formal breach of a positive command in the case of Moses and Aaron at Meribah (Num. xx. 24, xxvii. 14). i^iS 1 KINGS 13. 22-26. Z mandment which the Lord thy God commanded thee, 22 but earnest back, and hast eaten bread and drunk water in the place of the which he said to thee, Eat no bread, and drink no water ; thy carcase shall not come unto the 23 sepulchre of thy fathers. And it came to pass, after he had eaten bread, and after he had drunk, that he saddled for him the ass, to zvit, for the prophet whom he had 24 brought back. And when he was gone, a lion met him by the way, and slew him : and his carcase was cast in the way, and the ass stood by it ; the lion also stood by the 25 carcase. And, behold, men passed by, and saw the car- case cast in the way, and the lion standing by the car- case : and they came and told it in the city where the 26 old prophet dwelt. And when the prophet that brought him back from the way heard thereof, he said. It is the man of God, who was disobedient unto the mouth of the Lord : therefore the Lord hath delivered him unto the 22. On the disgrace of being buried apart from the family sepulchre, see the instance of Uriah (Jer. xxvi. 23) : cf. Gen. xlvii. 30, 1. 25 ; Isa. xiv. 18 ff. 23. to wit, for the prophet. Here alone the man of God from Judah is called a prophet; but the word is shown to be a gloss by the awkward construction, and by its omission in the LXX, which of the whole clause retains but the single phrase ' and he returned.' This, along with the first word of the next verse, means : *and he departed again, [and a lion, &c.].' 24. The effect of the lesson is heightened by another miracle : the lion and the ass stand peaceably together for some hours over the body of the dead man. Klostermann completely misunder- stands the spirit of the passage when he tries to eliminate the supernatural, and makes the verse say merely that the ass remained and grazed and plucked herbs beside the corpse ! 25. in the city where. The vagueness is remarkable ; it has been already said that the old prophet dwelt in Beth-el. Kloster- mann ingeniously proposes to read : * in the gate where the old prophet was sitting,' the gate being the place of public resort, where news was discussed. 26 % 27 arc wanting in the original LXX I KINGS 13. 27-34. ZD 199 lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake unto him. And 27 he spake to his sons, saying, Saddle me the ass. And they saddled it. And he went and found his carcase 28 cast in the way, and the ass and the lion standing by the carcase : the lion had not eaten the carcase, nor torn the ass. And the prophet took up the carcase of the man of 29 God, and laid it upon the ass, and brought it back : and he came to the city of the old prophet, to mourn, and to bury him. And he laid his carcase in his own grave; 30 and they mourned over him, sayings Alas, my brother ! And it came to pass, after he had buried him, that he 31 spake to his sons, saying. When I am dead, then bury me in the sepulchre wherein the man of God is buried ; lay my bones beside his bones. For the saying which he 32 cried by the word of the Lord against the altar in Beth- el, and against all the houses of the high places which are in the cities of Samaria, shall surely come to pass. After this thing Jeroboam returned not from his evil 33 way, but made again from among all the people priests of the high places : [D] whosoever would, he consecrated him, that there might be priests of the high places. And 34 29'', 30". The LXX here reads more tersely, and probably more correctly : ' and the prophet brought him back to the city to bury him in his own sepulchre.' 30^. Alas, my brother ! the customarj^ wail for the dead : cf. Jer. xxii. 18. 31, 32. For the fulfilment, see 2 Kings xxiii. 16-18, thie cities of Samaria. See above, p. 194. 33* is a repetition of the statement of xii. 31, inserted by the author of the long interpolation, in order to resume the main narrative. 33^*, 34 are the original continuation of xii. 31, and are from the hand of the compiler. consecrated him : lit. ' filled his hand,' the technical expres- sion for the installation of a priest i^^Exod. xxviii, 41 ; Judges xvii. 5, 12, Skc). The same phrase occurs in Assyrian {fiiuilti kdtd), 2og 1 KINGS 14. 1-3. D KI this thing became sin unto the house of Jeroboam, even to cut it off, and to destroy it from off the face of the earth. 14 [KI] At that time Abijah the son of Jeroboam fell a sick. And Jeroboam said to his wife, Arise, I pray thee, and disguise thyself, that thou be not known to be the wife of Jeroboam : and get thee to Shiloh ; behold, there is Ahijah the prophet, which spake concerning me that 3 I should be king over this people. And take with thee ten loaves, and cracknels, and a cruse of honey, and go with the figurative sense of * putting one in charge of something ' (Delitzsch, Ha>tdiL'drtcrbuch). that there might be priests: better, as LXX, 'and he' (whosoever would) ' became a priest.' &c. xiv. 1-18. Sickness and Death of Abijah the Son of fcrohoani. Jeroboam sends his wife, disguised as a common woman, to consult Ahijah the Shilonite regarding the fate of their sick child. The prophet, now an old blind man. penetrates her disguise, and anticipates her question by foretelling the death of the child. But this is prefaced by a denunciation of the sin of Jeroboam and a prophecy of the extinction of his whole house ; and followed by an announcement of the final overthrow of the kingdom he had founded. The section closes with an account of the death of the child, in accordance with the prediction. The passage in its present form consists of an ancient narrative inverses 1-6, 12. 17), recast and amplified by the compiler, whose hand is clearly discernible in the phraseology and standpoint of verses 7-16 (the answer of Ahijah. See the notes below : and observe the anachronism in verse 9. * above all that were before thee.' On the literar}- coincidences with other prophetic oracles incorporated in the book, cf. Driver, lutrod.^, p. 194. On the LXX version of the incident in xii. 24 ?-"), see Appendix, p. 443 f. 1. At that time : a standing phrase, either of the compiler or of one of his authorities, in introducing a new subject ; 2 Kings xvi. 6, xviii. 16, XX. 12, xxiv. 10. The name Abijah, being compounded with Yahweh, proves that Jeroboam was not consciously an apostate from the national religion. 2. which spake concerning me : xi. 296*. Verse 4 shows that a considerable time had elapsed since then. 3. For the custom of offering a present to a prophet, cf. i Sam. ix. 7 f . ; 2 Kings v. i^, viii. 8. I KINGS 14. 4-8. KID 201 to him : he shall tell thee what shall become of the child. And Jeroboam's wife did so, and arose, and went to 4 Shiloh, and came to the house of Ahijah. Now Ahijah could not see ; for his eyes were set by reason of his age. And the Lord said unto Ahijah, Behold, the wife of 5 Jeroboam cometh to inquire of thee concerning her son ; for he is sick : thus and thus shalt thou say unto her : for it shall be, when she cometh in, that she shall feign herself to be another woman. And it was so, when 6 Ahijah heard the sound of her feet, as she came in at the door, that he said. Come in, thou wife of Jeroboam ; why feignest thou thyself to be another? for I am sent to thee with heavy tidings. [D] Go, tell Jeroboam, 7 Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel : Forasmuch as I exalted thee from among the people, and made thee prince over my people Israel, and rent the kingdom 8 away from the house of David, and gave it thee : and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, cracknels : probably small cakes. The LXX (xii. 24'') adds here the homely touch ' for his children.' 4. his eyes were set: 'fixed' ; cf. i Sam. iv, 15. 5. For said read 'had said.' As in i Sam. ix. 15 fT. the prophet had been prepared for the arrival of his visitor by a Divine pre- monition. for it shall toe. A better construction is supported by the LXX, which at this point resumes the narrative : * And when she came in, disguising herself, and when Ahijah heard,' &c. 6. why feignest thou. The LXX has a reading more appropriate in the connexion : ' why dost thou bring me bread ? ' for I am sent. Render, 'seeing I am sent to thee with hard tidings.* 7-11 are wholly the work of the compiler; the original answer of the prophet is contained in verse 12, which in the LXX (xii. 24*) follows immediately the question of verse 6. 8. For David as the ideal of piety, see iii. 3, 6, ix. 4, xi. 4. 6, and often. 202 I KINGS 11. 9-13. DKID «; to do that only which was right in mine eyes ; but hast done evil above all that were before thee, and hast gone and made thee other gods, and molten images, to pro- voke me to anger, and hast cast me behind thy back : 10 therefore, behold, I will bring evil upon the house of Jeroboam, and will cut off from Jeroboam every man child, him that is shut up and him that is left at large in Israel, and will utterly sweep away the house of Jeroboam, ri as a man sweepeth away dung, till it be all gone. Him that dieth of Jeroboam in the city shall the dogs eat ; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air 12 eat: for the Lord hath spoken it. [KI] Arise thou therefore, get thee to thine house : and when thy feet 1 3 enter into the city, the child shall die. [D] And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him; for he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave : because in him rig'ht in mine eyes: as xi. 33, 38, xv. 5, ii, &c. ; cf. Deut. xii. 25, xiii. 18, &c. 9. Cf. Deut. iv. 25, ix. 18, xxxi. 29. all that were before thee : cf. xvi. ^5, 30. The stereotyped phrase has little force as applied to Jeroboam, who had no pre- decessors, and was the originator of the chief sin denounced. 10. every man child : avoiding the coarseness of the original proverbial expression, preserved in the A. V. (cf. xvi. 11, xxi. 21 ; 2 Kings ix. 8; i Sam. xxv. 22, 34% him that is shut up . . . large : * the fettered and the free/ an alliterative expression, as xxi. 21 ; 2 Kings ix. 8,xiv. 26 ; Deut. xxxii. 36. The primary sense of the categories is obscure. Some take the ^ fettered ' to be children in statu pupillari ; others, those who are married ; Ewald and W. R, Smith {Ret. of Sem.^, p. 456) consider it to be a ritual term denoting those debarred from religious privileges : on any view the ' free ' will include all other males, (A more recent interpretation by Yahuda in ZA, 1902, 240 AT. ) 11. the dogs: the scavengers of oriental cities: 2 Kings ix. 35 ff. fowls of the air : carrion-eating birds, like the vulture. 12. More graphically in the LXX (xii. 24 ') : ' Behold thou shalt depart from mc, and as thou enterest the gate of Sarcira thy maidens shall come out to meet thcc, and shall say to thee. The little boy is dead.' I KINGS 14. 14-17. DKI 203 there is found some good thing toward the Lord, the God of Israel, in the house of Jeroboam. Moreover the 14 Lord shall raise him up a king over Israel, who shall cut off the house of Jeroboam that day : biit what? even now. For the Lord shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in 15 the water; and he shall root up Israel out of this good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the River ; because they have made their Asherim, provoking the Lord to anger. And he shall 16 give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, which he hath sinned, and wherewith he hath made Israel to sin. [KI] And Jeroboam's wife arose, and departed, and came 17 to Tirzah : wid as she came to the threshold of the house, 13. some g-ood thing": some promise of early piety. The Rabbis, after their manner, clothe the statement in a legend : Abijah was ordered by his father to keep watch for any who might go up to the feasts to Jerusalem, and he not only did not do this but tore down a barrier which Jeroboam had set up to prevent such pilgrimages ! (quoted by Thenius). 14. See XV. 29. that day : "but what ? even now. The Hebrew is quite un- translatable. There is also some defect in the beginning of the following verse. Kittel gives a conjectural reconstruction which meets both difficulties : ' in that da3^ And even then (15) will Yahweh smite Israel, so that it sways as the reed,' &c. ; an allusion to the repeated changes of dynasty that marked the history of the northern kingdom down to the Exile, which is foretold in what follows. The grammar is not quite satisfactory' ; but the sense is certainly attractive. 15. For the threat of exile, see Deut. iv. 26 ff., vi. 15, xxix. 28, &c. Asherim. See on verse 23. 16. wherewith he hath made Israel to sin: a constantly recurring formula of the compiler : xv. 26, 30, 34, &c. 17. Tirzah was for the next few reigns the residence of the kings of Israel; xv. 21, xvi. 15 ff., &c. The indications seem to point to its being in the neighbourliood of Shechem, but the site is not known. Some have sought it in the ruins of TaUuza, a few miles north-cast of Nabulus ; others at et-Tire on the west side of Gerizim (Buhl, Geog. p. 203). to the threshold . . . died. LXX (xii. 24 '') makes the death 204 I KINGS 14. 18-23. KID 18 the child died. [D] And all Israel buried him, and mourned for him ; according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by the hand of his servant Ahijah the 19 prophet. And the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, how he warred, and how he reigned, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. 20 And the days which Jeroboam reigned were two and twenty years : and he slept with his fathers, and Nadab his son reigned in his stead. 21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the Lord had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there : and his mother's 2 3 name was Naamah the Ammonitess. And Judah did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord ; and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they 23 committed, above all that their fathers had done. For they also built them high places, and pillars, and Asherim, synchronize with her entrance into the city, adding : ' and the wail came out to meet her.' xiv. 19, 20. Concluding Notice on Jeroboam. 19. how hie warred. See verse 30, xv. 7. the hook of the chronicles : see Introd. p. 23. xiv. 21-31. Rehoboam of Judah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xi. 5 — xii. 16. xiv. 21-24. Editorial Introduction. 21. The LXX (B) of xii. 24* gives the age of Rehoboam at his accession as sixteen, and the length of his reign as twelve years. his mother's name. The naming of the queen-mother is a regular feature of the notices of the kings of Judah, due to her dignity and influence at the court (see on ii. 13, and cf. xv. 13). 23. pillars (Heb. mazzeboth). The Mazzebah was a sacred stone, and seems to have been an indispensable adjunct of the primitive Semitic sanctuary. Originally it was regarded as the abode of the Deity, and at the same time (before the introduction I KINGS 14. 24, 35. DKJ 205 on every high hill, and under every green tree ; and 24 there were also sodomites in the land : they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord drave out before the children of Israel. [KJ] And it 25 of fire sacrifices) served the purpose of an altar ; afterwards, when a separate altar became necessary, the stone was retained as a symbol of the God (W. R. Smith, Rel. of Sem?, p. 203 fT.). The use of the emblem was tolerated in Israel in early times (Gen. xxviii. 18, 22, xxxi. 13, xxxv, 14, 20, &c.), but prohibited by the later legislation on account of its ineradicable associations with heathenism (Deut. vii. 5, xii. 13 ; Lev. xxvi. i, «&c.). Asherlm : plur. of asherdh, which seems to have been a survival of the sacred tree, as the mazzebah was of the sacred stone (for another view see Barton, Semitic Otiginsj pp. 106, 248). It was a wooden pole (Judges vi. 26), the trunk of a tree stripped of its branches (Deut. xvi. 21), erected by the side of the altar (Jer. xvii. 2). It would seem that from very ancient times (Tel- Amarna tablets) the object had been personified, and the word used as the name of a goddess (xv. i3,xviii. 19; 2Kingsxxiii.4, &c.), who is apparently in the O. T. sometimes identified with Ashtoreth (cf. Judges ii. 13 with iii. 7). This marked association of the symbol with a female deity made it at all times repugnant to the true religion of Israel on every hig-li hill . . . tree : cf. 2 Kings xvi. 4, xvii. 10 ; Deut. xii. 2 ; Jer. ii. 20, iii. 6, xvii. 2. 24. sodomites (Heb. kddes/i, holy persons) : temple prostitutes, attached to heathen sanctuaries, of Ashtoreth especially, but introduced in Israel into the worship of Yahweh (Deut. xxiii. 17, 18, &c.). The word is here used collectively, including persons of both sexes. drave out : xxi. 26 ; 2 Kings xvi. 3, xvii. 8, xxi. 2 ; Deut. ix. 4, 5, &c. xiv. 25-28, The Expedition of Shishak. The account is taken from the annals of the kingdom of Judah ; and the prominence given to the incident is perhaps due less to its political importance than to the fact that it was the first step in the gradual impover- ishment of the temple, the successive stages of which are carefully noted throughout the book (see xv. 18 ; 2 Kings xii. 18, xiv. 14, xvi. 8, 17, xviii. 15 f., xxiv. 13, xxv. 9, 13 ff.). The former friendship between Jeroboam and Shishak naturally suggests that the raid was undertaken for the benefit of Jeroboam, and affected only Judah. It is true that the Egyptian lists in the temple of Amon at Karnak contain the names of more than sixty Ephraimitic cities that paid tribute to .Shishak, along with a still greater number of Judaean. 2p6 I KINGS 14. 26-29. KJD came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that 26 Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem : and he took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house ; he even took away all : and he took away all the shields of gold which 27 Solomon had made. And king Rehoboam made in their stead shields of brass, and committed them to the hands of the captains of the guard, which kept the door of the 28 king's house. And it was so, that as oft as the king went into the house of the Lord, the guard bare them, and brought them back into the guard chamber. 29 [Dj Now the rest of the acts of Rehoboam, and all that Amongst the former are Taanach, Megiddo, and Shunem on the Plain of Esdraelon, and perhaps Penuel on the east of the Jordan (cf. xii. 25), It is pointed out, however, by Maspero and W. Max MuUer that ' it is only the second half of the list which contains details pointing to actual conquest, and these seem to belong to Judah ' ; the inference being that ' the tribute which the Pharaoh claimed everywhere was promptly given by Jeroboam . . . ; in Judah it had to be exacted by force.' It is not improbable that for a time both Judah and Israel became tributary to Egypt. (See further, Driver, A ttthority and Archaeology, p. 87 f. ; W .Max Muller, Asien und Europa, p, 166 ; and EB, iv. c. 4485 ff.) 25. SMshak. The consonantal text has the form Shoshak, in closer correspondence with the Egyptian Shoshenq. He was the founder of the twenty-second (Bubastite) dynasty, and is supposed to have reigned c. 950 B. c. 28. tlie treasures of the house of the IiOBD. See vii. 51. the shields of grold: x. 17. Instead of these the LXX mentions the shields taken by David from the Syrians, v/hose removal by Shishak it also notices by anticipation in 2 Sam. viii. 7, 27. the guard: ///. 'the runners' (marg.), i.e. footguards. Their duty is to guard the palace and the king's person (i. 5 ; 2 Kings X. 25, xi. 4, 11, 19). 28. The use of the new shields was no doubt the same as that of those they had replaced, although the former are kept in the guard chamber instead of the house of the forest of Lebanon (X. 17). XV, 29-31. Concluding Notice, in which, however, is imbedded a fragment from the annals of the kingdom (verse 30). See on I KINGS 14. 30—15. 5. D 207 he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah ? And there was war between 30 Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually. And Rehoboam 31 slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David : and his mother's name was Naamah the Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead. Now in the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam the son 15 of Nebat began Abijam to reign over Judah. Three 2 years reigned he in Jerusalem : and his mother's name was Maacah the daughter of Abishalom. And he walked 3 in all the sins of his father, which he had done before him : and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father. Nevertheless for 4 David's sake did the Lord his God give him a lamp in Jerusalem, to set up his son after him, and, to establish Jerusalem : because David did that which was right in the 5 xii. 21 ff. The mention of the queen-mother is here out of place, and is rightly omitted in 2 Chron. xii. i6, and by the LXX. XV. 1-8. Abijam of Judah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xiii.) The account of the three years' reign is wholly from the pen of the compiler, verses 1-5 being the introductory formula (slightly expanded), and verses 7, 8 the concluding formula. Verse 6 is an interpolation. 1. Abijam: so always in Kings (xiv. 31), while Chronicles ( 2 Chron. xiii. i fF., &c.) and the LXX give the name as '• Abijah.' The ending -dm or -6m is not uncommon in proper names ; and it is possible that the two are distinct, the chronicler having inadver- tently substituted the more familiar form. 2. Three years : according to the LXX, six years (see on verse 9). Maacah the daughter of Abishalom. Abishalom is the same as Absalom (2 Chron. xi. 20 ff.), and it is most natural to suppose that the third son of David is meant. A daughter of Absalom must certainly have been older than Rehoboam; and Josephus {Ant. viii. 249) makes Maacah the daughter of Tamar (2 Sam. xiv. 27), taking daughter here in the sense of 'granddaughter.' 4. See on xi. 36. 2o8 I KINGS 15. 6-11. DZD eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, [Z] save 6 only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite. Now there was war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam all the days of 7 his life. [D] And the rest of the acts of Abijam, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah ? And there was war 8 between Abijam and Jeroboam. And Abijam slept with his fathers ; and they buried him in the city of David : and Asa his son reigned in his stead. 9 And in the twentieth year of Jeroboam king of Israel 10 began Asa to reign over Judah. And forty and one years reigned he in Jerusalem : and his mother's name 11 was Maacah the daughter of Abishalom. And Asa did 5. save only in tlie matter. The eulogy of David is never thus qualified by the compiler; and since the clause is wanting in the LXX, it ought probably to be deleted as the note of an over- scrupulous reader. 6. also omitted by the LXX, is a mistaken repetition of xiv. 30. 7. there was war. The notice would have come properly in the place of verse 6, since as a matter of fact no ' acts ' of Abijam have been recorded at all. XV. 9-24. Asa 0/ Judah. {Cf. 2 Chron. xiv~xvi.) XV. 9 -15. Introductory Formula. Here the compiler has worked into the ' framework ' some fragmentary notices of religious reforms carried out by Asa. Asa is one of the few kings of Judah on whom an entirely favourable judgement is passed. 0. the twentieth year : cf. the statement with verses i, 2 for an illustration of the chronological method followed by the author of the synchronism (see Introd. p. 40). The LXX puts the acces- sion of Asa in the twenty-fourth year of Jeroboam, showing that its reading in verse 2 was not an accidental error, but a sj'stematic correction ; note also its peculiar method of calculating the syn- chronism. 10. Maacah. See on verse 2. If the statement be strictly ac- curate in both places, Asa must have been the brother and not the son of Abijam ; and so Wellhausen proposes to read in verse 8. But it is perhaps an easier explanation to suppose that Maacah, though not literally the mother of Asa, continued to occupy the I KINGS 15. i^-i6. DKJ 209 that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, as did David his father. And he put away the sodomites out of 12 the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made. And also Maacah his mother he removed from 13 being queen, because she had made an abominable image for an Asherah ; and Asa cut down her image, and burnt it at the brook Kidron. But the high places were not 14 taken away : nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect with the Lord all his days. And he brought into the 15 house of the Lord the things that his father had dedi- cated, and the things that himself had dedicated, silver, and gold, and vessels. [KJ] And there was war between 16 official position of queen-mother after the short reign of her son Abijam. 12. See on xiv. 24. 13. For queen read 'queen-mother ' (as marg.). an abominable imagfe. The root of the Hebrew word ex- presses the idea of horror ; but what kind of object is indicated cannot be determined. That it was a mere covering or adornment for the sacred pole (see on xiv. 23) is hardly conceivable. The Vulg. takes it to have been a phallic emblem ; and this, though un- supported by the other versions, is perhaps the best conjecture that can be hazarded, so long as we adhere to the common sense of Asherah as the name of the sacred pole. If, however, we take Asherah as a proper name, it is possible to explain the objection- able thing as an image of the goddess so named, or her equivalent Astarte. (See W. R. Smith, Rel. ofSem?, p. 456.) 14. The retention of the high places (for which the writer blames not the king but the people) was an offence from the standpoint of the DeuLeronomic reformation ; but was perfectly consistent with the highest standard of religious conduct in the time of Asa. The centralization of the cultus in Jerusalem was a prophetic ideal whicli had probably not yet dawned on even the most enlightened worshippers of Yahweh. 15. The statement is unintelligible. It looks like a misplaced duplicate of vii. 5^^ XV. 16-22. War with Baasha of Israel. The protracted hostili- ties between Judah and Israel reach a crisis, in which Asa is driven to seek assistance from the king of Damascus ; and thus lead to a second inroad on the temple treasures i^cf. xiv. 26). The passage P 2io I KINGS 15. 1.7-19. KJ 1 7 Asa and Baasha king of Israel all their days. And Baasha king of Israel went up against Judah, and built Ramah, that he might not suffer any to go out or come in to Asa 18 king of Judah. Then Asa took all the silver and the gold that were left in the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house, and delivered them into the hand of his servants : and king Asa sent them to Ben-hadad, the son of Tabrimmon, the son of Hezion, king of Syria, that dwelt at Damascus, saying, 19 There is a league between me and thee, between my father and thy father: behold, I have sent unto thee a present of silver and gold ; go, break thy league with Baasha king of Israel, that he may depart from me. may have been transferred intact from the official annals of Judah. 16. Cf. xiv. 30, XV'. 7. 17. built (or ' fortified ') Ramah. The place here meant is the modern er-Rdm^ five miles due north of Jerusalem. Since we find in verse 22 that Asa made no attempt at the end of the war to push the frontier further north, we may assume that at tliis time Ramah was just on the border of Baasha's kingdom. It was at the same time near enough to Jerusalem to make its permanent occupation by a hostile army a serious menace to the security of the southern kingdom. 18. Cf. the incident, 2 Kings xvi. 7 ff. all the silver . . . left : cf. xiv. 26. Ben-hadad. On different forms of the name, see on xx. i. The grandfather of Ben-hadad must take us back to near the founda- tion of the Aramaean kingdom, recorded in xi. 24. Hence it was supposed (by Thenius and others) that Hezion here and Rezon in xi. 23 are the same person, both names being corruptions of an original form Hezron. Winckler, on the other hand, argues that the correct reading here is Hazael, and that Hezion has arisen from an attempt to combine this with Rezon {A litest. Unters. p. 60 ff,^. But neither hypothesis has much plausibility. 19. ^ There is ' : the marg. ' let there be ' is manifestly impossible. a leagne: 'a covenant.' The kings of Damascus had evidently been playing the usual double game in Palestinian politics, allying themselves now with Judah and now with Israel, according to the passing advantage of Ihc hour. I KINGS 15. 20-23. KJD 211 And Ben-hadad hearkened unto king Asa, and sent the 20 captains of his armies against the cities of Israel, and smote Ijon, and Dan, and Abel-beth-maacah, and all Chinneroth, with all the land of Naphtali. And it came 21 to pass, when Baasha heard thereof, that he left off building of Ramah^ and dwelt in Tirzah. Then king 23 Asa made a proclamation unto all Judah; none was exempted : and they carried away the stones of Ramah, and the timber thereof, wherewith Baasha had builded ; and king Asa built therewith Geba of Benjamin, and Mizpah. [D] Now the rest of all the acts of Asa, and 23 all his might, and all that he did, and the cities which 20. The district ravaged by the Syrians is in the extreme north of Western Palestine. Dan, the best- known of the cities, is generally identified with Tell el- Kadi-, at the source of the Ledddn^ the middle confluent of the Jordan. Abel-beth-maacah is recognized in the name ^Abil, a few miles further west; while Ijon is supposed to have been situated further north in the Merj 'Ayun, a narrow plain between the valleys of the Litani and the upper Jordan. Chinneroth is the old name of the Sea of Galilee (Num. xxxiv. II, &c.), and also of a town on its western shore (Joshua xix. 35) ; here all Chinneroth seems to denote the fertile plain now called el-Ghuwer. On Naphtali, cf. iv. 15. 21. dwelt in Tirzah: LXX, Meturned to Tirzah.' See on xiv. 17. 22. exempted : the same word as Num. xxxii. 22 (E. V. ' guiltless ') and Deut. xxiv. 5 (R. V. ' free '). The places fortified by Asa must be supposed within the territory of Judah. Geba of Benjamin can hardly be the modern Jeba, which is a little further north than Ramah ; rather Tell-el-Ful ( = Gibeah of Saul, cf. Isa. x. 29), about halfway between Jerusalem and Ramah. Mizpah is en-Nebi Santwtl (the prophet Samuel), a little to the west, the highest point in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. XV. 23, 24. Conclitding Formula (enclosing another sentence from the annals, referring to a disease of the feet from which the king suffered in his old age). 23. all his might : his heroic achievements. No successes are P 2 212 I KINGS 15. 24-27. DKI he built, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? But in the time of his old age 24 he was diseased in his feet. And Asa slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David his father: and Jehoshaphat his son reigned in his stead. 25 And Nadab the son of Jeroboam began to reign over Israel in the second year of Asa king of Judah, and he 26 reigned over Israel two years. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of his father, and in his sin wherewith he made Israel to 27 sin. [KI] And Baasha the son of Ahijah, of the house of Issachar, conspired against him; and Baasha smote him at Gibbethon, which belonged to the Philistines; attributed to Asa in Kings : but 2 Chron. xiv. 9 ff. narrates a sensational victory over a certain Zerah, king of Ethiopia. 24. Jehoshaplxat. See xxii. 41. XV. 25-32. Nadab of Israel. Having reached the last king of Judah who came to the throne during the life of Jeroboam, the writer now turns to the northern kingdom, and brings its history up to the end of the reign within which the death of Asa fell. Within this period two revolutions took place, each ending in the establishment of a new dynasty. In the reign of Nadab the only event thought worthy of record is the conspiracy of Baasha, which resulted in the extinction of the house of Jeroboam. The narrative is partly in the words of the annalistic document (verses 27-29^), partly in those of the compiler himself (29'', 30). The introductory (verses 25, 26) and concluding (verse 31) formulas are as bare and curt as possible. 25. the second year. Here the mode of reckoning differs from that usually employed by the Hebrew synchronist (see Introd. p. 41), the years of Asa's reign being evidently reckoned from his first complete year, which was the twenty-first of Jero- boam : cf. verses i, 2 and verse 9. 27. Gibbethon appears from Joshua xix. 44, xxi. 23 to have been a frontier town of Dan, held at this time by the Philistines. Since we find it still uncaptured twenty-four years later (xvi. 15), it must have played as great a part in the wars with the Philistines as Ramoth-Gilead afterwards did in those with Damascus. The I KINGS 15. 28-3?. KIDZD 213 for Nadab and all Israel were laying siege to Gibbethon. Even in the third year of Asa king of Judah did Baasha 28 slay him, and reigned in his stead. And it came to pass 29 that, as soon as he was king, he smote all the house of Jeroboam ; he left not to Jeroboam any that breathed, until he had destroyed him ; [D] according unto the saying of the Lord, which he spake by the hand of his servant Ahijah the Shilonite : for the sins of Jeroboam 30 which he sinned, and wherewith he made Israel to sin ; because of his provocation wherewith he provoked the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger. Now the rest of the 31 acts of Nadab, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? [Z] And there was war between Asa and Baasha king 32 of Israel all their days. [D] In the third year of Asa king of Judah began 33 Baasha the son of Ahijah to reign over all Israel in Tir- fact that the rebellion broke out in the camp suggests that Baasha, like Omri, may have been the commander of the army; but this is not directly affirmed. 29, 30. The usurper puts to death the whole family of his predecessor ; and in this the compiler recognizes the fulfilment of the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, xiv. 14. 32 repeats verse 16, but is clearly out of place in the account of Nadab's reign, and should probably be omitted, as by the LXX. XV. 33 — xvi. 7. Baasha of Israel. In this section the usual framework is supplemented by an oracle uttered against Baasha and his house by a prophet named Jehu, which obviously could not have found a place in the annals of the kingdom. It occurs, in fact, in two forms : the first (xvi. 1-4) is in the style of the compiler himself; while the second (verse 7) shows no trace of having passed through his hands, and must be regarded as a later addition to the book. 33. the third year. Referring back to verse 25, we see that the two years of Nadab's reign are both fractional parts of a year ; his first being that in which he became king, and his second that in which he was slain. begtin to . . . reig'u, and reigned : a zeugma,, the one 214 I KINGS 15. 34—16. 6. D 34 zah, rt;/^ reigned twenty and four years. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin wherewith he made 16 Israel to sin. And the word of the Lord came to Jehu 2 the son of Hanani against Baasha, saying, Forasmuch as I exalted thee out of the dust, and made thee prince over my people Israel ; and thou hast walked in the way of Jeroboam, and hast made my people Israel to sin, to 3 provoke me to anger with their sins ; behold, I will utterly sweep away Baasha and his house; and I wull make thy house like the house of Jeroboam the son of 4 Nebat. Him that dieth of Baasha in the city shall the dogs eat ; and him that dieth of his in the field shall the 5 fowls of the air eat. Now the rest of the acts of Baasha, and what he did, and his might, are they not written in 6 the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? And Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah ; verb expressing the double sense, 'became king* and 'reigned.' So xvi. 8, 15, 23, 2 Kings xiii. i, 10, xiv. 23, xv. 8, 17, 23, 27, xvii. I. The construction, though intelligible, is harsh, and pro- bably arises from the fact that the synchronisms were inserted at a secondary stage of the redaction (Introd. p. 39). Two of them are actually wanting in the LXX (xvi. 8, 15). xvi. 1. Jehu the son of Hanani is named by the chronicler as the author of a history which in his time had been incorporated in the book of the kings of Israel (2 Chron. xx. 34). He is also mentioned as meeting Jehoshaphat with a stern rebuke, after the death of Ahab [2 Chron. xix. 2), which is no doubt chronologically possible, though scarcely probable. 2-4. For the phraseology, cf. xiv. 7, 9-u, and other parallels cited by Driver, Introd. ', p. 194. 6. Like Jeroboam, Baasha dies a peaceful death, transmitting the prophetic doom to his son. buried in Tirzah. See on xiv. 17. Baasha is the first king who is certainly known to have made Tirzah his capital (xv. 21). At the end of the verse the LXX adds, ' in the twentieth (in some MSS., the twenty-eighth) year of king Asa.' It is possible that this is the misplaced synchronism of the accession of Elah, which is wanting in verse 8. I KINGS 16. 7-10. DD-DKI 215 and Elah his son reigned in his stead. [D-] And more- -7 over by the hand of the prophet Jehu the son of Hanani came the word of the Lord against Baasha, and against his house, both because of all the evil that he did in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him to anger with the work - of his hands, in being like the house of Jeroboam, and because he smote him. [D] In the twenty and sixth year of Asa king of Judali 8 began Elah the son of Baasha to reign over Israel in Tirzah, and reig/ied two years. [KI] And his servant 9 Zimri, captain of half his chariots, conspired against him : now he was in Tirzah, drinking himself drunk in the house of Arza, which was over the household in Tirzah : and Zimri went in and smote him, and killed him, in 10 the twenty and seventh year of Asa king of Judah, and 7. The position of the verse, after the concluding formula, would of itself create doubts of its genuineness. It is clearly a parallel to verses 1-4 ; and the only motive that can be assigned for its insertion is in the last clause : the interpolator wished to make it clear that the doom of Baasha's house was due not merely to his following in the footsteps of Jeroboam, but also to his ruth- less cruelty to the offspring of his predecessor (cf. the similar judgement on the house of Jehu, in Hos. i. 4). xvi. 8-14. Eloh of Israel. The introduction (verse 8) is abbreviated by the omission of the religious judgement ; and in the LXX by the omission of the synchronism (but see on verse 6 above). In the narrative of Zimri's conspiracy, verses 9-1 1 are from the chronicles of the kingdom, while verses 12, 13 are an editorial supplement. Verse 14 is the usual concluding formula. 9. he was in Tixzah. While the army was in the field against the Philistines, the king was giving himself up to dissipation in the capital. Arza, the major-domo, was probably an accomplice of the arch- conspirator Zimri, who held an impojrtant, though subordinate^ military command. 10. in the twenty and seventh year . . . Jtidah : omitted by the LXX, but undoubtedly genuine (see xv. 28). 11. Cf. XV. 29. 2t6 I KINGS 16. 11-15. KIDKI IT reigned in his stead. And it came to pass, when he began to reign, as soon as he sat on his throne, that he smote all the house of Baasha : he left him not a single man child, neither of his kinsfolks, nor of his friends. 12 [D] Thus did Zimri destroy all the house of Baasha, ac- cording to the word of the Lord, which he spake against 13 Baasha by Jehu the prophet, for all the sins of Baasha, and the sins of Elah his son, which they sinned, and wherewith they made Israel to sin, to provoke the Lord, 14 the God of Israel, to anger with their vanities. Now the rest of the acts of Elah, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? 15 In the twenty and seventh year of Asa king of Judah did Zimri reign seven days in Tirzah. [KI] Now the people were encamped against Gibbethon, which belonged man child: see xiv. 10. his kinsfolks : lit. ' his redeemers,' i. e, those near enough of kin to fall under the various obligations of the go'el (see Ruth ii. 20, iii. 13, iv. 4 ff). 12, 13 are the reflection of the compiler on the incident. their vanities : a common designation of false gods : Deut, xxxii. 21 ; Jer. viii. 19, xiv. 22, &c. xvi. 15-20. Zimri of Israel. The usurper did not in this case reap the fruit of his crime. On hearing of the event the army at Gibbethon immediatel3'' elected their general Omri as king and marched against Tirzah. Zimri in despair set fire to the palace and perished in the flames. The narrative part of the section (verses i5*'-i8) is the continua- tion of verses 9-1 r in the primary document; the compiler has supplied verse 19, besides the introduction (verse 15*) and the conclusion (20). 15*. The synchronism is omitted by LXX (B) ; the Lucianic text has ' In the twenty-second year of Asa,' &c. LXX (B) is again peculiar in assigning to Zimri a reign of seven years, instead of seven days. 15^ the people: i. e. the arm}', as often (2 Sam i. 4,&c,, &c.). Oibhethon: see on xv, 27. I KINGS 16. 16-21. KIDKI 217 to the Philistines. And the people that were encamped 16 heard say, Zimri hath conspired, and hath also smitten the king : wherefore all Israel made Omri, the captain of the host, king over Israel that day in the camp. And 17 Omri went up from Gibhethon, and all Israel with him, and they besieged Tirzah. And it came to pass, when 18 Zimri saw that the city was taken, that he went into the castle of the king's house, and burnt the king's house over him with fire, and died, [D] for his sins which he 19 sinned in doing that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, in walking in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin which he did, to make Israel to sin. Now the rest of 20 the acts of Zimri, and his treason that he wrought, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? [KI] Then were the people of Israel divided into two 21 parts : half of the people followed Tibni the son of Ginath, 16. In those troublous and anarchic times, election by the elders or the assembly (xii. 20) naturally gave place to election by the army, when the ablest general had the best chance. In this case it resulted in the founding of the strongest dynasty the northern kingdom ever had : see belov^. 18. the castle of tlie king's house: 'the citadel of the royal palace.' The w^ord for castle is usually rendered ' palace ' ; here it can only mean the best defended of a complex of royal buildings. 19. for his sins. The judgement is surprising in the case of one who reigned only seven days, who certainly had crimes enough to answer for, but could hardly have been the means of causing Israel to sin after the fashion of Jeroboam. 20. and his treason. It is difficult to see on what grounds Benzinger and many others assert that such statements could not have stood in the official annals. See Introd. p. 24. xvi. 21, 22. Rival Claimants for the Croivn. After the death of Zimri his faction appears to have found a new leader in a certain Tibni, the son of Ginath, who must have kept the allegiance of a section of the people for a considerable time (see on verse 23). The verses are taken from the same source as verses 16-18, and are untouched by the compiler. 2i8 I KINGS 16. 22-24. KIDKI 22 to make him king; and half followed Omri. But the people that followed Omri prevailed against the people that followed Tibni the son of Ginath : so Tibni died, 23 and Omri reigned. [D] In the thirty and first year of Asa king of Judah began Omri to reign over Israel, mid reigned twelve years : [KI] six years reigned he in Tirzah. 24 And he bought the hill Samaria of Shemer for two talents 22. so Tibni died. The LXX has : ' And Tibni and Joram his brother died at that time, and Omri reigned instead of Tibni.' The additions (which can scarcely be mere inventions) show that Tibni's resistance was of a much more formicable character than we should gather from the Hebrew. xvi. 23-28. Omri of Israel. With the exception of verse 24 (which is an ancient notice thrust into the introduction) the whole passage is written by the compiler, who tells little beyond the fact that Omri reigned wickedly for twelve years. It is a meagre record of an eventful and powerful reign. To the Assyrians Omri was known as the founder of the kingdom of Israel ; and for all effective purposes he is fairly entitled to that distinction. In the Inscriptions, Jehu, the destroyer of his dynasty, is called by Shalmaneser II 'the son of Humri ' ; and down to the time of Sargon the country is described as 'the land of the house of Humri.' From another quarter, the Stone of Mesha testifies to his prowess as the subjugator of the land of Moab, which remained under the dominion of Israel for forty years. His choice of Samaria as the capital, which is the one thing here related to his credit, was itself an evidence of political sagacity, comparable to David's selection of Jerusalem. The compiler's silence with regard to the more brilliant aspects of the reign is an evidence of his indifference to purely secular interests. 23. In tlie thirty and first year. This allows an interregnum of four years between the election of Omri (verse 16) and his acknowledgement as undisputed sovereign. The twelve years of his reign, however, are reckoned from the death of Elah (see verse 29), a clear indication that the synchronistic notice has been superimposed on the original introduction. That, at least, is the view that has prevailed in the Hebrew text ; on the divergent scheme of the LXX, sec on verse 29. 24. The site of the ancient Samaria is now occupied by the village of Sebttstiyeh, six miles north-west of Nabulus. It stood on the crest of an isolated conical hill, rising more than 300 feet I KINGS 16. 25-29. KID 219 of silver ; and he built on the hill, and called the name of the city which he built, after the name of Shemer, the owner of the hill, Samaria. [D] And Oniri did that 25 which was evil in the sight of the Lord, and dealt wickedly above all that were before him. For he walked ,26 in all the way of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, and in his sins wherewith he made Israel to sin, to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger with their vanities. Now the rest of the acts of Omri which he did, and his 27 might that he shewed, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? So Omri slept 28 with his fathers, and was buried in Samaria : and Ahab his son reigned in his stead. And in the thirty and eighth year of Asa king of Judah 29 above the level of the broad valley from which it springs (G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. p. 346). Its strikingly beautiful situation suggested to Isaiah the image of a wreath on the brow of a drunken reveller (Isa. xxviii. i). Samaria, the Greek form of the name, is akin to the Assyrian Samirina and Aramaic Shdmeraifi, and probably more ancient than the Hebrew Shomeron : it is certainly more easily derivable from Shemer, the name of the owner of the hill. 25. above all that were before him. Wherein his exceptional wickedness consisted is not told either in verse 26 or anywhere else. Mic. vi. 16 (' statutes of Omri ') might show that some religious innovations of a reprehensible kind were attributed to him in later times. [After verse 28 the LXX inserts the account of Jehoshaphat's reign ; see on verse 29.] xvi. 29-34. Ahah of Israel. Introduction. These verses are the editorial introduction (interspersed with a few annalistic notices) to the reign of Ahab. It is separated from the concluding notice in xxii. 39, 40 by a series of narratives of the highest historical and religious interest. The most im- portant fact of the reign was the introduction of the Phoenician Baal-worship, which is here described as a consequence of the marriage alliance with the king of Tyre, and rightly characterized as a menace to the national religion which threw the cult of Jeroboam's golden calves completely into the shade. The re- 220 I KINGS 16. .^0-32. D began Ahab the son of Omri to reign over Israel : and Ahab the son of Omri reigned over Israel in Samaria 30 twenty and two years. And Ahab the son of Omri did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord above all 31 that were before him. And it came to pass, as if it had been a light thing for him to walk in the sins of Jero- boam the son of Nebat, that he took to wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Zidonians, and went and 32 served Baal, and worshipped him. And he reared up building of Jericho (verse 34) is presumably recorded as a glaring illustration of the impiety and indifference to spiritual considera- tions that marked the age. 29. in the thirty and eigflith year : LXX, < in the second year of Jehoshaphat.' We have here a good example of the freedom with which the text was handled in early times, and also a proof of the secondary character of the whole synchronistic scheme. The explanation of the difference is probably as follows. The LXX reckons the twelve years of Omri from the suppression of Tibni (verse 23), which brings the end of the reign down to the forty-third of Asa. Since Asa reigned only forty-one years, the death of Omri thus falls in the reign of Jehoshaphat. Then the plan of the book required that the account of Jehoshaphat should come between Omri and Ahab ; and accordingly the LXX actually inserts it between verses 28 and 29 (28*"'^, in Swete), dating his accession in the eleventh year of Omri. Otherwise, the verse is given by the LXX in a simpler and probably more original form than in the Hebrew. 31. And it came . . . walk ; better, perhaps, ' And it was the lightest (of his offences) that he walked,' &c. Ethbaal : Ithobal I (' with him is Baal ') of Tyre is mentioned by Menander (Josephus, Ant. viii. 131 f.) ; his reign is dated by Winckler 887-876 B.C. {KAT^, p. 129). The name Jezebel <^IzebeT) is of uncertain etymology. The marriage, which proved so disastrous to Ahab's dynasty and the peace of the nation, was in itself a clever stroke of statecraft. Ahab, like Solomon before him, perceived the advantage of an alliance with Tyre ; and he secured it in the usual way by taking the Tyrian princess as his consort. The inevitable practical corollary was the recognition of the foreign deit}', out of which arose the great religious struggle of the reign. 32, 33. International courtesy demanded that the foreign queen should have a sanctuary of her own religion in her adopted I KINGS 16. 33— 17. I. DKIEj 221 an altar for Baal in the house of Baal, which he had built in Samaria. And Ahab made the Asherah ; and 33 Ahab did yet more to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger than all the kings of Israel that were before him. [KI] In his days did Hiel the Beth-elite 34 build Jericho : he laid the foundation thereof with the loss of Abiram his firstborn, and set up the gates thereof with the loss of his youngest son Segub ; according to the \vord of the Lord, which he spake by the hand of Joshua the son of Nun. [Ej] And Elijah the Tishbite, who was of the sojourners 17 country ; and accordingly Ahab, still following in the footsteps of Solomon (xi. 7), erects in Samaria a temple to Baal, with its indis- pensable adjuncts, the asherah and (as we learn from 2 Kings iii. 2) the mazzebah (see on xiv. 23). Baal is here evidently the Baal or chief god of Tyre, Melkarth. On the religious significance of the innovation, see the introductory note to next chapter. 34 is wanting in LXX (L), and presents some difficulties. Jericho : now Ertha, not far from the mouth of the Jordan ; but the O. T. city is thought to have been at 'Ain es-Sultdn, about one and a half miles to the north-west, and six miles from the river. The place had not lain waste since its destruction by Joshua (see 2 Sam. x. 5, Judges iii, 13) ; hence the word build must be understood in the frequent sense of ' extend ' or ' fortify ' : how this task fell to a private individual does not appear. The expression with, the loss of {lit. 'at the cost of'^the so-called Beth prctii) is variously interpreted. Some think of an immolation of the two sons by the father, in order to extinguish the curse that lay on the rebuilding of the city ; others (as Winckler) of the primitive custom of burying human victims alive under foundations ot thresholds, to avert the wrath of the earth-demons (cf. Trumbull, Threshold Covenant, p. 46 ff.). These theories are perhaps un- called for ; the best explanation may, after all, be that some tragic fate actually overtook Hiel's sons, and that the common opinion recognized in this the operation of the ancient curse pronounced by Joshua (Joshua vi. 26). xvii-xix. Elijah and Ahab. Although these chapters cover only about three years of Elijah's life they present an epitome of his whole career, and constitute 222 I KINGS 17. I. Ej of Gilead, said unto Ahab, As the Lord, the God of Israel, the chief document for our interpretation of the religious crisis of the ninth century. The nature of that crisis must be briefly indicated. The worship of the Baals— the local deities of the old Canaanitish sanctuaries— had been practised by the Israelites ever since the Conquest, and had resulted in an amalgamation of the two types of religion, and a confusion of the ethical character of Yahweh with the attributes proper to a mere nature-deity. It is probable that by the time of Elijah this process had gone so far as no longer to excite any effectual protest on behalf of the purity of the national faith. But the introduction of the cult of the Tyrian Baal under the patronage of Jezebel was recognized as a new departure in the life of the people, and it raised anew the whole issue between true and false religion in Israel. At this juncture Elijah appeared. He saw, if no one else did, that the conflict between Yahweh and Baal was no mere affair of politics or patriotism, but a conflict between two opposite religious principles, of which one could not exist alongside of the other ; on the one hand the immoral nature-religion of Canaan, and on the other the ethical religion of Israel. 'To him,' as Wellhausen has finely said, * Baal and Yahweh represented, so to speak, a contrast of principles, of profound and ultimate practical convictions ; both could not be right, nor could they exist side by side. For him there existed no plurality of Divine Powers, operating with equal authority in different spheres, but every- where One Holy and Mighty Being, who revealed Himself, not in the life of nature, but in those laws by which alone human society is held together, in the ethical demands of the spirit.' {Israelitische ttnd Jiidische Gesckichie^, p. 74.) The perception of that funda- mental antagonism, and the rigorous enforcement of its practical consequences, are the key to the significance of Elijah's ministry. As the precursor of the prophetic movement of the following century, he is to be ranked as the greatest religious personality that had been raised up in Israel since Moses. Critics are unanimous in assigning the narrative to a Biography of Elijah, written from the prophetic point of view, and distinct from all the other documents incorporated in the book (see Introd. p. 28). On two points some difference of opinion exists : (a) as to whether ch. xxi belongs to the same source as xvii-xix (on this something will be said in the introduction to ch. xxi) ; and {b) as to the date of the composition. It is note- worthy that the section (in contrast to ch. xxi) shows no decided trace of Deuteronomic revision ; hence, so far as literary evidence goes, the possibility is left open that it might have been embodied in the history after the compilation of Kings. And there are perhaps some features which by themselves might suggest a late I KINGS 17. 2. Ej 223 liveth, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew nor rain these years, but according to my word. And the 2 composition. But there arc other and more essential characteris- tics which can only be explained on the assumption of a relatively early date (the beginning of the eighth century). Thus (i) the absence of any polemic against the worship of the golden calves is in marked contrast to the compiler's persistent criticism of that offence, and makes it probable that the narrative is older than Amos and Hosea ; (2) the complaint of the destruction of the northern altars (xix. 14^ could hardly have been recorded by any writer influenced by the Deuteronomic legislation ; and (3) the manner in which the judgement on Israel is represented (see the note on xix. 17) could not possibly originate after the historical tradition had once been fixed bj' the Book of Kings. It seems a reasonable conclusion that while the history may be idealized in a way that precludes the assumption of strictly contemporary authorship, j'et the biography must have taken shape in an age lo which the work of Elijah was a living memor3\ xvii. I. Elijah's Message to Ahab. With the eagle-like sudden- ness which characterizes all his movements Elijah appears abruptly before Ahab with the announcement of a drought which is to continue for some years, and not to be removed except in accordance with his prophetic word. The threat raises in the most effective way the religious question which Elijah wished to force on the minds of his contemporaries : Who is the truly Divine Being — Yahweh or Baal ? In nothing did the ancient world recognize the hand of God more directly than in the giving and withholding of rain ; and the chief purpose of this prediction is to demonstrate that the God whose sen'ant Elijah is is the sole ruler of nature, against whose will no power in heaven or earth can prevail. It is generally supposed that the beginning of the history has been omitted in the compilation ; but the considerations that point in that direction have no great weight; and it is doubtful if any introduction would not- weaken the dramatic effect of the great prophet's advent on the scene. 1. of the sojourners of Gilead. There is little doubt that the correct reading is that of the LXX : 'from Tishbe of Gilead '— so defined to distinguish it from another Tishbe in Galilee (Tobit i. 2). A place Istib^ a few miles north-west from Mahm (see on iv. 14^, where a ruined shrine still bears the name Mat Elyds, has been plausibly identified with the birthplace of Elijah. Iiefore whom I stand : expresses the prophet's lofty con- sciousness of his personal relation to Yahweh (cf. xviii. 15). xvii. 2-7. Elijah at the Brook Cherith. The intensity of the calamity is delineated, not in vague general statements, but 224 I KINGS 17. 3-9. Ej 3 word of the Lord came unto him, saying, Get thee hence, and turn thee eastward, and hide thyself by the brook 4 Cherith, that is before Jordan. And it shall be, that thou shalt drink of the brook ; and I have commanded 5 the ravens to feed thee there. So he went and did according unto the word of the Lord : for he went and 6 dwelt by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan. And the ravens brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening ; and he drank of the 7 brook. And it came to pass after a while, that the brook dried up, because there was no rain in the land. 8 And the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, 9 Arise, get thee to Zarephath, which belongeth to Zidon, concretely and vividly through the experiences of the prophet himself. He is sent first to a desolate vvradi east of the Jordan, where, fed morning and evening by the ravens, he watches the gradual dwindling of the stream from which he drank. 3. Get thee hence. The want of any previous determination of locality is one of the reasons assigned for thinking the narrative has been curtailed at the beginning. the brook Cherith {Krith) is traditionally associated with the Wadi el-Kelt in the neighbourhood of Jericho. But the word before in a geographical designation can hardlj^ be understood otherwise than as ' eastward,' so that the place must be sought in one of the watercourses flowing into the Jordan from the east, where in fact it is put by the Onomasticon of Eusebius (Lagarde's edition, pp. 113, 302). 6. the ravens. The attempt to minimize the miracle by reading * the Arabs ' {'drdbim for 'orebim) is a rationalistic absurdity'. For bread and flesh the LXX reads 'bread in the morning and flesh in the evening,' which looks better, but may have been suggested by Exod. xvi, 8. xvii. 8-16. Elijah with the Widow of Zarephath. The prophet is next sent to Zarephath in Phoenicia, where he lodges in the house of a widow, sustained by the miraculous barrel of meal and cruse of oil, which failed not while the famine lasted. It is impossible to conceive a more terribly realistic picture of mute abject human suffering than the account of Elijah's first interview with the woman at the gate. 9. Zarephath (Sarepta, Luke iv. 26), on the sea-coast, nine or ten miles south of Sidon, near the modern village of Sarafend. I KINGS 17. lo-ifi. Ej 225 and dwell there : beliold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee. So he arose and went to 10 Zarephath ; and when he came to the gate of the city, behold, a widow woman was there gathering sticks : and he called to her, and said, Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink. And as she was 11 going to fetch it, he called to her, and said. Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand. And she 12 said. As the Lord thy God liveth, I have not a cake, but an handful of meal in the barrel, and a little oil in the cruse : and, behold, I am gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die. And Elijah said unto her. Fear 13 not ; go and do as thou hast said : but make me thereof a little cake first, and bring it forth unto me, and after- ward make for thee and for thy son. For thus saith the 14 Lord, the God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the Lord sendeth rain upon the earth. And she 15 went and did according to the saying of Elijah : and she, and he, and her house, did eat nia7iy days. The barrel [6 of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by 10, 11. The woman complies readily with the request for water, but when asked for bread is forced to declare the absolute destitution to which she is reduced. 12. the IiORD thy God. The woman is a heathen, but recognizes Elijah as a worshipper of Yahweh, and swears by his God. For son the LXX, here and in verse 13, reads 'sons.' 13. make me . . . first : a severe trial of her faith. 15. The woman trusts the prophet, and is rewarded by the fulfilment of his promise. For her house read 'her son ' (LXX 'sons,' as before). many days : strictly, ' for some time.' The word is not found in the LXX, and is apparently interpolated. Q 226 I KINGS 17. 17-22. Ej 1 7 Elijah. And it came to pass after these things, that the son of the woman, the mistress of the house, fell sick ; and his sickness was so sore, that there was no breath 1 8 left in him. And she said unto Elijah, What have I to do with thee, O thou man of God ? thou art come unto me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to slay my 19 son ! And he said unto her. Give me thy son. And he took him out of her bosom, and carried him up into the chamber, where he abode, and laid him upon his own 20 bed. And he cried unto the Lord, and said, O Lord my God, hast thou also brought evil upon the widow 2 1 with whom I sojourn, by slaying her son? And he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried unto the Lord, and said, O Lord my God, I pray thee, 3 3 let this child's soul come into him again. And the xvii. 17-24. The Widoivs Son restored to Life. After some time the widow's son falls sick and dies, but through the intercession of Elijah is restored to life. The mother makes avowal of he- faith in the God of Elijah. 17. no breath left in Mm : no sign of life. Though the writer seems to avoid the direct assertion that the child died, Josephus {Ant. viii. 325) is mistaken in suggesting that he describes the case as one of apparent death merely. Such a view is not consis- tent with the language of verse 21, 18. to bringf my sin to remembrance. The idea seems to be that the presence of the man of God has called the attention of the Deity to guilt which would otherwise have been overlooked, and of which she herself had been unconscious. As in the O. T. generally, the sense of sin is awakened by calamity, and the mind is carried back behind conscious transgressions to the deep-seated moral defect which is inherent in human nature. 19. the chamber: 'the upper chamber* ^see 2 Kings iv. 10), not usually found in the houses of the poor. 20. hast thou also brought : or rather, with a change of emphasis, ' hast thou brought evil upon the very widow with whom . . . ? ' i. e. in addition to the universal misery caused by the drought. 21. stretched himself upon: cf. 2 Kings iv. 34 f. and Acts XX. 10. The LXX reads ' breathed into the child.' l«t thii ohUd's aioul. The soul (jisphesh) is the principle of I KIN(;S 17. 23—18. .^. Ej 227 Lord hearkened unto the voice of Elijah ; and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived. And 23 Elijah took the child, and brought him down out of the chamber into the house, and delivered him unto his mother : and Elijah said, See, thy son liveth. And the 24 woman said to Elijah, Now I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the Lord in thy mouth is truth. And it came to pass after many days, that the word of 18 the Lord came to Elijah, in the third year, saying, Go, shew thyself unto Ahab ; and I will send rain upon the earth. And Elijah went to shew himself unto Ahab. 2 And the famine was sore in Samaria. And Ahab called .', Obadiah, which was over the household. (Now Obadiah life, and cannot be conceived as having left the body except at death (contrast x. 5). Whether it was believed to survive the death of the body as an independent entity is a disputed point of O. T. psychology. 24. Now I know : by experience ; not that she had doubted it before (verse 18). that the word . . . truth : or, ' that the word of Yahweh is truly in thy mouth.' (Ps. cxxxii. 11.) xviii. 1-19. Elijah's Meeting with Ahab. In the third 3'ear (of the drought) Elijah is commanded to emerge from his seclusion and bring the controversy between Yahweh and Israel to a decision. He first appears to Obadiah, the God-fearing minister of the palace, who has just parted from Ahab to search the country for pasture to the royal riding-beasts ; and Obadiah, after being reassured as to Elijah's intention, goes to seek his master. Ahab soon appears — the LXX says he ' ran out ' in his eagerness to confront the ' troubler of Israel '—but he is overawed by the stern dignity of the prophet's answer, who rolls back the blame of Israel's troubles on the idolatries of the ruling house. Elijah demands a convocation of all Israel, with the representatives of the foreign religion, at Carmel ; and the king complies. 3'', 4 interrupt the narrative by the recital of an episode in which Obadiah had given proof of his fidelity to the cause of Yahweh. It is generally supposed that this is a condensation of a fuller report of Jezebel's persecution, which stood originally Q 2 228 I KINGS 18. 4-To. Ej 4 feared the Lord greatly : for it was so, when Jezebel cut off the prophets of the Lord, that Obadiah took an hun- dred prophets, and hid them by fifty in a cave, and fed 5 them with bread and water.) And Ahab said unto Oba- diah, Go through the land, unto all the fountains of water, and unto all the brooks : perad venture we may find grass and save the horses and mules alive, that we 6 lose not all the beasts. So they divided the land between them to pass throughout it : Ahab went one way by him- 7 self, and Obadiah went another way by himself. And as Obadiah was in the way, behold, Elijah met him : and he knew him, and fell on his face, and said, Is it thou, 8 my lord Elijah ? And he answered him, It is I : go, tell 9 thy lord, Behold, Elijah is here. And he said, Wherein have I sinned, that thou wouldest deliver thy servant into 10 the hand of Ahab, to slay me? As the Lord thy God liveth, there is no nation or kingdom, whither my lord in an earlier part of the document. That is possible ; but what is here given is taken directly from verse 13, and a fuller account was perhaps unnecessary in a biography of Elijah. 4. The activity of the prophetic schools (see on xx. 35) was a marked feature of the time, and a symptom of the rising opposi- tion to Jezebel's influence. Of her persecution of the prophets we know nothing ; but we cannot suppose that it was part of an organized scheme to suppress the worship of Yahweh in favour of that of Baal (see ch. xxii.). 5. Go thronGrh: better, as LXX, ' Come and let us go through.' that we lose not : read with LXX (L), ' that cattle be not cut off from us.' 7. The appearance of Elijah is unexpected and mysterious, as in xvii. I, xxi. 20. 9. Obadiah fears that the prophet may vanish as suddenly as he came, leaving him to bear the brunt of Ahab's exasperation. 10. the IiO&D thy God : cf. xvii. 12. The expression in the mouth of an Israelite is a recognition of the special relation of the prophet to God ; so Isa. vii. 13. There is an obvious but not unnatural exaggeration in the description of Ahab's efforts to discover Elijah. 1 KINGS 18. 11-17. Ej 229 hath not sent to seek thee : and when they said, He is not here, he took an oath of the kingdom and nation, that they found thee not. And now thou sayest, Go, n tell thy lord, Behold, Elijah is here. And it shall come i i to pass, as soon as I am gone from thee, that the spirit of the Lord shall carry thee whither I know not ; and so when I come and tell Ahab, and he cannot find thee, he shall slay me : but I thy servant fear the Lord from my youth. Was it not told my lord what I did when 13 Jezebel slew the prophets of the Lord, how I hid an hundred men of the Lord's prophets by fifty in a cave, and fed them with bread and water? And now thou 14 sayest, Go, tell thy lord, Behold, Elijah is here : and he shall slay me. And Elijah said, As the Lord of hosts 15 liveth, before whom I stand, I will surely shew myself unto him to-day. So Obadiah went to meet Ahab, and 16 told him : and Ahab went to meet Elijah. And it came 1 7 to pass, when Ahab saw Elijah, that Ahab said unto him, 12. Obadiah shares the popular belief that the prophet's mys- terious movements are caused by the supernatural power of the spirit of Yahweh(cf. 2 Kings ii. 16); but there seems no trace of this idea in the mind of the writer. The conception appears in Ezekiel (iii. 12, viii. 3, xliii. 5), but it is of course not to be inferred that it originated with him. 13. See above on verse 4. 15. the IiOBD of hosts : Heb. Yahzveh Zebd' 6th— a. pecuV\ar\y solemn title of the God of Israel, designating Him usually as the Lord of the universe, or its cosmical forces. It is held by some scholars (Wellhausen, Smend, &c.) that it was first introduced into the language of religion by the prophet Amos, and that all occurrences of it in the older history are due to literary revision. Another and more probable view is that it originated in the period of the Philistine wars, as a name of the battle-God of the Hebrew hosts (i Sam xvii. 45). That it acquired a larger, and in some sense an opposite, connotation in the hands of the prophets is undoubtedly true ; but Elijah is in many respects the forerunner of the literary prophets, and it is not incredible that in its more exalted acceptation it was first used by him. 230 I KINGS 18. 18-20. Ej iS Is it thou, thou troubler of Israel? And he answered, I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of 19 the Lord, and thou hast followed the Baalim. Now therefore send, and gather to me all Israel unto mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the Asherah four hundred, which eat 20 at Jezebel's table. So Ahab sent unto all the children of Israel, and gathered the prophets together unto mount 17, X8. troubler . . . troubled: a strong word, meaning 'to bring disaster upon' (Gen. xxxiv. 30; Joshua vi. 18, vii. 25). the Baalim : ' the Baals ' — referring to tlie local forms under which the Canaanitish Baal was worshipped. 10. Carmel : see below on verse 20. and the prophets of the Asherah four hundred. If the words be genuine Asherah must here be the proper name of a goddess (see on xiv. 23). But since these prophets are not mentioned in verses 22 and 40 it is not unlikely that the clause is a late gloss, which the LXX has repeated in verse 22, though not in verse 40. eat at Jezebel's table : see on ii. 7. That the Phoenician and Canaanite religion had its prophets {nebi'im) is an important historical notice, whose interest is enhanced by the description of their frenzied demeanour in verse 28. xviii. 20-40. The Sacrifice on Carmel. The scene chosen for this great vindication of the divinity of Yahweh is Mount Carmel, 'sacred above all mountains, and forbidden of access to the vulgar.' There is some reason to believe that the mountain was held sacred by the Phoenicians, and had an altar to Baal as well as one to Yahweh (verse 30). (For the classical testimonies, see W. R. Smith, Rel. of Sem.^, p. 156.) Hence it was the fittest place imaginable for a contest such as Elijah contemplated, between the rival claims to divinity of Yahweh and Baal. The incident is described with all the impressiveness and circumstance which befitted the crowning act of Elijah's prophetic career. The issue of the trial by fire demonstrated, as completely as physical miracle could ever do, the impotence and non-entity of Baal and the presence of true godhead behind the word of Elijah. The assembled people were for the moment overawed and convinced ; and the extermination of the Baal-prophets seemed to seal for ever the victory of the true religion over the false. 20. ixnto mount Carmel. The precise spot on the long range I KINGS 18. 21-26. Ej 231 Carmel. And Elijah came near unto all the people, and 21 said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him : but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. Then said 23 Elijah unto the people, I, even I only, am left a prophet of the Lord ; but Baal's prophets are four hundred and fifty men. Let them therefore give us two bullocks ; 23 and let them choose one bullock for themselves, and cut it in pieces, and lay it on the wood, and put no fire un- der : and I mil dress the other bullock, and lay it on the wood, and put no fire under. And call ye on the name 24 of your god, and I will call on the name of the Lord : and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said. It is well spoken. And Elijah said unto the prophets of Baal, Choose you 25 one bullock for yourselves, and dress it first ; for ye are many ; and call on the name of your god, but put no fire under. And they took the bullock which was given 26 of Carmel where the sacrifices took place cannot, of course, be determined with certainty ; but none can be found more suitable than el-Muhrdkd (the place of burning), at the foot of which is Tell el'Kasts (the priests' mound), the place traditionally associated with the massacre of the prophets of Baal. El-Mithrakd stands nearly 1,600 feet above sea-level, nearly four miles south of the highest summit ; it has no view of the sea, which, however, can readily be obtained by a few minutes' ascent (see verse 43). Hard by is a spring, from which the water might have been drawn for the drenching of the altar (33 ff.). / 21. halt ye between two opinions: LXX, 'go lame on both knee joints.' The literal sense of the Hebrew is obscure, but the idea of the question is clear from what immediately follov,7S. It satirizes the attempt to combine two religions so incongruous as those of Baal and Yahweh. 22. I, even Z only, am left: cf. xix. 14 ; but see, on the othci hand, verse 13, xx. 13, xxii. 6ff. 24. the God that answereth hy fire : cf. 2 Chron. vii. i. 26. The words which was given them (strictly, 'which he 232 I KINGS 18. 37-29. Ej them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered. -7 x\nd they leaped about the altar which was made. And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud : for he is a god ; either he is musing, or he is gone aside, or he is in a journey, or peradventure 28 he sleepeth, and must be awaked. And they cried aloud, and cut themselves after their manner with knives and 29 lances, till the blood gushed out upon them. And it was so, when midday was past, that they prophesied until had given them ') are to be omitted, with the LXX, as inconsistent with verses 23, 25, leaped is the same word as is rendered 'halt' in verse 21. It seems to denote a religious dance round the altar, accompanied with contortions of the body, as was usual in such ceremonies. whicli was made : LXX, ' which they had made.' 2*7. It is unreasonable to doubt that Elijah's irony is conceived in the spirit of absolute monotheism, as distinguished from mere monolatry. He could not have used such language if the question in his mind had been merely whether Baal was the proper god for Israel to worship : he plainly implies that Baal is no god at all. he is xnnsing': LXX, 'is engaged in conversation.' Sfone aside is explained as a euphemistic expression. The sentence as a whole is awkward in style. 28. The taunt of Elijah stimulates the devotees of Baal to still higher frenzy. The cutting of the flesh, so that the blood gushes out on the altar, is an instance of a widely diffused piece of primitive ritual, based originally, as W. R. Smith has argued, on the idea of a blood-bond thus established between the god and the worshipper (^loc. cit. p. 321 ff.). Here it is perhaps sufficiently' explained as a substitute for human sacrifice, or an attempt to excite the pity of the god. 29. they prophesied : i. e. they had worked themselves up to the condition of wild convulsive frenzy in which they were no longer capable of self-control, but were supposed to be taken possession of by a supernatural power. Such manifestations were characteristic of the earlier and lower forms of prophecy even in Israel (i Sam, x. 10, xix. 20-24), and were always associated with the name udbV {prophet^, so that in popular speech ' prophet ' and ■madman' were almost convertible terms (i Sam. xviii. 10 ; 2 Kings I KINGS 18. 30-33. EJPEj 233 the time of the offering of the evening oblation ; but there was neither voice, nor any to answer, nor any that regarded. And Elijah said unto all the people, Come 30 near unto me ; and all the people came near unto him. And he repaired the altar of the Lord that was thrown down. [P] And Elijah took twelve stones, according to 31 the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the word of the Lord came, saying, Israel shall be thy name. And with the stones he built an altar in the 32 name of the Lord ; [Ej] and he made a trench about the altar, as great as would contain two measures of seed. And he put the wood in order, and cut the bullock in 33 pieces, and laid it on the wood. And he said, Fill four ix. II ; Jer. xxix. 26). This exhibition lasted till the time of the oifering* of the evening oblation, which must therefore have been an established custom in the northern sanctuaries, and must evidently have been observed long before nightfall. Whether this time corresponded with that prescribed by the Priestly Code ('between the two evenings,' Exod. xxix. 39 R. V. marg.) is uncertain. Between verses 29 and 30 the LXX has another address of Elijah to the prophets of Baal, which is possibly genuine : * Cease forthwith, and I will offer my burnt-offering. And they ceased and withdrew.' 30. And he repaired . . . thrown down : clearly showing that a local sanctuary of Yahweh had stood on the spot. The statement appears inconsistent with what immediately follows ; for if the old altar was repaired, there was no need to build a new one. Hence those critics are probably right who consider verses 31, 32* to be an interpolation by a reader who took exception to the idea of Elijah tacitly sanctioning the use of a provincial altar b^' restoring it so leverently ; and who reveals his standpoint by a direct quotation from the Priestly Code (Gen. xxxv. 10). This view is confirmed by the fact that in the LXX verses 31, 32* stand htfore the last sentence of verse 30. 32^. as gfreat as would contain : rather, ' about as much as would be sown with two seahs.' The seah is a third of an ephah (see on v. 11). In the Mishnah the expression here used {beth scah) is said to be a definite area, about 900 sq. yards (Ben- zinger) ; twice that would be the size of Elijah's ' trench.' The measurement may apply to the area enclosed by the trench. 33-35. Such elaborate precautions against the suspicion of fraud 234 I KINGS 18. .H-40. Ej barrels with water, and pour it on the burnt ofifering, and 34 on the wood. And he said, Do it the second time ; and they did it the second time. And he said. Do it the 35 third time ; and they did it the third time. And the water ran round about the altar ; and he filled the trench 36 also with water. And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening oblation, that Elijah the prophet came near, and said, O Lord, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that I am thy servant, and that I have 37 done all these things at thy word. Hear me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know that thou. Lord, art God^ and that thou hast turned their heart back again. 38 Then the lire of the Lord fell, and consumed the burnt offering, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and 39 licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces : and they .^o said, The Lord, he is God ; the Lord, he is God. And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal ; let not one of them escape. And they took them : and read very strangely in the O. T. To the mind of one commentator they have actually suggested the grotesque idea that naphtha was used ! 36i 37. The prayer of Elijah contains two petitions : first, for the vindication of his own prophetic authority, a final proof that he had all along acted in accordance with the will of God ; and second, for the bringing back of the nation to faith in the one true God. On the answer he feels that he has staked the whole future of Israel's religion. That 36^ and 37 are duplicates (Benzinger) is not probable. 38. The Divine answer takes of necessity the form of a miracle, an event which cannot be explained by any known laws of nature. And without assuming the reality of this miracle it would be difficult to avoid dissolving the whole history of Elijah into legend. the fire of the LORD is the lightning (Gen. xix. 24, &c.). 40. The slaughter of the false prophets took place, not on the scene of the sacrifice, but at the brook Kiaihon {Na/tr el- Mukal /a), at the foot of tlie hill 'see on verse 20), I KINGS 18. 41-44. Ej 235 Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there. And Elijah said unto Ahab, Get thee up, 41 eat and drink ; for there is the sound of abundance of rain. So Ahab went up to eat and to drink. And Elijah 42 went up to the top of Carmel; and he bowed himself down upon the earth, and put his face between his knees. And he said to his servant. Go up now, look toward the 43 sea. And he went up, and looked, and said. There is nothing. And he said. Go again seven times. And it 44 came to pass at the seventh time, that he said, Behold, there ariseth a cloud out of the sea, as small as a man's hand. And he said. Go up, say unto Ahab, Make ready xviii. 41-46. T/ie coming of the Rain. Having, as it seemed, made an end for ever of idolatry in Israel, Elijah now turns to Ahab with an assurance that the sorely-needed rain will be no longer withheld. While the king eats and drinks in his tent, the prophet ascends the mountain to wait and pray for the first sign of the promised blessing. At last his attendant reports a speck of cloud on the horizon, and speedily the whole sky is overcast, and before Ahab's chariot can reach the gate of Jezrecl the rain has begun to fall. 41. Get tliee up : from the banks of the river, where he had witnessed the massacre of his queen's satellites, to some point not indicated on the mountain-side. It is impossible to form a distinct picture of the situation. there is the sound. The prophet means that he already hears (in spirit) the noise of the coming rain. 42. he bowed himself dowa. The verb occurs again only in 2 Kings iv. 34 f. Neitherthe attitude itself noritssignificance can be fully explained. It seems, however, to express intense concentra- tion of thought on an invisible object, since Elijah cannot relax his attention to observe the signs of the weather, but sends his servant to look. 43. Go again seven times : add with the LXX, * And the servant went again seven times.' (See further, Burney's Notes, p. 328.) 44. 45. With the appearing of the cloud, as small as a man's hand, Elijah knows that his prayer is answered, and he has hardly time to send warning to Ahab before the heaven is black with storm-clouds, and a rain that must speedily make the roads im- passable has begun to fall. 236 I KINGS 18. 45— 1». 2. Ej thy chariot^ and get thee down, that the rain stop thee 45 not. And it came to pass in a Httle while, that the heaven grew black with clouds and wind, and there was a great rain. And Ahab rode, and went to Jezreel. 46 And the hand of the Lord was on Elijah ; and he girded up his loins, and ran before Ahab to the entrance of Jezreel. 19 And Ahab told Jezebel all that Elijah had done, and withal how he had slain all the prophets with the sword. 3 Then Jezebel sent a messenger unto Elijah, saying, So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not thy 46. From the nearest end of Carmel to Jezreel [Zeriii) would be a ride of seventeen or eighteen miles. The object of Elijah's great feat is not stated, and conjecture is useless. It is not even said that he made himself a runner to Ahab's chariot, but only that he reached Jezreel before it. The incident is recorded chiefly as a proof of the supernatural power by which the prophet was sustained. xix. 1-9*. Elijah's Flight and Despair. Threatened with the vengeance of Jezebel, Elijah flees first to Beer-sheba in the extreme south of Judah ; and then goes a day's journey into the wilderness, where, in utter prostration of body and spirit, he throws himself down under a shrub and prays for death. He is twice wakened from sleep by an angel, and finds food and drink miraculously provided for him ; thus refreshed and strengthened he proceeds on his long pilgrimage to Horeb, the mount of God. Although many features of the narrative are obscure, its main conceptions convey an irresistible impression of truth^jThe psychological reaction following on the disappointment of his grand ambition, his temporary loss of faith in his own mission, his craving for some nearer contact with the historic God of Israel, his sudden perception of how little a man can accomplish, and his consequent weariness of \\ie-^2i\\ these things are portrayed with marvellous insight and delicacy, and invest the character of Elijah with a singular naturalness and charm. 1. withal had better be omitted : it is an attempt to reproduce an ungrammatical expression of the Hebrew text, which is found in no ancient version. 2. Jezebel's threat is in reality a confession of impotence ; if she had dared to kill Elijah she would not have sent him this warning. Her object is to frighten him out of the country. The I KINGS 19. ?, 4. Ej 237 life as the life of one of them by to-morrow about this time. And when he saw that, he arose, and went for his 3 life, and came to Beer-sheba, which belongeth to Judah, and left his servant there. But he himself went a day's 4 journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a juniper tree : and he requested for himself that he might die; and said, It is enough; now, O Lord, take away my life ; for I am not better than my fathers. LXX prefaces her asseveration with the words : ' As sure as yon are Elijah, and I am Jezebel,' 3. Read, as margin (with LXX, &c.), ' And he was afraid.' The scribes shrank from speaking of Elijah and fear in one breath. Beer-sheba ('Well of the Oath,' see Gen. xxvi. 33) is still called Bir es-Seba', and marks the southern limit of cultivation at a point midway between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea : hence the common O. T. phrase ' from Dan to Beer-sheba ' (iv. 25, &c.). which helongreth to Judah, and was therefore be3'ond the jurisdiction of Ahab and Jezebel. The expression is commonly regarded as a proof that the writer belonged to the northern kingdom ; though what else he could have said if he had been a Judaean is not apparent. It is important to note that Beer-sheba was an ancient sacred place much frequented by pilgrims from North Israel even after the severance of the two kingdoms (see Amos V. 5, viii. 14). This may have had something to do in determining the direction of Elijah's flight. 4. The craving for complete solitude leads him a day's journey into the wilderness ; and there, unseen by any human eye, he abandons himself to the bitterness of disenchantment and failure. a jnniper tree : strictly, ' a certain broom bush.' (The in- definite expression is repeated in verse 5, showing that there is some irregularity in the text. It is, however, unnecessary to delete the clause here as a gloss (Benzinger).) The Hebrew name rotem is the same as the Arabic retem, which includes several species oi genista. The shrub grows plentifully along the desert wadis between Palestine and Sinai, and its scanty shelter is taken advantage of, for want of better, by the Bedouin in pitch- ing their tents. for Z am not better than my fathers. His strength is but a man's strength after all, and he has reached the limit of human endurance : life has become a useless burden, because he feels he can never again rise to the height of the effort that has failed. -238 I KINGS 19. 5-8. Ej 5 And he lay down and slept under a juniper tree ; and, behold, an angel touched him, and said unto him, Arise 6 and eat. And he looked, and, behold, there was at his head a cake baken on the coals, and a cruse of water. And he did eat and drink, and laid him down again. 7 And the angel of the Lord came again the second time, and touched him, and said, Arise and eat ; because the 8 journey is too great for thee. And he arose, and did eat and drink, and went in the strength of that meat forty days and forty nights unto Horeb the mount of God. 5. an auerel: LXX, •some one.' On angels as intermediaries between God and the prophets, see xiii. 18 ; the idea is one of the indications that have been thought to point to late composition of the passage. 6. a cake . . . coals means simply a cake such as is baked on glowing stones (as we might speak of a griddle-cake). 7. the anerel of the LOBD may be the angel of verse 5, not necessarily the unique and mysterious being who is associated with the theophany in the earlier history (Gen. xvi. 7 ff., xxi. 17 ff., xxii. II ff. ; Judges vi. 11 flf., xiii. 3, &c.). 8. unto Horeb the mount of Ood (Exod. iii. i). On the whole, the narrative gives the impression that this was the goal of Elijah's pilgrimage from the first, though his strength failed him on the way (see verse 7). The source of the impulse might be twofold : (i) on the one hand, a desire to meet the God of Israel at the very place where the national covenant — now abrogated by national apostasy — had been formed. (2) On the other hand, there may be the idea, appearing elsewhere in the O. T., that Horeb continued to be the true dwelling-place of Yahweh even after the people had entered Canaan (Judges v. 4f., Hab. iii. 3, &c.). In protesting against the popular identification of Yahweh with the local Baals, Elijah may have repudiated the notion that he was actually present in every Israelitish sanctuary, and have clung to the thought that he dwelt in awful majesty amid the thunder-clouds of Sinai. On either view his impulse was to get back to the historic origins of the national religion, and renew his faith by personal contact with the God he served. The name Horeh for the mount of the Law is characteristic of the Elohistic document of the Pentateuch (which is supposed to have been written in North Israel) and the Book of Deuteronomy. The writer appears to have vague ideas of its situation ; the Sinai of I KINGS 19. 9-1 r. EjZ 239 And he came thither unto a cave, and lodged there ; 9 [Z] and, behold, the word of the Lord came to him, and he said unto him. What doest thou here, Ehjah ? And 10 he said, I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts; for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy pro- phets with the sword : and I, even I only, am left ; and they seek my life, to take it away. And he said. Go 11 forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. tradition could easily be reached from Beer-sheba in eight or ten days. S^^-ll*. The verses seem out of place here, and spoil by antici- pation the dramatic eftect of the vision which follows. Verse 11* would lead us to expect that Elijah stood on the mountain while the theophany took place ; verse 13 shows that, on the contrary', he was still in the cave, and only came out when the more violent manifestations of the Divine presence had ceased. The contradic- tion is not removed by the LXX's addition of ' to-morrow.' The vei-ses are perhaps a duplication of 13'', 14 by a later hand (Well- hausen). xix. 11''- 18. The Theophany at Horeb. Elijah is made to realize the presence of God in a spectacle and an experience which for grandeur and depth of conception could hardly be surpassed in literature. The Lord passes by arrayed in the terrors of storm, earthquake, and fire ; but none of these bring home to the prophet the immediate sense of God. It is only in the audible stillness which succeeds the fire that he feels the mysterious attraction of the Divine, and, wrapping his face in his mantle, comes forth to the entrance of the cave. Then in answer to the heart-searching question, What doest thou here? he pours forth his complaint against his people ; and after being commissioned to appoint the ministers of Divine vengeance, he is assured of the triumph, through fearful judgements, of the cause for which he had lived. The lesson of the theophany must be gathered from the revelation which accompanies it It is commonly conceived as a rebuke to the impetuous and fiery zeal of the prophet, and his rehance on violent methods for advancing the cause of God : he is supposed to learn here that not fire and storm but the still small voice is the fit emblem of the patient and gentle and silent operation of the spiritual forces by which the kingdom of God is built up. (See A. B. Davidson, The Called of God, ch. vi). But that interpreta- tion, however attractive in itself, does not agree with the con- 240 I KINGS 19. 12-15. Ej [Ej] And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord ; but the Lord was not in the wind : and after the wind an earthquake ; but the Lord I a was not in the earthquake : and after the earthquake a fire ; but the Lord was not in the fire : and after the 13 fire a still small voice. And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou 14 here, Elijah ? And he said, I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts ; for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword ; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away. 15 And the Lord said unto him, Go, return on thy way to eluding message, which unfolds a vision of judgement more terrible than even Elijah could have wished. The significance of the theophany lies rather in its effort to express through the least sensuous of material symbols the spirituality of Yahweh. As compared with older representations, in which thunderstorm and earthquake appear as adequate vehicles of the Divine presence, this certainly indicates an advance in the conception of Yahweh's nature. 11. The narrative is resumed after the interpolation with the words : And, behold, the ZiOBD. 12. a still small voice : lit. * a sound of thin silence.' The expressive oxymoron finds a parallel in the hcndiadys of Job iv. 16 (* silence and a voice '). 13. wrapped his face : that he might not look on God and die (Gen. xxxii. 30 ; Exod. iii. 6, xxxiii. 20, &c.). 14. I have been very jealous. The words express the spirit of Elijah's ministri^, consuming zeal for Yahweh and uncom- promising opposition to every object of worship which sought to share with Him the honours of godhead. What the prophet com- plains of is the entire suppression of the religion of Yahweh, which is, historically considered, an exaggeration, though one that is natural in an emotional outburst. 15. 16. In answer to his complaint, Elijah is commanded to I KINGS 10. i6-i8. Ej 241 the wilderness of Damascus : and when thou comest, thou shalt anoint Hazael to be king over Syria: and 16 Jehu the son of Nimshi shalt thou anoint to be king over Israel : and Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah shalt thou anoint to be prophet in thy room. And it 17 shall come to pass, that him that escapeth from the sword of Hazael shall Jehu slay : and him that escapeth from the sword of Jehu shall Elisha slay. Yet will I 18 leave me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath 'anoint' the three men who in different ways are to complete his reformation by the extirpation of Baal-worship — Hazael, Jehu, and Elif;>ja. Such a commission clearly implies that his own life-work is practically over, and that his remaining time on earth will be short. The word 'anoint' is strictly applicable to the two kings ; but there is no instance of the anointing of a prophet, and even in the case of Elisha the ceremony was not actually per- formed. Abel-meholali (see iv. 12) is said by Eusebius {OnomasUcon) to be in the Jordan valley, ten Roman miles south of Scythopolis (Beth-shan). 17. tlie sword of Hazael symbolizes the Syrian wars (cf. 2 Kings viii. 12), whose disastrous course is fully recorded in the subsequent narratives; that of Jehu refers to the massacres described in 2 Kings ix, x ; but what is meant by the sword of Elisha the history does not reveal. There may have been a tradition of some stern measures directed by Elisha against the devotees of Baal, similar to Elijah's execution of the prophets at Carmel, although no trace of it appears in the documents preserved by the compiler. The whole course of events, indeed, was different from the forecast given in this verse. The sword of Hazael did not precede but followed the sword of Jehu ; and the brunt of the Syrian wars fell most heavily on the house of Jehu hiinself, champion of Yahweh's cause though he was. The discrepancy illustrates the freedom and idealism of O. T. prediction, and proves beyond a doubt that the passage before us is no invention of a late writer with an eye on the fulfilment. . 18. seven thousand is a round number for the faithful minority who will be spared in the judgement, It is an anticipation o( the later prophetic doctrine of the Remnant, the pious kernel, the Israel within Israel, to whom belongs the promise of the future. . U 242 I KINGS 19. 19, 20. Ej 19 not kissed him. So he departed thence, and found Elisha the son of Shaphat, who was plowing, with twelve yoke of oxen before him, and he with the twelfth : and Ehjah passed over unto him, and cast his mantle upon 20 him. And he left the oxen, and ran after Elijah, and said. Let me, I pray thee, kiss my father and my mother, and then I will follow thee. And he said unto him. Go bath not kissed hiiu : cf. Hos. xiii. 2. The rite is also illustrated by the Mohammedan custom of kissing the Kaaba. xix. 19-21. The Call of Elisha. Of the three commissions en- trusted to Elijah in verses 15, 16, only one, and that the last of the three, is reported to have been actually carried out by him. We have, in fact, no record of the anointing of Hazael at all (see on 2 Kings viii. 7-15) ; the account of the anointing of Jehu by an cmissar3'^ of Elisha (2 Kings ix) is taken from an independentsou?ce, which represents an older tradition than that presupposed by this narrative. The history of Elijah must have related these incidents in a form corresponding to verses 15, 16, and presumably in the order there prescribed. This points to the conclusion that there is a lacuna in the Elijah-document between verses i8 and 19 ; and the inference is strengthened by the observation that verse 19 is not the natural continuation of verses 15-18. The explicit command to go straight to Damascus by the desert (verse 15) could not with- out explanation be followed by the statement that the prophet went straight to the middle Jordan valley instead. We may assume, therefore, that in the original document verse 19 was preceded immediately by the account of the anointing of Jehu, and that * thence ' (wherever it may have been) Elijah went to Abel-meholah, where he found Elisha, and threw his mantle over him. The symbolic action was correctly interpreted by Elisha, and after a farewell feast with his parents and friends he followed Elijah as his personal attendant. 19. lie departed thence : see above. The mantle of Elijah appears again in 2 Kings ii. 13, 14 as the symbol (and vehicle) of his prophetic gift (cf. 2 Kings i. 8, marg.). The garment of skin covered with the hair seems then, as in later times (Zech. xiii. 4 ; Matt, iii. 4\ to have been the distinctive garb of the prophet. 20. Cf. Luke ix. 61. While Elisha's request is natural and intelligible, the answer of Elijah is perplexing. The easiest ex- planation (though not quite convincing) is that Elijah grants his request, and adds that he has done nothing to him that need interfere with such an expression of human affection. Other senses suggested arc : • Go by all means, yet [consider] what I I KINGS 19.21—20.1. EjN 243 back again; for what have I done to thee? And he 21 returned from following him, and took the yoke of oxen, and slew them, and boiled their flesh with the instruments of the oxen, and gave unto the people, and they did eat. Then he arose, and went after Elijah, and ministered unto him. [Nj And Ben-hadad the king of Syria gathered all his 20 have done to thee ' ; or, ' Go, and come back [to me], for [under- stand] what I have.' 21. from followinGT him : better, ' from behind him,' or simply, ' from him.' tlie yoke of oxen : the pair v^hich he himself had been guid- ing (verse 19). The act signifies for Elisha the breaking up of the old life and associations. That he bade farewell also to his parents, though not stated, is to be understood. XX. A/tab^s Victories over the Syrians. The chapter records a phase of the long conflict between Israel and Syria, which had commenced in the reign of Baaslia (xv. i8flf.), and lasted with intermissions till the time of Jeroboam II (see verse 34). Owing to the imperfection of the record (see below) it is impossible to say for certain to what period of Ahab's reign the incidents are to be assigned. The probability is that ch. xxii was the immediate sequel of ch. xx in the original document to which both belong ; and that consequently the events here related took place about three years before the death of Ahab. A still more interesting question is whether they preceded or followed the battle of Karkar, which was fought in 854 b. c, and is one of the leading synchronisms between Hebrew and Assyrian history. An inscription of Shalmaneser II tells how in that year he met and defeated at Karkar, in the vicinity of Hamath, a strong coalition of Syrian princes ; and amongst the names of the con- federates are those of Bir'idri (or Dad'idri) of Damascus (evidently the head of the league) and Ahab of Israel, who is said to have furnished a contingent of 2,000 chariots and 10,000 men (see COT, p. 196). The identity of Ben-hadad with the Bir'idri of the in- scription cannot be doubted : see on verse i. Here then we find Ahab and Ben-hadad fighting side by side against a common enemy, and the question is how their co-operation is to be explained in the light of the narrative before us. Two constructions suggest themselves : (i) Ahab may have been the friendly but independent ally of Ben-hadad at Karkar ; in which case it is natural to R 2 244 I KINGS 20. i. N host together : and there were thirty and two kings with him, and horses and chariots : and he went up and suppose that the fighting of ch, xx was over before that event, and that the alHance was the result of Ahab's singular generosity in the hour of victor^', as related in verses 32-34. (2) Ahab may have been tlie vassal of Ben-hadad, and compelled to fight in the ranks of the anti-Assyrian league. Such a relation between the two sovereigns seems implied in verses 3 f. ; hence the most probable inference would be that after the battle of Karkar Ahab made an effort to recover his independence, with the results nar- rated in this chapter. Recent historians seem pretty equally divided between these two views, and the point remains for the present in suspense. But if the Hebrew chronology is to be strictly followed, the death of Ahab must have taken place in the same year as the battle of Karkar (see Introd. p. 46). The source from which the narrative (along withxxii. i-38)istaken seems to be a popular history of the northern kingdom, written from a political rather than a religious standpoint, and exhibiting the character and policy of Ahab in a much more favourable light than is the case in ch. xvii-xix or xxi. The author's admiration for the gallantry and chivalry of his hero is apparent throughout ; it com- pels the sympathy of the reader in spite of the darker features emphasized in the other sections of the history. It is evident that such a delineation of Ahab's personality cannot come from the same pen as the biography of Elijah in ch. xvii-xix ; and that conclusion is confirmed by other points of difference, such as the attitude of Ahab towards the prophets, the absence of any allusion to the worship of Baal or the work of Elijah, and the introduction of Micaiah the son of Imlah as the solitary representative of true prophecy. Since the narrative is too copious and graphic for the official annals, we must regard it as an extract from a larger in- dependent work, in which the earlier history of the Syrian wars was probably related with the fullness of historical knowledge which characterizes the chapters before us. Whether the passages have literary affinities with any of the other documents used by the compiler is a matter which can be considered later (see on 2 Kings iii, vi. 25 ff., and ix-x) : for the reign of Ahab at least they stand entirely by themselves. XX. 1-22. The Siege and Relief of Samaria. The narrative pre- supposes (a) an attempt by Ahab to escape from the relation of vassalage in which he had hitherto stood to Damascus ; and pro- bably (b) a series of reverses in the field, which had laid open the capital to the Sx^rian army. Of these circumstances some account was no doubt contained in the part of the document which has been omitted (see above). The story is taken up at the point I KINGS 20. 2,3. N 245 besieged Samaria, and fought against it. And he sent 2 messengers to Ahab king of Israel, into the city, and said unto him, Thus saith Ben-hadad, Thy silver and 3 thy gold is mine ; thy wives also and thy children, even where Ben-hadad, having invested Samaria, proposes to Ahab humiliating terms of surrender. It is difficult to see wherein the second proposal (verses sf.) differs from the first (verse 3) ; but at all events Ahab was ready to accept the first, but flings back the second with a spirited and memorable defiance. While the drunken Ben-hadad issues orders for an assault on the city, Ahab leads out his forces against him, and (by a stratagem ?) secures a complete victory over the Syrians. The description of the battle is very obscure, 1. The verse shows traces of amplification. A comparison of the Hebrew with the LXX suggests that the original may have been : 'And Ben-hadad collected his whole army,, and came up and laid siege to Samaria.' On the thirty and two king's, see verse 24. Ben-hadad ('Son of [the god] Hadad ') is the name given to three Syrian kings in the O.T. (cf. xv. r8 ; 2 Kings xiii. 24). Winckler (and Cheyne) would reduce them to two by identifying the king here mentioned with the Ben-hadad of xv. 18 ; but that, though chronologically possible, is in contradiction with the allusion of XX. 34. The name in Shalmaneser's inscription is read by some Assyriologists as Dad'tdri, by others as Biridri. If the former reading be correct, the real name of the king must have been Hadadezer (2 Sam. viii. 3, &c.), and he is here called Ben-hadad by confusion with the name of his father Ben-hadad I. It is much more probable, however, that the true form is Bir'idri, and that this has been transformed into Ben-hadad by two easily intelligible processes: (i) the Hebrew Ben- {'■son^) was substituted for the Aramaic Bar- (it would be a mistaken etymology, but that does not matter) ; and (2) the last consonant R was changed to D. (Winckler, Alttest. Untersuchungen, p. 68 ff.) This theory is con- firmed by the fact that an intermediate stage is represented by the LXX, which invariably reads 'son of Hader.' 3 ff. The negotiations are difficult to understand. Commentators have tried hard to make out a tangible difference between the first and the second demand of Ben-hadad ; but their explanations are all unsatisfying, and no single viev^' can be carried through. The best is perhaps Wellhausen's, which is based on the LXX reading of verse 7 (see below) and an emendation in verse 3, which makes the last clause read • but thy wives and thy children are ihine^ (The phrase even the g'oodliest is not in the LXX.) On this 246 I KINGS 20. 4-7. N 4 the goodliest, are mine. And the king of Israel answered and said, It is according to thy saying, my lord, O king ; 5 I am thine, and all that I have. And the messengers came again, and said, Thus speaketh Ben-hadad, saying, I sent indeed unto thee, saying, Thou shalt deliver me thy silver, and thy gold, and thy wives, and thy children ; 6 but I will send my servants unto thee to-morrow about this time, and they shall search thine house, and the houses of thy servants ; and it shall be, that whatsoever is pleasant in thine eyes, they shall put it in their hand, 7 and take it away. Then the king of Israel called all the elders of the land, and said, Mark, I pray you, and see how this man seeketh mischief: for he sent unto me for my wives, and for my children, and for my silver, and view Ahab consents to the surrender of his silver and gold, but not of his wives and children, a distinction intelligible enough in itself, but hardly in accordance with the language of verses 4, 5. Others hold that in the first instance Ben-hadad asks only for the sacrifice of Ahab's personal possessions, while in the second he demands the surrender of the city ; that, however, lays an empha- sis on the words ' and the houses of thy servants * (verse 6) which the construction does not warrant. Another view (which is naturally suggested by the contrast of verses 5 and 6, but finds no support in verse 7) is that Ahab, while ready to yield all that is asked, resents the indignity of having his palace ransacked by the minions of Ben-hadad. It is possible that the confusion was in the mind of the writer himself, who may have reported the circumstances at second-hand, without a clear perception of the precise point at issue, 5, 6. The expression for "but at the beginning of verse 6 is usually preceded by a negative sentence ; hence Klostermann amends verse 5 so as to read, ' I did not send to thee, saying, Thou shalt give me . . . ; but to-morrow I will send . . . and they shall take it,' bringing out the contrast between a voluntary surrender and a humiliating search. For pleasant in thine eyes it is better to read, with LXX, * pleasant in their eyes.' 7. The LXX rendering referred to above is : ' for he has sent to me for my wives and for my sons [and for my daughters] ; my silver and my gold I have not withheld from him.' I KINGS 20. 8-H. N 247 for my gold ; and I denied him not. And all the elders 8 and all the people said unto him, Hearken thou not, neither consent. Wherefore he said unto the messengers 9 of Ben-hadad, Tell my lord the king, All that thou didst send for to thy servant at the first I will do : but this thing I may not do. And the messengers departed, and brought him word again. And Ben-hadad sent unto ro him, and said. The gods do so unto me, and more also, if the dust of Samaria shall suffice for handfuls for all the people that follow me. And the king of Israel n answered and said, Tell him. Let not him that girdeth on his artnour boast himself as he that putteth it off. And it came to pass, when Ben-hadad heard this message, 12 as he was drinking, he and the kings, in the pavilions, that he said unto his servants, Set yourselves in array. And they set themselves in array against the city. And, 13 behold, a prophet came near unto Ahab king of Israel, and said, Thus saith the Lord, Hast thou seen all this great multitude ? behold, I will deliver it into thine hand this day; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord. And Ahab said, By whom? And he said, Thus saith 14 10. Ben-hadad boasts that he has men enough to pulverize the city and carry it away in handfuls. 11. Tell Mxn. The LXX reads more forcibly, ' Enough M' Ahab's reply is a pithy proverb, to which parallels can be found in any language ; cf. the Latin, Ne trinmphtim canas ante victoriatn. 12. in the pavilions: strictly, 'booths,' temporary shelters for soldiers in the field (cf. 2 Sam. xi. 11). The word Set is a technical military term, which may be understood either of the formation of storming parties or (as marg.) of the erection of battering engines : the one view is just as likely to be correct as the other (cf. Ezek. xxiii. 24). 13. 14. The intervention of a prophet at this juncture appears to many critics uncalled-for and incredible ; but the two verses ' -\h n for nan. 248 I KINGS 20. 15-19. N the Lord, By the young men of the princes of the pro- vinces. Then he said, Who shall begin the battle ? And 15 he answered, Thou. Then he mustered the young men of the princes of the provinces, and they were two hundred and thirty two : and after them he mustered all the people, even all the children of Israel, being seven I'* thousand. And they went out at noon. But Ben-hadad was drinking himself drunk in the pavilions, he and the 17 kings, the thirty and two kings that helped him. And the young men of the princes of the provinces went out first ; and Ben-hadad sent out, and they told him, saying, 18 There are men come out from Samaria. And he said. Whether they be come out for peace, take them alive; or whether they be come out for war, take them alive. 19 So these went out of the city, the young men of the princes of the provinces, and the army which followed seem too closely wrought into the narrative to be treated as an interpolation. Apart from them we have no explanation of the very peculiar mode of attack adopted by Ahab. 15. young* men . . . provinces : servants of the provincial governors. The word for province {medinah) is used in the O. T. only in its primary sense of ^ administrative district,' and nlwaj-s in late books except here. In Syriac and Arabic it is the common word for 'city.' Why these men were chosen to lead the sally does not appear. The view of some commentators, that they were sent out as non-combatants with an army concealed behind them, has little foundation in the text. They seem to have gone out alone (verse 17) ; and so far as the victory can be explained by natural causes, it was due to the drunken folly of Ben-hadad, in breaking up his battle-line to capture the insignificant band alive (verse 18). 1*1. and Ben-hadad sent: better, as LXX, 'and they sent and told Ben-hadad.' 19. and the army which followed them. If they had been followed by an army (of 7,000 men) Ben-hadad would have been in no doubt whether they meant peace or war ; moreover the army must have been with the king when he issued from the city (verse 21). There are other indications of textual disorder, which might be remedied if (with Doorninck and Kittel) we transpose I KINGS 20. 20-25. N 249 them. And they slew every one his man ; and the 20 Syrians fled, and Israel pursued them : and Ben-hadad the king of Syria escaped on an horse with horsemen. And the king of Israel went out, and smote the horses 21 and chariots, and slew the Syrians with a great slaughter. And the prophet came near to the king of Israel, and 22 said unto him, Go, strengthen thyself, and mark, and see what thou doest : for at the return of the year the king of Syria will come up against thee. And the servants of the king of Syria said unto him, 23 Their god is a god of the hills; therefore they were stronger than we : but let us fight against them in the plain, and surely we shall be stronger than they. And 24 do this thing ; take the kings away, every man out of his place, and put captains in their room : and number thee 25 verses 20 and 21, and render the passage thus : ' (19) And when these had gone out from the city . . . (21) the king of Israel went out with the army after them, and captured (so LXX) the horses and chariots . . . (20) And they smote each his man, and the Syrians fled and Israel pursued them, and Ben-hadad the king of Syria escaped on a chariot horse.* 22. The prophet warns Ahab that the Syrians will renew the attack in the following year. XX. 23-34. The Syrians defeated at Aphek. The counsellors of Ben-hadad explain his defeat by the theory that the Hebrew deities, as hill-gods, had naturally proved invincible in the hilly country round Samaria ; and advise him to try conclusions with them next time in the plains. Accordingly, in the following year, the two armies meet at Aphek, in the Plain of Sharon, where Ahab, again encouraged by the anonymous prophet, achieves a still more brilliant victory over the Syrian host. Ben-hadad abjectly sues for his life, but is received by Ahab with royal honours and set at liberty, after engaging to restore the cities which his father had conquered, and to grant certain trading rights in Damascus to Israelitish subjects. 24. The idea underlying the verse seems to be that the Syrian army was composed of thirty-two corps (see xxii. 31), that these had originally been commanded by feudatory kings, who are now to be replaced by Syrian officers. But the term rendered captains means ' satraps ' pahoth. a loan-word, see on x. 15), which implies 250 I KINGS 20. 26-30. N an army, like the army that thou hast lost, horse for horse, and chariot for chariot : and we will fight against them in the plain, and surely we shall be stronger than they. And he hearkened unto their voice, and did so. 26 And it came to pass at the return of the year, that Ben-hadad mustered the Syrians, and went up to Aphek, 37 to fight against Israel. And the children of Israel were mustered, and were victualled, and went against them : and the children of Israel encamped before them like two little flocks of kids; but the Syrians filled the 28 country. And a man of God came near and spake unto the king of Israel, and said. Thus saith the Lord, Be- cause the Syrians have said. The Lord is a god of the hills, but he is not a god of the valleys ; therefore will I deliver all this great multitude into thine hand, and ye 39 shall know that I am the Lord. And they encamped one over against the other seven days. And so it was, that in the seventh day the battle was joined ; and the children of Israel slew of the Syrians an hundred 30 thousand footmen in one day. But the rest fled to a rearrangement of civil administration rather than a reorganiza- tion of the army. The verse is possibly an interpolation. 26. at the return of the year : cf. 2 Sam. xi. i, ' the time when kings go out to battle.' Aphek appears to have regularly served as the base for the Syrian invasions of Israel (see a Kings xiii. 17). Its situation is much disputed. Most probably it is to be identified with the Aphek of I Sam. xxix. i, and lay in the northern part of the Plain of Sharon (see on 2 Kings xiii. 22 ; and cf. G, A. Smith in EB, i. c. 191 f.). 27. and were victualled is a somewhat peculiar notice, omit- ted by the LXX. Benzinger's conjecture that the word is a corruption of a place-name, the rendezvous of the Israelites, deserves consideration. The word rendered * little flocks ' occurs only here, and is of uncertain signification. Nor does it appear why the Israelites are compared to iico flocks, instead of one. 28. Read, with marg., ' the ' man of God, the same individual as in verses 13, 22. See on xii. 2a. I KINGS 20.31-33. N ' 251 Aphek, into the city ; and the wall fell upon twenty and seven thousand men that were left. And Ben-hadad fled, and came into the city, into an inner chamber. And his servants said unto him, Behold now, we have p,i heard that the kings of the house of Israel are merciful kings : let us, we pray thee, put sackcloth on our loins, and ropes upon our heads, and go out to the king of Israel : peradventure he will save thy life. So they 32 girded sackcloth on their loins, and put ropes on their heads, and came to the king of Israel, and said, Thy servant Ben-hadad saith, I pray thee, let me live. And he said, Is he yet alive ? he is my brother. Now the 33 men observed diligently, and hasted to catch whether it were his mind ; and they said. Thy brother Ben-hadad. Then he said, Go ye, bring him. Then Ben-hadad came forth to him; and he caused him to come up into the 30. the wall fell upon twenty and seven thousand cannot be understood otherwise than literally : Benzinger's suggestion that it is a figurative way of saying that that number perished when the wall was taken is not admissible. No doubt the numbers, both in this verse and the preceding, excite surprise. into an inner chamber: lit. 'chamber for chamber,' or *a chamber within a chamber ' : the expression recurs in xxii. 25, a Kings ix. 2. 31. This tribute to the humanity of the Hebrew kings, which is probably a reflection of the national character, is extremely interesting. ropes upon our heads cannot well mean ' halters round our necks,' like the burghers of Calais before Edward III. Although the custom is not elsewhere mentioned in the O. T., the rope was probably at one time the headgear of the humblest classes (see Nowack, Archaologie, i. p. 125) ; and, like the sackcloth on the loins, was assumed by others as a mark of the deepest humiliation. 33. Render, ' Now the men took it as an omen, and eagerly snatched it from him, and said ' (cf. LXX, ' caught up the word from his mouth ') ; i.e. they seize on the word ' brother,' which had fallen from Ahab's lips, and hold him to it. 252 I KINGS 20. 34, ?5. NZ 34 chariot. And Ben-hadad said unto him, The cities which my father took from thy father I will restore ; and thou shalt make streets for thee in Damascus, as my father made in Samaria. And I, said Ahab, will let thee go with this covenant. So he made a covenant with him, and let him go. 35 [Z] And a certain man of the sons of the prophets said 34. We learn here for the first time that Omri had been obUged, not only to cede territory to Damascus, but to grant trading facilities to Aramaean merchants in Samaria. Ahab now secures similar privileges for his subjects in Damascus. streets, or ' bazaars ' ; cf. the Arabic sftk, which has the same double sense. And X, said Ahab. There can be no doubt that the words are Ahab's ; but something indicating the change of speaker must have fallen out of the text. To change the verb, with Wellhausen, to second person, 'thou shalt let me go,' is less natural. XX. 35-43. Ahafs Leniency denounced by a Prophet. The clemency shown by Ahab to his fallen foe, whether well-advised or fatuous, was no doubt severely criticized by many of his subjects ; and in no quarter was dissatisfaction more likely to be felt than in those nurseries of religious and patriotic enthusiasm, the prophetic schools. A member of one of these fraternities gives expression to this feeling by an acted parable, in which he plays the part of a man wounded in the recent fight, who had incurred the forfeit of his life by letting slip a prisoner who had been committed to his charge. Having put this case before the king, and been refused redress, he suddenly throws off his disguise, and (like Nathan on a well-known occasion) shows the astonished Ahab that he has unwittingly passed sentence on himself. For setting free an enemy who had fallen under Yahweh's ban he and his people would have to bear the penalty that ought to have been exacted of the conquered Syrian. The incident, if genuine, throws an important light on the fierce excitement prevailing in the prophetic societies of the time. At the same time, the section embodies a judgement on Ahab's conduct, which is certainly' not prepared for by what goes before ; and there are striking coinci- dences with ch. xiii, which, together with the want of any connexion with what precedes or follows, have led several writers (like Wellhausen), to assign the passage to a late period. It is worthy of mention, however, that the verses as a whole made on Kuenen the impression of high antiquity. 36. the sons of the prophets, here mentioned for the first I KINGS 20. .^6-38. Z 253 unto his fellow by the word of the I^okd, Smite me, I pray thee. And the man refused to smite him. Then 30 said he unto him, Because thou hast not obeyed the voice of the Lord, behold, as soon as thou art departed from me, a lion shall slay thee. And as soon as he was departed from him, a lion found him, and slew him. Then he found another man, and said. Smite me, I pray 37 thee. And the man smote him, smiting and wounding him. So the prophet departed, and waited for the king 38 by the way, and disguised himself with his headband time, frequently appear in the subsequent history (2 Kings ii, passim, iv. I, 38, V. 22, vi. I, ix. i), always, except here, in connexion with the work of Elisha. In Semitic idiom the phrase {bne hannebtim) means no more than ' members of the prophetic guilds' or communities, of which the individual member might be described indifferently as nabV simply (verse 38; 2 Kings ix. 4), or as be)i ndbV (Amos vii. 14). Prophecy in Israel had been from the first a social phenomenon, gathering men together in companies, and drawing susceptible natures into its circle (i Sam. x. 10 if., xix. 20 ff.) ; and it is not unlikely that between the times of Samuel and Elisha a somewhat stricter organization of these societies had been developed. The little we know of their manner of life is gathered from the passages just referred to. We learn that they had fixed settlements, probably in connexion with local sanctuaries (Beth-el, Gilgal, &c. : 2 Kings ii) ; that though coenobites (iv. 38 ff., vi. iff.) they were not celibates (iv. iff.); and that they were supported in part by charitable gifts of the laity (iv. 42, v. 22). They appear to have acknowledged Elisha as their head, but that they were the personal disciples of him or any other great prophet is nowhere suggested. It is therefore only in a ver}'- loose sense that such communities can be spoken of as ' schools ' ; and the traditional idea that they were theological seminaries for the training of candidates for the prophetic office is altogether misleading. by the word of the XiOBD. See on xiii. i. 36. Other points of resemblance to ch. xiii are the requirement of mechanical obedience to a prophetic oracle, and the punishment of disobedience by the agency of a lion. 38. his headband: rather, *a bandage.' The word (dpfter) occurs only here and verse 41 ; but the meaning is guaranteed by Assyrian. The A. V. followed the Vulg. in reading ^epher, 'with ashes upon his face.' 254 I KINGS 20. 39— 21. I. Z Ef 39 over his eyes. And as the king passed by, he cried unto the king : and he said, Thy servant went out into the midst of the battle; and, behold, a man turned aside, and brought a man unto me, and said, Keep this man : if by any means he be missing, then shall thy life be for his life, or else thou shalt pay a talent of silver. 40 And as thy servant was busy here and there, he was gone. And the king of Israel said unto him, So shall 41 thy judgement be ; thyself hast decided it. And he hasted, and took the headband away from his eyes ; and the king of Israel discerned him that he was of the 42 prophets. And he said unto him. Thus saith the Lord, Because thou hast let go out of thy hand the man whom I had devoted to destruction, therefore thy hfe shall go 43 for his life, and thy people for his people. And the king of Israel went to his house heavy and displeased, and came to Samaria. 21 [Ej2] And it came to pass after these things, that Naboth 40. busy here and there : lit. * doing those things and those. " But all ancient versions read more appropriately, ' looking here and there.' 41. discerned him that he was of the prophets. It would seem, though there is no other evidence of the fact, that the prophets at this time bore some distinctive mark on their persons, which could be concealed by a bandage over the eyes. 42. the man . . . destruction : lit. ' the man of my ban ' (cf. Isa. xxxiv. 5). The Hebrew word is herem, which is used in its strict and original sense of dedication to utter destruction of the spoils of war (see Driver, Notes on Samuel, p. 100 ff.). 43. heavy and displeased : cf. xxi. 4. xxi. Nabotli's Vineyard. The chapter obviously breaks the connexion between ch. xx and xxii ; and it is possible that it may have stood originally after ch. xix, as in the LXX. By the majority of critics it is regarded as the continuation of the history of Elijah in ch. xvii-xix. The arguments for that view arc not convincing, although they do I KINGS 21. 2. Ef- 255 the Jezreelite had a vineyard, which was in Jezreel, hard by the palace of Ahab king of Samaria. And Ahab 2 undoubtedly sliow that ch. xxi is much more closely akin to ch. xvii-xix than to ch. xx, xxii. The most noticeable points of affinity are the prominence given to Elijah, and the conception of the character of Ahab as a weak man dominated by the strong- willed and unscrupulous Jezebel. The irascible question of verse 20, moreover, presupposes some previous encounter between the king and the prophet, such as that of xviii. 17. On the other side, it has to be observed that (i) there is nothing to indicate that the central interest of the writer of ch. xxi is the personality of Elijah. (a) The career of Elijah finds its natural termination in the appoint- ment of his successor, and it is not just probable that the same author should after that introduce him again on the stage of public affairs. The only natural place for the incident in the life of Elijah would be between verses 18 and 19 of ch. xix. But (3) it has been remarked by Ewald that the murder of Naboth probably did more to bring about the revolution in which the house of Omri perished than the religious policy of Ahab ; and it may be added that the contest on Carmel becomes much more intelligible on the supposition that the heart of the people had been already stirred by the knowledge of this hideous crime : that, however, is impossible if ch. xxi be the sequel to ch. xix. (4) Ch. xxi, unlike ch. xvii-xix, has been manipulated by the compiler, whose hand is clearly recognizable in the style of verses 20 ''-24. The narrative is in fact closely parallel to xiv. 1-16 (cf xvi. 1-4) : it gives the usual prophetic announcement of the downfall of the dynasty, and the role ascribed to Elijah is not more prominent than that of Ahijah the Shilonite, or Jehu the son of Hanani in the earlier incidents. If, therefore, the passage was extracted from a history of Elijah, it would appear to have been a different document from ch. xvii-xix, as well as from ch. xx, xxii. Burney tries to prove that ch. xxi belongs to the same source as 2 Kings ix. i — x. 28 ; but his reasoning appears one-sided and inconclusive (see his Notes, p. 210 flf.). xxi. 1-4. Naboth's Refusal to sell his Vineyard. The tragic incident originates in a perfectly reasonable and just proposal of Ahab to his humble neighbour Naboth for the purchase of a vine- yard closely adjoining the palace at Jezreel. Naboth, however, true to the conservative instincts of his class, refuses on religious grounds to alienate his patrimony. The king takes this un- expected thwarting of his wish so much to heart that he retires to his couch, refusing to eat till Jezebel comes to his assistance. 1. The LXX does not contain the words, after these things, nor the superfluous clause, which was in Jezreel. Jezreel was 256 I KINGS 21. 3-6. Ef spake unto Naboth, saying, Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house ; and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it : or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the 3 worth of it in money. And Naboth said to Ahab, The Lord forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of 4 my fathers unto thee. And Ahab came into his house heavy and displeased because of the word which Naboth the Jezreelite had spoken to him : for he had said, I will not give thee the inheritance of my fathers. And he laid him down upon his bed, and turned away his face, 5 and would eat no bread. But Jezebel his wife came to him, and said unto him. Why is thy spirit so sad, that 6 thou eatest no bread ? And he said unto her. Because I spake unto Naboth the Jezreelite, and said unto him. Give me thy vineyard for money; or else, if it please apparently the summer residence of Ahab — a second capital where some of the most thrilling events of the time were transacted (xviii. 46 ; 2 Kings ix. 16 if., 3off.\ It is the modern Zer'tn, at the head of the valley of the same name, which descends eastward towards the Jordan. Naboth is here a Jezreelite, as in 2 Kings ix. ai, 25 f. ; the writer of xxii. 38 seems to have followed a different tradition which transferred the incident to Samaria. 3. See Lev. xxv. 23 ff., Num. xxxvi. 7 ff. 4. The first half of the verse (down to fathers) is wanting in the LXX, which reads instead, 'And the spirit of Ahab was troubled.' With this change the linguistic resemblance to xx. 43 disappears. turned away his face — to the wall ; cf, 2 Kings xx. 2. The LXX has, ' covered his face.' xxi. 5-16. Jezebel compasses the Death of Naboth and the Confis- cation of his Property. The queen, having ascertained the cause of her lord's disquietude, affects surprise at his pusillanimity, and undertakes to put him in secure possession of Naboth's vineyard. She issues an order to the elders of Jezreel to have Naboth put on his trial on a trumped-up charge of treason. Her directions are carried out to the letter by the obsequious elders. Naboth and his sons being publicly stoned to death outside the city. Ahab I KINGS 21. 7-10. Ef 257 thee, I will give thee another vineyard for it : and he answered, I will not give thee my vineyard. And 7 Jezebel his wife said unto him, Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel? arise, and eat bread, and let thine heart be merry : I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite. So she wrote letters in Ahab's 8 name, and sealed them with his seal, and sent the letters unto the elders and to the nobles that were in his city, and that dwelt with Naboth. And she wrote in the 9 letters, saying, Proclaim a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people : and set two men, sons of Belial, 10 before him, and let them bear witness against him, saying, Thou didst curse God and the king. And then then goes down (from Samaria ?) to take formal possession of the vineyard. 7. Dost thou . . . ? Better, ' Dost thou now exercise royal au- thority over Israel ? ' In other words, ' What is the good of being a king, if you cannot have your way in so trifling a matter ? ' 8. Ahab and Jezebel would seem to have been Hving at the time in Samaria. nobles, or ' freemen * : an Aramaic word, elsewhere found only in late passages (especially Nehemiah). It may be here a gloss on 'elders.' On the latter, see on viii. 2. The LXX omits * that were in his city.' 9. Proclaim a fast. Fasting is everywhere in the O. T. a sign of humiliation before God. The idea here seems to be that the community Hes under the anger of the Deity, on account of a grave crime committed by one of its members, which is to be exposed and punished. The place 'at the head of the people (marg.) which Naboth is to occupy can hardly be the seat of honour ; it must be the place commonly assigned to the accused and the witnesses in the judicial assembly. 10. two men : as witnesses, in accordance with law and usage (Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 15 ; Matt. xxvi. 60). sons of Belial : worthless fellows (see marg.), with no character to lose, and easily bribed for any ill purpose. Thou didst curse : cf. Exod. xxii. 28. The word for ctirse is a euphemism = 'bless' (as Job i. 5, &c.), used perhaps in the sense of 'bid farewell to,' hence 'renounce' or 'disown' (Davidson, Cantb. Bible^ on Job). S 258 I KINGS 21. 11-17. Ef 11 carry him out, and stone him, that he die. And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who dwelt in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, according as it was written in the letters which she had 1 2 sent unto them. They proclaimed a fast, and set Naboth 13 on high among the people. And the two men, sons of Belial, came in and sat before him : and the men of Belial bare witness against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did curse God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died. 14 Then they sent to Jezebel, saying, Naboth is stoned, 15 and is dead. And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money : 16 for Naboth is not alive, but dead. And it came to pass, when Ahab heard that Naboth was dead, that Ahab rose up to go down to the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, to take possession of it. 17 And the word of the Lord came to Elijah the Tishbite, 15. From 2 Kings ix. 26 we learn that Naboth's sons were also slain, as was perhaps necessary for the success of Jezebel's scheme. The freehold, being left without an heir, is confiscated to the crown. 16. to go down. Samaria stands over 1,000 feet higher than Jezreel. An unnatural refinement of hypocrisy is attributed to Ahab by the LXX, which says that on hearing of the death of Naboth he 'rent his garments and put on sackcloth.' Cf. verse 27. xxi. 17-29. Elijah's Encounter ivith Ahab. The suddenness of the prophet's appearance, in the very flush of Ahab's guilty satisfaction, is represented with great power in the opening verses. Unfortunately, the original narrative is broken off in the middle of verse 20, and replaced by a speech whose phrases betray the hand of the compiler. In this oracle there is no reference either to Ahab's personal fate or to the murder of I KINGS 21. 18-21. Ef D 259 saying, Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, 18 which dwelleth in Samaria : behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth, whither he is gone down to take possession of it. And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus 19 saith the Lord, Hast thou killed, and also taken pos- session? and thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the Lord, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine. And 20 Ahab said to Elijah, Hast thou found me, O mine enemy ? And he answered, I have found thee : [D] because thou hast sold thyself to do that which is evil in the sight of the Lord. Behold, I will bring evil upon thee, and will 21 Naboth (verse 23 being an interpolation); but simply an announce- ment of the retribution that was to overtake his descendants, on account of his religious delinquencies. The last three verses, describing Ahab's repentance and the postponement of the judge- ment, may, however, be part of the old narrative, since the doom pronounced on Ahab in verse 19 was actually transferred (in substance) to his son (2 Kings ix. 24 ff.). 18. The clause, which dwelleth (strictly, t's) in Samaria, can only mean that Ahab was to be found at that moment in Samaria ; it was not necessary to tell Elijah where the king usually dwelt. But Ahab was at the moment in Jezreel ; hence the words must be a gloss added by some one who supposed that Naboth, though a native of Jezreel, had his vineyard in Samaria (see xxii. 38). Benzinger, indeed, thinks that this may have been the view of the writer of the chapter, though it is inconsistent with 2 Kings ix. 21, 26. 19. Hast thou killed . . . ? The real character of Ahab's conduct is unmasked by this pointed sarcasm : it was as certain that he was the murderer as it was evident that he had taken possession. In the place. There was no literal fulfilment of this threat ; see on xxii. 38, 2 Kings ix. 24 fF. 20*. Hast then found me? Cf. xviii. 17: from being the 'troubler of Israel' Elijah has become the personal enemy of Ahab. Surely something more than is recorded must have passed between them.. 20 ''. because introduces the protasis to verse 21. The Deutero- nomic addition commences here : cf. the language with xi. 6, &c., and 2 Kings xvii. 7. 21, 22. Cf. xiv. 10, 16. S 2 26o I KINGS 21. 22-29. DZDD^Ef utterly sweep thee away, and will cut off from Ahab every man child, and him that is shut up and him that 3 2 is left at large in Israel: and I will make thine house like the house of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, and like the house of Baasha the son of Ahijah, for the provo- cation wherewith thou hast provoked me to anger, and 23 hast made Israel to sin. [Z] And of Jezebel also spake the Lord, saying. The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the 24 rampart of Jezreel. [D] Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat ; and him that dieth in the field 25 shall the fowls of the air eat. [D'^] (But there was none like unto Ahab, which did sell himself to do that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, whom Jezebel his wife 26 stirred up. And he did very abominably in following idols, according to all that the x\morites did, whom the 27 Lord cast out before the children of Israel.) [Ej^] And it came to pass, when Ahab heard those words, that he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his flesh, and a 8 fasted, and lay in sackcloth, and went softly. And the word of the Lord came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, 29 Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me ? 23. The verse breaks the flow of the Deuteronomic address. It is impossible to say whether it is a fragment of Elijah's original message or an interpolation based on 2 Kings ix. 36. In either case it is better to read, with some ancient versions, ' portion ' {helek\ instead of rampart (hel). 24. See xiv. 11, 25. 26 have been added by a still later hand (the second redactor). Their purpose is to counteract the impression apt to be made by verse 22, by pointing out that in reality no king had been so wicked as Ahab, and none had had so bad a wife. For But render ' Only,' or ' However.' 27-29 record a modification of the original penalty (verse 19), in consequence of Ahab's professions of penitence, which may have been quite sincere. The rending of the garments and the wearing of sackcloth are closely associated signs of mourning, which have become conventional in the O. T., and whose primary I KINGS 22. 1,2. Ef N 261 because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: but in his son's days will I bring the evil upon his house. [N] And they continued three years without war 22 between Syria and Israel. And it came to pass in the a third year, that Jehoshaphat the king of Judah came significance is therefore obscure. Possibly both denote a reversion to the primitive clothing of a pre-historic age, the rough hair loin-cloth being substituted for ordinary civihzed apparel (see on XX. 31). The LXX here repeats its assertion that Ahab ' put on sackcloth on the day when they killed Naboth the Jezreelite' (verse 16). xxii, 1-40. The Death of Ahab. See the introductory note on ch. xx. The present section is the continuation of that chapter. Ben-hadad had violated the treaty of Aphek by refusing to surrender the frontier city of Ramoth-gilead, and after three years' truce Ahab resolves to assert his rights by force. The chronicler, who as a rule ignores the history of the northern kingdom, inserts this passage as an incident in the reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xviii). xxii. I -12. The Expedition resolved on : Consultation of the Prophets. In the third year after the battle of Aphek Ahab calls a council of his officers, and reminds them that Ramoth-gilead has never been evacuated by the Syrians, and must now be recovered by force. He sends for his vassal Jehoshaphat of Judah, who promises to support him with his whole army. At Jehoshaphat's request, however, a convocation of prophets is first held, and four hundred prophets, led by a certain Zedekiah, unanimously predict the success of the enterprise. Jehoshaphat is still un- satisfied ; and Ahab has to admit that there was one man whose presence he had not thought desirable, because of the uniformly un- favourable character of his oracles. Nevertheless, at Jehoshaphat's urgent request, Micaiah the son of Imlah is summoned to give his advice. 2. The mention of Jehoshaphat's visit at this point gives rise to the impression that it was his presence in Samaria which suggested to Ahab the idea of an alliance against Syria. That is little likely to have been the case. He embarks on the expedition with evident reluctance, and would probably have kept out of it if he had been free to refuse. It is held by some that the marriage of Jehoshaphat's son to Ahab's daughter (2 Kings viii. 18) implies that Judah was at this time a vassal-state of Israel, and bound to 262 I KINGS 22. 3-S. N 3 down to the king of Israel. And the king of Israel said unto his servants, Know ye that Ramoth-gilead is ours, and we be still, and take it not out of the hand of the 4 king of Syria? And he said unto Jehoshaphat, Wilt thou go with me to battle to Ramoth-gilead? And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses. 5 And Jehoshaphat said unto the king of IsraeJ, Inquire, 6 I pray thee, at the word of the Lord to-day. Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, about four hundred men, and said unto them. Shall I go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear? And they said, Go up ; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand 7 of the king. But Jehoshaphat said_, Is there not here besides a prophet of the Lord, that we might inquire 8 of him ? And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the render military service when called upon. Hence Klostermann and Benzinger transpose 2 ^^ to the end of verse 4 : Ahab first decides on the expedition, and then calls on Jehoshaphat to join him, on which the latter comes to Samaria. 3. Bamotli-gilead. See on iv. 13. On the authority of Eusebius, who says it was fifteen Roman miles west of Philadelphia, it has usually been identified with es-Sal( (eighteen miles north of the Dead Sea), or the ruins oi el-Jal fid, six miles further north. But both these sites, as well as Jerdsh, twenty-two miles north-east of es-Salt, are much too far south for iv. 13 ; and the locality is probably to be sought on the Yarmuk, in the neighbourhood of Edre'i (see G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. p. 587, and Cooke's note in Driver's Deittcroiiomy, p. xviii). The maps show in that region a place Rcmthch, which might suit ; but Smith seems inclined to identify it with Ramoth-mizpeh (Joshua xiii. 26\ 4. See on verse 2. The courtesy of the communications need not be more than diplomatic. 5. For to-day render (as in i. 51) ' first of all.' 6. Ahab can still command the services of some four hundred prophets of Yahweh, a fact which reveals the difference of stand- point between this document and the Life of Elijah. I KINGS 22. 9-13. N 263 Lord, Micaiah the son of Imlah : but I hate him ; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so. Then 9 the king of Israel called an officer, and said, Fetch quickly Micaiah the son of Imlah. Now the king of 10 Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah sat each on his throne, arrayed in their robes, in an open place at the entrance of the gate of Samaria ; and all the prophets prophesied before them. And Zedekiah the son of 1 1 Chenaanah made him horns of iron, and said, Thus saith the Lord, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until they be consumed. And all the prophets prophesied 1 3 so, saying. Go up to Ramoth-gilead, and prosper: for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king. And the messenger that went to call Micaiah spake unto 13 8. The solitary representative of the higher prophecy— the prophecy which is true to itself, and utters its presage of disaster regardless of the superficial enthusiasms which others mistake for inspiration — is SUicaiali the son of Imlah. He is a man of kindred spirit with Elijah, and like him a true precursor of the ethical prophecy of the following centuries (cf. Jer. xxviii, 8). The passage is important, as the first instance of a cleavage in the ranks of the prophetic body, which runs through the whole subsequent history of the movement. 10. arrayed in their robes (Jit. ' clad in clothes ') : LXX, 'in full armour.' The phrase 'in a threshing-floor' (marg.) is difficult to understand, and might be a corrupt repetition of the word for 'clothes.* Another suggestion is that it contained a specification of the kind of clothes meant ; but it cannot be said, in view of verse 30, that such a specification is indispensable. 11. Cf. Jer. xxviii, where a prophet of the type of Zedekiah employs a similar symbolic action in support of a false prediction. xxii. 13-28. The Prophet of Evil. In the meantime Micaiah has been prompted by the officer sent to fetch him, and urged to fall into line with the other prophets, who had spoken as the king wished. Strangely enough, his first answer to Ahab's question is identical with theirs. Something in his tone, however, convinces Ahab that he is not speaking his inmost thought, and he adjures him to utter the whole truth. Micaiah then unfolds his reading 264 I KINGS 22. 14-17. N him, saying, BehoW now, the words of the prophets declare good unto the king with one mouth: let thy word, I pray thee, be hke the word of one of them, and 14 speak thou good. And Micaiah said. As the Lord Hveth, what the Lord saith unto me, that will I speak. 15 And when he was come to the king, the king said unto him, Micaiah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we forbear? And he answered him, Go up, and prosper ; and the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of 16 the king. And the king said unto him. How many times shall I adjure thee that thou speak unto me 17 nothing but the truth in the name of the Lord? And he said, I saw all Israel scattered upon the mountains, as sheep that have no shepherd : and the Lord said, These have no master; let them return every man to of the situation by relating two visions that had come to him. The first — a vision of Israel as a shepherdless flock, scattered on the mountains — is a veiled prediction of Ahab's death. The second penetrates still more deeply into the Divine purpose, and is remarkable for the judgement it pronounces on the origin of false prophecy. He has stood in the council of heaven, and seen how the Lord commissioned the spirit to utter through the court- prophets false oracles that should lure Ahab to his doom. Such an estimate of the perplexing phenomenon of spurious prophecy bears the stamp of antiquit}'. Jeremiah and Ezekiel denounced the false prophets of their time as men who spoke ' from their own heart,' without inspiration ; Micaiah, on the contrary, believes his opponents to be inspired, but inspired to prophesy lies. The import of his revelation, therefore, is that the expedition is decreed of Yahweh and must proceed, but that it is decreed in anger and destined to end disastrously for Israel. For his uncompromising attitude he is smitten on the cheek by Zedekiah, and by Ahab's orders sent to prison till his return. 13. the words of the prophets. Read, with LXX, 'the prophets have spoken ' — with one mouth good, &c. 14. Cf. Num. xxii. 38. 16. adjure thee: i. e. ' make thee swear.' 17. as sheep that have no shepherd: Num. xxvii. 17; Matt. ix. 36. I KINGS 22. 18-21. N 265 his house in peace. And the king of Israel said to 18 Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee that he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil.? And he said, 19 Therefore hear thou the word of the Lord : I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. And 20 the Lord said, Who shall entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead ? And one said on this manner : and another said on that manner. And there 2 1 came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, 18. Ahab seeks to remove the depressing effect of the oracle on the mind of Jehoshaphat by insinuating that it proceeds from personal animosity ; and Micaiah answers in verse 19. ' Not so ! ' (the LXX text is here preferable to the Heb. 'Therefore'), disclosing the source of his certainty by narrating a second vision. the host of heaven : perhaps the earliest instance of the use of this expression. Most frequently it denotes the stars, but here (as in Neh. ix. 6^, Dan. iv. 35, and perhaps Isa. xxiv. 21) it is evident that angelic ministers of Yahv^^eh are meant : these are called ' host of heaven ' because, like Yahweh Himself, they have their dwelling-place there. (See further, Driver in DB, ii. p. 429 f) 21. a spirit: Heb. 'the spirit.' Hebrew idiom does not abso- lutel}'^ preclude the indefinite rendering, but the article has probably in this case its natural force ; and the question arises, what spirit is meant? The spirit is evidently the personified principle of prophecy, the superhuman power which was recognized as the source of the prophetic ecstasy. In other passages these manifesta- tions are ascribed directly to the spirit of Yahweh (i Sam. x. 10, &c.), i. e. to the direct action of God on the prophets. Here the spirit is an independent personal agent, and it is difficult to say how this idea is related to the simpler conception of the immediate Divine inspiration of the prophets, or what judgement is expressed on the worth of the more excited forms of inspiration exhibited by Zedekiah and his fellows. It is certainly remarkable that Micaiah claims to have a truer knowledge of God's will than that imparted by the spirit ; and still more remarkable that the spirit himself becomes, for a special purpose, a * lying spirit.' The falsification • of prophecy appears to be traced, not to the imperfection of its human medium, but to the supernatural source from which it emanates. To our minds, such a theory of prophecy involves 266 I KINGS 22. 22-28. N 22 I will entice him. And the Lord said unto him, Where- with ? And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said. Thou shalt entice him, and shalt prevail also : go forth, 23 and do so. Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets ; and 24 the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee. Then Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah came near, and smote Micaiah on the cheek, and said, Which way went the 25 spirit of the Lord from me to speak unto thee? And Micaiah said, Behold, thou shalt see on that day, when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself. 26 And the king of Israel said. Take Micaiah, and carry him back unto Amon the governor of the city, and to 27 Joash the king's son; and say. Thus saith the king. Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of affliction, until I come in :8 peace. And Micaiah said. If thou return at all in peace, the Lord hath not spoken by me. And he said, Hear, ye peoples, all of you. moral difficulties greater than those it solves ; but it is enough that it enabled a true prophet to hold fast his faith, in spite of the fact that men possessed by a spirit not their own were prophesying what he knew to be a lie. 24. To Zedekiah, at all events, the author of all prophecy is the spirit of tlie ^OSD. There is no reason to doubt the sincerity of this man's belief in his own inspiration. 25. The ultimate criterion on which Micaiah relies is the fulfil- ment of the prediction (cf. verse 28 ; Deut. xviii. 21 f. ; Jer. xxviii. 9). In reality Micaiah utters a fresh prediction, of the nature of a sign, as did Jeremiah in similar circumstances (xxviii. 16 f,). into an inner chamber. See on xx. 30. 26. Joash, the son of Ahab, is not elsewhere mentioned. 28. And he said, Hear . . . The clause, which is wanting in the LXX, is a citation of the opening words of the canonical Book of Micah (i. 2). It is the marginal gloss of an uncritical reader who erroneously identified the two prophets. I KINGS 22. 29-32. N 267 So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of 29 Judah went up to Ramoth-gilead. And the king of 30 Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, I will disguise myself, and go into the battle ; but put thou on thy robes. And the king of Israel disguised himself, and went into the battle. Now the king of Syria had commanded the thirty and 31 two captains of his chariots, saying, Fight neither with small nor great, save only with the king of Israel. And 3^ it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw Jehoshaphat, that they said, Surely it is the king of xxii. 29-38. The Battle. Undeterred by the warning just uttered, the two kings proceed to battle ; though Ahab takes the precaution of disguising himself as a common soldier. The Syrian captains, having received orders to direct all their efforts against the king of Israel, at first surrounded Jehoshaphat, but ceased to press him on discovering that he was not the man they sought. The arrow of destiny was shot at random by an unknown Syrian bowman, and it penetrated the joints of Ahab's armour, inflicting a mortal wound. The king, however, was propped up in his chariot, and kept his place in the fighting line till the evening, when he died. It is to be inferred that the battle had gone in favour of Israel, though the fruits of victory were lost when the cry went through the host that the king was dead, causing the troops to disperse to their homes. The bod}' of Ahab was brought to Samaria and there buried ; and a late writer found a meagre fulfilment of Elijah's prophecy (xxi. 19) in the circumstance that the blood washed from his chariot was lapped by dogs at the pool of Samaria. 30. Ahab's disguising of himself covers neither a cowardly design to save his own life by the sacrifice of Jehoshaphat's nor a chivalrous resolve to share the risks of the common soldier. It merely reveals his secret anxiety lest Micaiah's vision should come true, and is perhaps dictated by the superstitious notion that by changing his identity he can escape the notice of the unseen powers of evil. That he was aware of Ben-hadad's orders concerning him (verse 31) we can hardly suppose. 31. On the number 32, see on xx. 24. It is not given in 2 Chron. xviii. 30, and may have been inserted in the text either from XX. I or xx. 24. The command itself is a striking tribute to Ahab's prowess. 32. Seeing only one Richmond in the field the captains 268 I KINGS 22.33-37. N Israel ; and they turned aside to fight against him : and 33 Jehoshaphat cried out. And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw that it was not the king of 34 Israel, that they turned back from pursuing him. And a certain man drew his bow at a venture, and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the harness : where- fore he said unto the driver of his chariot, Turn thine hand, and carry me out of the host; for I am sore 35 wounded. And the battle increased that day : and the king was stayed up in his chariot against the Syrians, and died at even : and the blood ran out of the wound into 36 the bottom of the chariot. And there went a cry throughout the host about the going down of the sun, saying, Every man to his city, and every man to his 37 country. So the king died, and was brought to Samaria ; naturally took him for the king of Israel. For turned aside agfainst him it is better to read, with LXX and 2 Chron. xviii. 31, 'surrounded him.' The cry of Jehoshaphat was probably a shout to his men. The chronicler understood it to be a prayer to God, and adds that 'the Lord helped him,' &c. Similarly LXX (L). 34. at a venture : lit. ' in his innocence ' (cf. marg.), never dreaming that his arrow was to decide the battle. The word rendered in marg. ' lower armour ' probably denotes the tassets or jointed appendages of the cuirass, covering the abdomen. The shaft thus entered ' between the tassets and the breastplate,' wounding the lower part of the body. out of the host : better, as LXX and Chronicles, * out of the battle.' 35. The first impulse of the wounded king had been to with- draw from the field ; but noting the increasing fierceness of the conflict he seems to have determined to remain and see it through. and died at even. Read, as 2 Chron. xviii. 34, 'until the even.' LXX has ' from morn till even,' and adds the words ' and he died at even ' at the end of the verse, which is probably right. 36. * And the shrill cry passed through the camp,' &c. 37. The verse should read (continuing verse 36), 'for the king is dead. And they came to Samaria, and buried the king,' &c. I KINGS 22. 38-41. NZD 269 and they buried the king in Samaria. [Z] And they 38 washed the chariot by the pool of Samaria; and the dogs hcked up his blood ; (now the harlots washed themselves there ;) according unto the word of the Lord which he spake. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Ahab, 39 and all that he did, and the ivory house which he built, and all the cities that he built, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? So Ahab slept with his fathers ; and Ahaziah his son 40 reigned in his stead. And Jehoshaphat the son of Asa began to reign over 41 38 seems to have been added by a later hand, in order to bring the end of Ahab into some sort of correspondence with the doom pronounced by EHjah, after the murder of Naboth (xxi. 19). It misses the essential point that Ahab was to die in the same place as Naboth (i. e. outside Jezreel), and overlooks the fact that this sentence was afterwards suspended and transferred from Ahab to his son (xxi. 29). An interpretation so strained and so disparaging to Ahab is little likely to have suggested itself to the author of ch. XX, xxii, who besides had no occasion to refer to a prophecy recorded only in a separate document. xxii. 39, 40. Concluding Forniida. The long account of the reign is wound up by the compiler with the usual reference to the chronicles of Israel. Incidentally we learn that (i) Ahab had built an ivory house (i.e. a palace lavishly ornamented with ivory : cf. Amos iii. 15 ; Ps. xlv. 8 ; Canticles vii. 4), and (2) had fortified a number of cities, xxii. 41-50. Jehoshaphat of Jndah. The most important political events of the reign are recorded in their connexion in the history of the northern kingdom (xxii. 1-38 ; 2 Kings iii), and the section devoted specially to Jehoshaphat consists mainly of the editorial framework. In the concluding formula, however, two annalistic notices have been preserved (verses 46-49 == Hebrew, 47-50). In the LXX the whole section stood originally before xvi. 29 (see the note there). This is the case both in the Vatican MS. (B) and in the Lucianic recension ; although the former repeats it here, with some variations and the omission of verses 46-49, and adopting of course the Hebrew chronology. xxii. 41-44. Introduction. 270 I KINGS 22.42-18. DKJ 4 a Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel. Jeho- shaphat was thirty and five years old when he began to reign ; and he reigned twenty and five years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Azubah the daughter of Shilhi. 43 And he walked in all the way of Asa his father; he turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the Lord : howbeit the high places were not taken away ; the people still sacrificed and burnt incense 44 in the high places. And Jehoshaphat made peace with the 45 king of Israel. Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, and his might that he shewed, and how he warred, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the 46 kings of Judah ? [K J] iVnd the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he put 47 away out of the land. And there was no king in Edom : 48 a deputy was king. Jehoshaphat made ships of Tarshish 41. the foTirth year of Ahab. See on xvi. 29. 43. the high places. See on iii. 2, 3, xv. 14. xxii. 46-49. An Expedition to Ophir planned and frustrated. (Cf. 2 Chron. xx. 35-37.) The traffic with Ophir had probably been discontinued since the days of Solomon. The recovery, under unknown circumstances, of the suzerainty over Edom presented an opportunity to reopen it ; and with this object in view Jehoshaphat caused a large ship to be built at Ezion-geber. The vessel, however, was wrecked in that port ; and this so dis- couraged Jehoshaphat that he refused to join Ahaziah of Israel in a second venture. The chronicler's version of the incident is slightly different. According to him, Ahaziah had been a partner in the enterprise from the first (which is in itself probable, since Jehoshaphat was no doubt still a vassal of Israel) ; and the shipwreck put an end to the hopes of both. Ahaziah began to reign in the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat, so that the incident belongs to the later period of the latter's reign. 46. Cf. XV. 12. 47. no kinsf in Edom. Some years later (2 Kings iii) we find that there was again a king in Edom, who however was obviously a vassal of Jehoshaphat. a deputy was king*. The two Hebrew words which compose this clause may be taken with the following verse, and slightly I KINGS 22. 49-53. KJD 271 to go to Ophir for gold : but they went not ; for the ships were broken at Ezion-geber. Then said Ahaziah the son 49 of Ahab unto Jehoshaphat, Let my servants go with thy servants in the ships. But Jehoshaphat would not. [D] And Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers, and was 50 buried with his fathers in the city of David his father : and Jehoram his son reigned in his stead. Ahaziah the son of Ahab began to reign over Israel 51 in Samaria in the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and he reigned two years over Israel. And 52 he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of his father, and in the way of his mother, and in the way of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherein he made Israel to sin. And he served Baal, 53 and worshipped him, and provoked to anger the Lord, the God of Israel, according to all that his father had done. changed so as to read : * And the deputy of king Jehoshaphat made.' (So Stade and others, following out a hint suggested by the LXX.) The construction thus obtained is more natural than the ordinary renderings. 48. ships of TarsMsli. See on x. 22. The LXX has the sing, 'ship' throughout, and even the Hebrew contains an indi- cation that this was the original reading. On OpMr and Eziou- sreber, see on ix. 26, 28. I Kings xxii. 51 — 2 Kings i. i8. Ahaziah of Israel. xxii. 51-53 (= Hebrew, 52-54). Introduction. 51. iB. the seventeenth year. The statement reveals an irregularity which has crept somehow into the Hebrew chrono- logical system. Reckoning from verse 41, the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat would bring us only to the twentieth year of Ahab, whose reign lasted twenty-two years, LXX (L) avoids the inaccuracy by adhering to what seems to have been the original scheme of the LXX (see on xvi. 29 and xxii. 41), reading, 'in the twenty-fourth year^,' It is curious that the same mode of reckon- ing has invaded the Hebrew text in 2 Kings i. 17. * First year of Ahab = second of Jehoshaphat (xvi. 29) ; therefore twenty-second of Ahab = twenty-third of Jehoshaphat, and first of Ahaziah = twenty-fourth of Jehoshaphat. See Introduction, p. 40. THE SECOND BOOK OF THE KINGS 1 [KI] And Moab rebelled against Israel after the death 2 of Ahab. [Ej^] And Ahaziah fell down through the i. I. The Revolt of Moab. The verse is a short annalistic notice of the revolt, a fuller account of which is reserved for the reign of Jehoram (ch. iii). It is difficult to explain its insertion at this point. Benzinger surmises that it may have been the introduction to a narrative of the struggle which once stood here, but was afterwards removed because of its inconsistency with ch. iii. But that is scarcely credible, unless we assume that ch. iii was added after the compilation of the book ; and if we do make that assumption it is just as likely that the verse contains all that the compiler intended to record about the incident. The dis- cussion of the historical situation may be deferred till we come to ch. iii. (On the division of the original Book of Kings into two at this point, see Introduction, p. 3.) i. 2-17*. Elijah predicts the Death of Ahazialu Ahaziah had fallen through a lattice in the upper chamber of his palace, and sends to a heathen oracle in the Philistine city of Ekron to inquire whether he should recover from his injuries. The event furnished the occasion of Elijah's last public appearance as a prophet and champion of the national religion. After giving a terrible demonstration of his preternatural power, he is brought to the bedside of the king and announces his impending death. The source from which the narrative is taken belongs to the cycle of prophetic biographies of which we have so many examples in this part of the history. By some recent critics, verses 2-8 are regarded as the original kernel of the passage, and assigned to the same author as i Kings xvii-xix, xxi ; the remainder (9-16) being treated as a legendary supplement of much later date. One point in favour of the analysis is a peculiarity in the spelling of the name Elijah, in which verses 2-8 stand almost alone in the whole O, T.^. * The exact facts are these : the usual form ^in'^-s? is never used in verses 2-S, but four times in verses 9-1G. The abbreviated form rrbw occurs three times in verses 2-8, and once in verses 9-16. The only other place in the O. T. where the shorter form is used is Mai. iv. 5 [«= Hebrew, iii. 23]. II KINGS 1. 3. Ej3 273 lattice in his upper chamber that was in Samaria, and was sick : and he sent messengers, and said unto them, Go, inquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron whether I shall recover of this sickness. But the angel of the Lord 3 But it is evident that if this fact makes against the unity of the present narrative, it militates equally against the view that verses 2-8 are from the same hand as i Kings xvii-xix or xxi. A certain disparity of conception between the two parts may be felt ; and it must be admitted that the first half presents a conception of Elijah in no way incongruous with that of i Kings xvii-xix. At the same time the arguments against the combination of xxi with xvii-xix apply with equal force to this passage ; and apart from the question of the liomogeneity of the three narratives, the hypothesis of a late interpolation has not much utility. 2. The lattice {lit. 'network' — the same word as i Kings vii. 17 ff.) protected the aperture which served as a window in the upper chamber. The latter, in ordinary one-storied houses, consisted of a single room erected on the flat roof (see on iv. 10), and often with one or two of its walls continuous with those of the main building. In a royal palace the structure would not be so simple. Baal-zebnb means etymologically and according to tradition, 'Lord (or Baal) of flies,' i. e. probably a god who was supposed to send or remove the plague of flies. It would be in accordance with Semitic analogies if Zabub could be taken as a local designa- tion ; but if it were so, the god could hardly have been described as the g-od of Ekron. Cheyne thinks the name a corruption of Baal-zebul (*Lord of the high house '): cf. Beelzebul, Matt. x. 25 (R. V. marg.). There is certainly a connexion between these two names ; though how the name of this obscure local deity came to be transferred to the ' prince of the devils ' we do not know. Ekron, the nearest to Israel of the five chief Philistine cities, is identified with 'Akir, south-west from er-Ramlehj and about nine miles from the coast. 3. The ang-el of the ZiOBD is here and in verse 15 the medium of prophetic revelation, a function not assigned to him in i Kings xvii-xix or xxi (with the doubtful and in any case trivial exception of xix. 7). The formula used in these narratives is * the word of Yahweh came ' ; or (as in xix. 15 flf.) God speaks to Elijah face to face. In the patriarchal and other ancient records the angel of Yahweh is identified with Yahweh Himself, being in fact a per- sonification of the theophany : or, to put it otherwise, he is Yahweh Himself in visible self-manifestation. But the present passage does not stand quite on the same level : the angel here is 274 II KINGS 1. 4-9. Ej' said to Elijah the Tishbite, Arise, go up to meet the messengers of the king of Samaria, and say unto them, Is it because there is no God in Israel, that ye go to 4 inquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron ? Now therefore thus saith the Lord, Thou shalt not come down from the bed whither thou art gone up, but shalt surely die. 5 And Elijah departed. And the messengers returned unto him, and he said unto them, AVhy is it that ye are 6 returned? And they said unto him, There came up a man to meet us, and said unto us, Go, turn again unto the king that sent you, and say unto him. Thus saith the Lord, Is it because there is no God in Israel, that thou sendest to inquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron? therefore thou shalt not come down from the bed 7 whither thou art gone up, but shalt surely die. And he said unto them, What manner of man was he which 8 came up to meet you, and told you these w^ords ? And they answered him. He was an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins. And he said, It is 9 Elijah the Tishbite. Then the king sent unto him a captain of fifty with his fifty. And he went up to him : and, behold, he sat on the top of the hill. And he spake unto him, O man of God, the king hath said, simply an individual angel— one of the many messengers who execute Yahweh's behests. Is it because, &c. Elijah's 'jealousy' for the Lord God of Hosts comes out in this indignant question. 8. an hairy man {lit. 'possessor of hair') : i.e. one clothed with a garment of hair ; see on i Kings xix. 19. The grirdle (W. R. Smith, ' waistcloth ') of leather is not elsewhere referred to in the O. T. (cf. Mark i. 6). 9 ff. The calling down of fire from heaven on the presumptuous soldiery is the only painful episode in all the histories of Elijah ; and it is difficult to think that the author of ch. xvii-xix would have lowered the moral grandeur of his hero by so extravagant a display of superhuman power. 11 KINGS 1. 10-16. Ef 275 Come down. And Elijah answered and said to the 10 captain of fifty, If I be a man of God, let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee and thy fifty. And there came down fire from heaven, and consumed him and his fifty. And again he sent unto him another 11 captain of fifty with his fifty. And he answered and said unto him, O man of God, thus hath the king said, Come down quickly. And Elijah answered and said 12 unto them. If I be a man of God, let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee and thy fifty. And the fire of God came down from heaven, and consumed him and his fifty. And again he sent the captain of a third 13 fifty with his fifty. And the third captain of fifty went up, and came and fell on his knees before Elijah, and besought him, and said unto him, O man of God, I pray thee, let my life, and the Hfe of these fifty thy servants, be precious in thy sight. Behold, there came fire down 14 from heaven, and consumed the two former captains of fifty with their fifties : but now let my life be precious in thy sight. And the angel of the Lord said unto Elijah, 15 Go down with him : be not afraid of him. And he arose, and went down with him unto the king. And he 16 said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Forasmuch as thou hast sent messengers to inquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron, is it because there is no God in Israel to inquire of his word ? therefore thou shalt not come down from the bed whither thou art gone up, but shalt surely die. 11. And lie answered is probably a scribal error for ^ And he went up ' (as verses 9, 13). 13. the captain of a third fifty: rather, as LXX (L), ' a third captain of fifty.' The behaviour of this third captain illustrates the respect due to a prophet, which it is obviously the writer's design to inculcate. 16. is it because . . . word? The words are a gloss from verses 3, 6, and should be omitted, with LXX. 276 II KINGS 1. 17— 2. I. Ej^DEs 17 So lie died according lo the word of the Lord which Elijah had spoken. | D] And Jehoram began to reign in his stead in the second year of Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah ; because he had no son. 18 Now the rest of the acts of Ahaziah which he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? 2 [Es] And it came to pass, when the Lord would take up i. 17'', 18. Conclusion. The formula is irregular in several respects. ,i) Verse 18 ought to precede 17^, and between the two there should be the notice of the king's burial. (2) The synchronism in verse 17 belongs to the introductory formula of the succeeding reign. (3) That synchronism (' in the second year of Jehoram') is based on the system peculiar to the LXX (see on I Kings xxii. 51), and is at variance with the scheme of the Hebrew text i,cf iii. i). Now, we are here confronted by a very intricate problem of textual criticism. The MSS. of the LXX exhibit great variations ; but they agree in inserting at this point the introductory notice on Jehoram of Israel (a parallel to iii. 1-3). And they continue significantly : ' And the anger of the Lord was kindled against the house of Ahab,' which looks very like a preface to the extirpation of the dynasty recorded in ch. ix, x. Further, it must be observed that if the chronological system of the LXX was ever consistently carried out in any series of MSS., the reign of Jehoram of Judah (viii. 16-24) must have been placed between those of Ahaziah and Jehoram of Israel. All these facts, together with others to be noted later (viii. 16, ix. 29), go to show that the disorder in this passage is connected with sweeping operations on the text, in the course of which the independent Elisha-narratives (see below) were freely transposed in accordance with the views of different editors. 17. After Jehoram insert with LXX (L), ' his brother.' in the second year begins a new sentence, a fragment of the introductory formula of Jehoram of Israel (.see above;. ii. Elijah succeeded by Elisha. That the chapter belongs to the mass of prophetic literature that had gathered round the names of the two great northern prophets is obvious. As there was a Life of Elijah (see on i Kings xvii-xix), so there must have been a Life of Elisha, or at least a col- lection of traditions and anecdotes respecting Elisha, a large num- ber of which are preserved in the earlier part of 2 Kings (ch. ii, iv- II KINGS 2. 2. Es 277 Elijah by a whirlwind into heaven, that Eh"jah went with EHsha from Gilgal. And Ehjah said unto Ehsha, Tarry 2 vii, viii. 1-15, xiii. 14-21). These may be supposed to have been reduced to writing by the sons of the prophets in various localities, and afterwards put loosely together, either in an independent work or as an appendix to the history of Elijah. There is no reason to doubt that these narratives faithfully reflect the general character of Elisha's work, which touched life at much lower levels than that of his great predecessor. For reasons stated below, the account of Elijah's translation in verses 1-18 is to be regarded as the introduc- tion to the group of Elish a- narratives, rather than the close of the biography of Elijah. ii. 1-18. The Translation of Elijah. Elijah, accompanied by Elisha, pays a series of farewell visits to the prophetic communi- ties in the vicinity of the Jordan valley ; and at each place finds the presentiment of his approaching departure echoed by members of the local fraternity. The two then cross the Jordan together, into the region where Moses lay buried in a grave which no man knew. Elisha, who has persistently refused to leave his master, asks as a last request that he may be so endowed with the spirit of Elijah as to be able to continue his work. Elijah's answer is hesitating and conditional : if a spiritual vision of the transla- tion be vouchsafed to him, then he will know that his prayer is granted. Suddenly, as they walk together, they are separated by a chariot and horses of fire ; and Elijah is caught up into heaven. Elisha, understanding the significance of the vision for himself, takes up the mantle that had fallen from Elijah ; and with it repeats the miracle of dividing the Jordan, thus proving himself the successor of Elijah. Fifty prophets who witnessed the scene at once acknowledge him as the head of their order, though their lingering doubts of the reality of Elijah's translation are not removed till they have searched the district for three days. The narrative would undoubtedly form in every respect a worthy sequel to i Kings xvii-xix ; but it contains some features which show that we have to do with a different writing. (i) Elijah's close personal relations with the prophetic guilds is nowhere alluded to in any of the Elijah-narratives, and is not in keeping with the impression of solitariness which is reflected from all these records. It might of course be supposed that he had changed his manner of life before the end (Ewald) ; but the feeling remains that we have rather to do with distinct concep- tions of his career. (2) In i Kings xix Elisha is already desig- nated as Elijah's successor and invested with his mantle ; here, on the contrarj', the succession is still doubtful, and contingent on an event which is hidden even from Elijah himself. (3) The «78 II KINGS 2. 3-7. Es here, I pray thee ; for the Lord hath sent me as far as Beth-el. And Elisha said, As the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth, I will not leave thee. So they went 3 down to Beth-el. And the sons of the prophets that were at Beth-el came forth to Elisha, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Lord will take away thy master from thy head to-day? And he said. Yea, I know it; 4 hold ye your peace. And Elijah said unto him, Elisha, tarry here, I pray thee ; for the Lord hath sent me to Jericho. And he said. As the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth, I will not leave thee. So they came to 5 Jericho. And the sons of the prophets that were at Jericho came near to Elisha, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Lord will take away thy master from thy head to-day ? And he answered, Yea, I know it ; hold C ye your peace. And Elijah said unto him. Tarry here, I pray thee ; for the Lord hath sent me to Jordan. And he said. As the Lord liveth, and as thy .soul liveth, I will 7 not leave thee. And they two went on. And fifty men of the sons of the prophets went, and stood over against writer of i Kings xix. 15 ft', could scarcely have thought of Elijah as 'The chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof (cf. xiii. 14). When we consider that the incident marks the beginning of Elisha's ministry as much as the close of Elijah's, we naturally assign it to the senes of narratives with which it has the closest aflinities, those, namely', pertaining to the Life of Elisha. 1. Gilgal is spoken of as if it were the ordinary residence of Elijah and Elisha (cf. iv. 38). .Since they 'went down ' to Beth-el (verse 2) it cannot be the Gilgal of Joshua iv. 19, which laj' between Jericho and the Jordan. There must have been man3' ^ignls (cromlechs) in the countr}', and the one here meant must have been in the central high land, perhaps the present Jiljilia, about seven miles north of Beth-el {G. A. Smith, //is/. Geog. p. 494). 3. On sons of the prophets, see on i Kings xx. 35. 4. Jericho. See on i Kings xvi. 34. •7. The fifty men are witnesses of the double miracle of dividing the water 'verse 15^ ; but not, of course, of what took place on the further side. II KINGS 2. 8-12, Es 279 them afar off: and they two stood by Jordan. And 8 Eh'jah took his mantle, and v;rapped it together, and smote the waters, and they were divided hither and thither, so that they two w^ent over on dry ground. And 9 it came to pass, when they were gone over, that Ehjah said unto EHsha, Ask what I shall do for thee, before I be taken from thee. And Elisha said, I pray thee, let a double portion of thy spirit be upon me. And he said, 10 Thou hast asked a hard thing : nevertheless, if thou see me when I am taken from thee, it shall be so unto thee ; but if not, it shall not be so. And it came to pass, as n they still went on, and talked, that, behold, t?iere appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, which parted them both asunder ; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. And Elisha saw it, and he cried. My father, my 1 2 father, the chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof ! 9. a double portion is rightly explained in the margin as the portion of the firstborn son, which was twice as much as that of tlie other sons (Deut. xxi. 17). It requires some hardihood to take the expression literally, and then prove by a comparison of mira- cles that Elisha was really twice as great a prophet as Elijah (Ecclus. xlviii. 12). The burden of Elisha's petition is that he may be worthy to succeed Elijah as head of the prophetic body. thy spirit. See verse 15. 10. The vision of heavenly realities is withheld from ordinary men (see vi. 17) ; if that gift should be bestowed on Elisha, it will be the sign that God has answered his prayer. 11. a chariot of fire, &c. The religious imagination had clothed the idea of Yahweh's omnipotence in forms derived from earthly warfare ; his heavenly army contained horses and chariots in- visible to mortal eyes, composed of the fiery element in which Yahweh dwells. Passages to be compared are vi. 17 ; Hab. iii. 8 f. ; Ps. Ixviii. 17. The conception is related on the one hand to the name Yahweh of Hosts, and perhaps on its lower mythological side to the horses and chariots of the sun-god, of which we read in xxiii. 11. 12. the chariots of Israel. The apostrophe is more probably addressed to Elijah himself than to the chariots, &c., which had borne him away. This at least is the only kind of reference possible 28o II KINGS 2. 13-17. Es And he saw him no more : and he took hold of his own 13 clothes, and rent them in two pieces. He took up also the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and went back, 14 and stood by the bank of Jordan. And he took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the Lord, the God of Elijah ? and when he also had smitten the waters, they were divided T5 hither and thither: and Elisha went over. And when the sons of the prophets which were at Jericho over against him saw him, they said, The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha. And they came to meet him, and bowed 16 themselves to the ground before him. And they said unto him, Behold now, there be with thy servants fifty strong men ; let them go, we pray thee, and seek thy master : lest peradventure the spirit of the Lord hath taken him up, and cast him upon some mountain, or 17 into some valley. And he said. Ye shall not send. And when they urged him till he was ashamed, he said, Send. They sent therefore fifty men ; and they sought three in xiii. 14 ; the meaning in both cases would be that the prophet was a greater strength to his nation than all its chariots and horses. 13. the mantle of Elijali. See on i Kings xix. 19. 14. lie also: answering to marg., 'even he.' Both renderings are at fault. The Hebrew phrase {^aph htV) should be read ^cpho' : it does not need to be translated, being merely an intensive par- tide adding emphasis to the preceding question. 15. The words at Jericho must have come in by mistake (see verse 7) ; the bed of the Jordan is not visible from Jericho. By the spirit of Elijah these prophets understand the Divine energy as the source of thaumaturgic power ; and this is probably the sense of Elisha's praj'er also (verse 9). 16. lest peradventiire the spirit. See i Kings xviii. 12. The suddenness and mj'stery of Elijah's appearances and dis- appearances had given rise to the belief that he was transported hither and thither by the spirit of the Lord : for the idea, of. Ezek. iii. 14, viii. 3, xi. i, 24, &c., where, however, the condition is ecstatic. II KINGS 2. iS-24. Es 281 days, but found him not. And tliey came back to him, 18 while he tarried at Jericho ; and he said unto them, Did I not say untu you, Go not? And the men of the city said unto EHsha, Behold, we 19 pray thee, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord seeth : but the water is naught, and the land miscarrieth. And he said, Bring me a new cruse, and put salt therein. 20 And they brought it to him. And he went forth unto 21 the spring of the waters, and cast salt therein, and said, Thus saith the Lord, I have healed these waters ; there shall not be from thence any more death or miscarrying. So the waters were healed unto this day, according to the 22 word of Elisha which he spake. And he went up from thence unto Beth-el : and as he 23 was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head ; go up, thou bald head. And he 24 ii. 19-22. Healing of the Waters of Jericho. The passage em- bodies a local tradition to the effect that the principal fountain of Jericho owed its salubrious qualities to a miracle performed on it by Elisha. The 'Aitt es-Sultan, a perennial fountain of sweet and palatable water rising at the foot of the ruins of the ancient city, is sometimes called the Fountain of Elisha ; and is no doubt the source referred to here. Its previous badness seems to have consisted in some occult influence supposed to emanate from it, which had produced frequent abortions throughout the region. 19. miscarrieth: rather, ' causes miscarriages.' The marginal rendering, however, is defensible ; see Mai. iii. 11. 21. miscarrying' is the same word as in verse 19, although we should have expected a substantive in place of a participle. 22. unto this day. The narrative, therefore, was written some time after the incident. ii. 23-25. Elisha and the Children of Beth-el. On his homeward journey, passing through Beth-el, Elisha is insulted by a crowd of young boys, and curses them in the name of his God. Two she-bears come out of the wood and rend forty-two of their number. The story is recorded (like i, 9fr.) to enforce the lesson of respect for the office and person of the prophet. 23. The insult lies in the derisive epithet bald head, baldness 282 II KINGS 2. 25—3. I. Es D looked behind him and saw them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she- bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of 25 them. And he went from thence to mount Carmel, and from thence he returned to Samaria. 3 [D] Now Jehoram the son of Ahab began to reign being counted a disgrace in antiquity. The Arabs are said to distinguish between crown-baldness, which is called the baldness of slaves, and forehead-baldness, which is called noble baldness, as due to the pressure of a helmet (Macalister, in DB, i. p. 235). Cf. Isa. iii, 17-24. 25. returned to Samaria. Wellhausen has suggested that the original document may have read * to Gilgal,' in accordance with verse i, and that Samaria was substituted by an editor to give a more natural connexion with ch. iii. But the word returned may refer to the circuitous route described, from Beth-el to Car- mel and back to Samaria. iii. Jehoram of Israel. The Moabite Campaign. The introductory formula (verses 1-3) is, of course, from the pen of the compiler. The remainder of the chapter is the history of a joint-expedition of Jehoram and his allies against Moab, during which the united armies were saved from destruction by the instrumentalit}' of the prophet Elisha. Wellliausen and most critics consider that the main interest of the writer was in the political events he describes, that therefore the passage belongs to the same class of popular histories as i Kings xx, xxii, and was in fact composed by the author of these two chapters. Some, however (Benzinger and Kittel). hold that tiie whole passage only serves as a background for the Elisha-episode. and is accordingly to be regarded as an extract from the biography of Elisha. The point is not easy to determine. There are undoubtedly some striking resemblances to i Kings xx, xxii, which strongly favour the view of Wellhausen : cf. verses 7, u with xxii. 4, 5, 7 ; and note the frequent tendency to omit the proper names of the several kings. On the other hand, there are indications which seem to point in an opposite direction. Thus it is urged that in this chapter it is a sufficient introduction of Elisha to say that he had been the servant of Elijah (verse 11), and that this is not likely to be the continuation of a document in which the existence of Elijah himself is so completely ignored as in i Kings xx, xxii. And again, there are at least two phrases which seem formed after the style of the Elijah-history : cf. verse 14 with xvii. i, II KINGS 3. 2, 3. D 283 over Israel in Samaria in the eighteenth year of Jeho- shaphat king of Judah, and reigned twelve years. And 2 he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord ; but not like his father, and like his mother : for he put away the pillar of Baal that his father had made. Nevertheless 3 he cleaved unto the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin ; he departed not therefrom. and verse 20 with xviii. 29, 36. But we have seen that i Kings XX, xxii are not purely pohtical : the narrative has been utilized as the basis of a series of pictures illustrating the influence of the prophets ; and we may readily suppose that here the continuation of that narrative has been similarly treated, and perhaps partly rewritten. That the prophet in this case happens to be Elisha is an insufficient reason for assigning the whole to the cycle of Elisha-stories, with which it has little in common. (See Introd. p. 28 f.) The historicity of the record is vouched for in essential respects by the discovery at Dibon of the famous Moabite Stone, erected to commemorate the successful revolt of Moab against Israel. In the inscription Mesha himself relates how his land had been oppressed by Omri of Israel '■ many days,' and afterwards b}' his son, how the land of Medeba had been occupied by Israel during ' his [Omri's] days and half his son's days, forty years,' and how by the help of Chemosh his god he had gradually expelled the invaders, capturing their strongholds one by one and massacring or enslaving the inhabitants (see Bennett in DB^ iii. p. 404 ff. ; and Burney, p. 371 ff.). According to this account the revolt broke out, not after the death of Ahab (as i. i, iii. 5), but in the middle of his reign ; moreover, in the biblical chronology the united reigns of Omri and Ahab amount to less than forty years. These are the only points in which the two records are directly in conflict ; in all other respects they may be used to supplement one another. The events recorded in this chapter belong to a period subsequent to the Moabite inscription ; it describes an attempt (but apparentl}' an unsuccessful attempt) of Jehorani to restore the Israelitish supremacy over Moab. iii. 1-3. Jntroditction. See on i. 17 f. 2. For pillar (i. e. ntazscbdh, see on i Kings xiv. 23) the LXX reads the plural 'pillars.' The reformation here attributed to Jehoram must have been very partial, since the worship of the Tyrian Baal was still in full exercise at the time of Jehu's revolution. 284 II KINGS 3. 4-r. N 4 [N] Now Mesha king of Moab was a sheepmaster ; and he rendered unto the king of Israel the wool of an hundred thousand lambs, and of an hundred thousand 5 rams. But it came to pass, when Ahab was dead, that the king of Moab rebelled against the king of Israel. 6 And king Jehoram went out of Samaria at that time, and 7 mustered all Israel. And he went and sent to Jeho- shaphat the king of Judah, saying. The king of Moab hath rebelled against me : wilt thou go with me against Moab to battle ? And he said, I will go up ; I am as iii. 4-10. Preparations for the Invasion of Moab. Since the death of Ahab, Mesha had withheld the annual tribute of wool which he had been accustomed to pay to the kings of Israel ; and, as we learn from his inscription, had expelled the Israelites from his territory. In order to subdue this petty state Jehoram collects his entire army, and calls on his vassal Jehoshaphat* of Judah to take part in the expedition, which it was arranged should march round the Dead Sea and invade Moab from the south. On the route they are joined by the king of Edom, who must at this time have been Jehoshaphat's vassal. But the allied army suffered so severely from want of water that on reaching the Moabite frontier (the IVadi el-Ahsci) advance and retreat seemed alike impossible, and Jehoram's courage utterly failed him. 4. a sheepxuaster : Heb. noked (cf. Amos i. i), a keeper of the peculiar stunted and short-legged breed of sheep still called by the Arabs nakad, and highly esteemed on account of its wool. he rendered. The verb is frequentative : ' used to render,' year by year. The tribute seems excessive, and it is not clear whether it consisted in the animals or only in their fleeces, or whether the explicative accusative wool applies to the rams alone (see marg.). 5. Cf. i. I ; and see introductory note above. 7. Cf. I Kings xxii. 4, The same relation of vassalage is here presupposed. ^ LXX (L) substitutes the name of Ahaziah of Judah for that of Jehoshaphat in this chapter. The motive for the change is apparent. According to the chronological scheme of Lucian, Jehoram of Israel and Jehoshaphat were at no time contemporaries. It is, of course, possible that originally the name of the king of Judah was not given at all (Benzinger) ; but still, in view of verse 14, we can hardly doubt that Jehoshaphat was meant. II KINGS 3. 8-II. N 285 thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses. And he said, AVhich way shall we go up ? And 8 he answered. The way of the wilderness of Edom. So 9 the king of Israel went, and the king of Judah, and the king of Edom : and they made a circuit of seven days' journey : and there was no water for the host, nor for the beasts that followed them. And the king of Israel said, 10 Alas ! for the Lord hath called these three kings to- gether to deliver them into the hand of Moab. But n Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here a prophet of the Lord, that we may inquire of the Lord by him ? And one of the king of Israel's servants answered and said, Elisha the son of Shaphat is here, which poured water on 8. Whiich way? The question would be most natural in the mouth of Jehoshaphat, the subordinate party ; unless we suppose that the narrative has been abridged, and that here we have the fragment of a consultation of Yahweh through some prophet (see below on verse 13}. The choice of so circuitous a route is perhaps to be explained by the fact that Mesha had already fortified the cities in the northern part of his land in expectation of an attack. 9. the king* of Edom. According to the annalistic statements of I Kings xxii. 47, 2 Kings viii. 20 there was no king of Edom at this time. For this reason Ewald thought it possible that the events really happened in the reign of Jehoram of Judah, and that the name of Jehoshaphat as the better-known king was sub- stituted by mistake. But that is not probable, on account of verse 14. 10. the ZiORD hath called. The reference may be to prophetic oracles (like those of i Kings xxii) predicting a favourable issue of the campaign. iii. 11-28. Consultation of Elisha. Jehoshaphat having dis- covered that the prophet Elisha is in the camp, the three kings visit him to seek the word of Yahweh. Elisha at first refuses to answer them, but afterwards relents out of consideration for the king of Judah, and calls for a minstrel. In the condition of prophetic excitation induced by the music, he gives directions for collecting an abundant supply of water which will be mysteriously sent to the armies ; and adds a promise of complete victory over Moab. 11. Cf. I Kings xxii. 7. which potired water : i. e. was the servitor of Elijah (i Kings xix. 21). 286 II KINGS 3. 12-16. N 13 the hands of EHjah. And Jehoshaphat said, The word of the Lord is with him. So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and the king of Edom went down to him. T3 And Elisha said unto the king of Israel, What have I to do with thee ? get thee to the prophets of thy father, and to the prophets of thy mother. And the king of Israel said unto him. Nay : for the Lord hath called these three kings together to deliver them into the hand of Moab. 14 And Elisha said, As the Lord of hosts liveth, before whom I stand, surely, were it not that I regard the presence of Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would not 15 look toward thee, nor see thee. But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the Lord came upon him. 16 And he said, Thus saith the Lord, Make this valley full 12. It is remarkable that, whereas in i Kings xxii Jehoshaphat knows nothing of the northern prophets and never inquires for Elijah, here he is so famihar with their names that he at once recognizes Ehsha as a true man of God. 13. The words and to the propliets of thy motlier are wanting in LXX (B), probably by mistake. In any case, by the propliets of th.y father Elisha must mean Baal-prophets ; for this sense alone gives point to Jehoram's reply : ' Nay, but it is Yahweh who,' &c. The reference is to prophetic oracles (like those of I Kings xxii), by which Yahweh had seemed to sanction the enterprise, though Jehoram now fears that they may prove to have been inspired by the 'lying spirit.' 15. And it came to pass: rather, 'And it used to be.' It is Elisha's habitual method of exciting the prophetic condition which is described. The association of religious music with the earlier and more violent exhibitions of prophecy in Israel is attested by I Sam. X. 5 ; and similar examples are found in Arabian literature (W. R. Smith, Prophets'^, p. 392). The practice had probably been kept up in the prophetic guilds with which Elisha was so closely associated. the hand of the IiOBD is a frequent expression for the prophetic trance. 16. this valley. The scene of the miracle was the Wadi forming the frontier between Moab and Edom, whose upper reaches still bear the name Wadi cl-Alisd ('valley of the sandy II KINGS 3. 17-21. N 287 of trenches. For thus saith the Lord, Ye shall not see 17 wind, neither shall ye see rain, yet that valley shall be filled with water : and ye shall drink, both ye and your cattle and your beasts. And this is but a light thing in 18 the sight of the Lord : he will also deliver the Moabites into your hand. And ye shall smite every fenced city, 19 and every choice city, and shall fell every good tree, and stop all fountains of water, and mar every good piece of land with stones. And it came to pass in the morning, 20 about the time of offering the oblation, that, behold, there came water by the way of Edom, and the country was filled with water. Now when all the Moabites heard 21 water-pits '). The peculiarity of the region is that the water from the mountains of Edom sinks beneath the surface, and is retained underground by the rocky bottom ; so that a supply can almost always be obtained by digging pits in the sand. The tradition thus rests on accurate local knowledge ; and the miracle consists, like the plagues of Egypt, in an enhancement of a natural phenomenon familiar to natives of the district (W. R. Smith, oryc^ p. 147) ^ 17. For your cattle read, as in verse 9, 'your host' (so LXX (L)). 19. and every choice city is a variant of the preceding clause, omitted by LXX. See further on verse 25 below, 20. about the time . . . oblation : cf. i Kings xviii. 29. by the way of: ' from the direction of Edom, i. e. from the south-east along the course of the Wadi. The pits are filled to overflowing by the water. iii. 21-27. Conquest and Devastation of Moab. The Moabite levies guarding the frontier, deceived by the reflection of the morning light on the v/ater-pits and thinking it blood, conclude ^ This follows the ordinary interpretation of verse 16. Burney, however (p. 270^, points out that it is opposed by verses 22, 23, * where the phenomenon described must have been produced by the sun shining upon natural 2iT\d so irregular and wide-spreading /00/s of water, and not upon artificial and so (presumably) symmetrically shaped trenches.' The sentence reads literally: 'A making of this valley nothing but pits ' ', and this might quite well be rendered, ' I will make,' &c., so that human agency would be excluded. 288 II KINGS 3. 22-25. N that the kings were come up to fight against them, they gathered themselves together, all that were able to put on 22 armour, and upward, and stood on the border. And they rose up early in the morning, and the sun shone upon the water, and the Moabites saw the water over against 33 them as red as blood : and they said, This is blood ; the kings are surely destroyed, and they have smitten each 24 man his fellow : now therefore, Moab, to the spoil. And when they came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose up and smote the Moabites, so that they fled before them : and they went forward into the land smiting the 25 Moabites. And they beat down the cities ; and on every that the allies have fallen out and destroyed one another. As they rush in disorder to seize the spoil they are easily over- powered by the Israelitish army, which then presses forward into the country, destroying every mark of civilization as it goes. Mesha is at last driven, with the remains of his army, behind the walls of his capital, from which he makes a desperate sortie, in the hope of reaching the king of Edom. Being foiled in this attempt, he offers his firstborn son as a propitiation to Chemosh on the wall of the city ; whereupon, in some way not explained, the fortune of war is reversed, ani the Israelites are compelled to evacuate the country. The short narrative throws a lurid light on the barbarities of ancient warfare, and also on the deep-seated religious instincts which, in Israel as amongst its heathen neigh- bours, were appealed to by the rite of human sacrifice. 21. Read, 'Now all Moab had heard . . . and had been summoned together.' 22. as red as blood. It is clear from the context that the effect was due to the red rays of the morning sun shining upon the water. 23. This is blood : LXX, ' This is blood of the sword ' — an attractive but impossible rendering ! are surely destroyed. Read, with marg. , ' have surely fought together.' 24. and they went forward. Render, as LXX (with a very slight change of text), ' And they kept pressing forward, smiting the Moabites as they went.' 25. The methods of warfare described in the first part of the verse were universal in antiquity. ' In Arabian warfare the II KINGS 3. 26, 27. N 289 good piece of land they cast every man his stone, and filled it ; and they stopped all the fountains of water, and felled all the good trees : until in Kir-hareseth only they left the stones thereof; howbeit the slingers went about it, and smote it. And when the king of Moab saw that 26 the battle was too sore for him, he took with him seven hundred men that drew sword, to break through unto the king of Edom : but they could not. Then he took his 27 eldest son that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall. And there was great wrath against Israel : and they departed from him, and returned to their own land. destruction of an enemy's palm-groves is a favourite exploit, and fertile lands are thus often reduced to desert ' (W. R. Smith, OTJC^, p. 369). Here they are sanctioned and even enjoined by a prophet ; but in later times the attempt was made to soften their barbarity by legislation (Deut. xx. 19 f.). The clause until in Kir-hareseth . . . thereof is very difficult, and the text so corrupt that we can only vaguely conjecture the sense. It is plain from what follows that it must have contained the name of a fortress ; and this guarantees the reading of Kir- hareseth as a proper name, though the Massoretes can hardly have understood it so, any more than did the LXX and Vulg. Kir-hareseth (Isa. xvi. 7, 11 = ' Kir of Moab,' xv. i) is identified with the modern Kemk, occupying an impregnable site on the north side of the Wadi of the same name, about twelve miles north of the Wadi el-Ahsa. For the rest, the sentence may have been something like this : ' until there was not left but [. . .] of her [Moab's] men in Kir-hareseth.' 26. unto the kingf of Edom, who was probably an unwilling partner in the alliance. 27. The deity to whom the tribute of human blood was paid was necessarily the national god of Moab, Chemosh. Cf. Moabite Stone, 11. II, 12: vhose hand the king leaned answered the man of God, and said, Behold, if the Lord should make windows in heaven, might this thing be? And he said, Behold, thou shalt see it with thine eyes, but shalt not eat thereof. in fact, is a quite superfluous personage ; and Wellhausen is probably right in thinking that the whole of the clauses relating to him are embellishments interpolated by a scribe who understood the verb 'sent' much too literally (it can be used in the sense of 'give directions,' see i Kings v. 9). The simplified text would read : ' And before the king came to him, he had said to the elders, See ye that this son of a murderer has given orders to cut off my head ? While he was yet talking with them, the king came down to him, and said,' &c. It is less probable, though possible, that the text errs by defect, a description of the arrival of the messenger having been omitted between verses 32 and 33. The expression son of a murderer means no more than * murderer ' ; and implies no real reflection on the father of the person spoken of. It is therefore idle to discuss whether it be more applicable to a son of Ahab or a son of Jehu. The prophet has nothing in his mind beyond the murderous design which he is unmasking. 33. Behold, this evil . . . : cf. Amos iii. 6, ' Shall there be evil in a city, and Yahweh hath not done it ? * why should I wait? The words express despondency rather than vindictiveness ; the king is overawed in the presence of the prophet, and lacks the courage to carry out his threat. vii. 1. A 'seah' (marg.) is the third part of an ephah, or about one and a half pecks. Reliable data as to the ordinary price of grain in ancient Israel cannot be found ; but there is no doubt that the prices specified are still abnormally high. 2. the captain: or 'adjutant' {shaltsh, see on i Kings ix. 22^. on whose hand: cf. the case of Naaman, v. 18. windows in heaven: cf Gen. vii. 11, viii. 2 ; Mai. iii. 10. 3IO II KINGS 7. 3-6. N 3 Now there were four leprous men at the entering in of the gate : and they said one to another, Why sit we here 4 until we die ? If we say, We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there : and if we sit still here, we die also. Now therefore come, and let us fall unto the host of the Syrians : if they save us alive, we shall live ; and if they kill us, we shall but die. 5 And they rose up in the twilight, to go unto the camp of the Syrians : and when they were come to the outermost part of the camp of the Syrians, behold, there was no 6 man there. For the Lord had made the host of the Syrians to hear a noise of chariots, and a noise of horses, even the noise of a great host : and they said one to another, Lo, the king of Israel hath hired against us the kings of the Hittites, and the kings of the Egyptians, to vii. 3-20. Outside the Gate. On that very evening four starving lepers from the gate went into the enemy's camp to surrender themselves and found it utterly deserted. Deceived by some mysterious sound in the air the Syrians had taken to sudden flight, thinking that a mighty host was advancing from the north to the relief of the city. The king, on hearing the report of the lepers, at first suspected a stratagem, and sent out couriers to follow the track of the fugitives. When all anxiety had been dispelled, the people rushed out and plundered the deserted camp. Thus on the next day Elisha's prophecy was literally fulfilled ; and the incredulous officer who had scoffed at his words was trampled to death in the gate, in sight of the plenty he was not to share. 5. in the twilig-ht : when their movements could not be observed from the city. 6. the kings of the Hittites, and the kingrs of the Egyptians. For ' the Egyptians ' we should probably read Mttzn (i. e. Cappadocia), as in i Kings x. 28. The centre of the Hittite power was in Northern Syria, between the Euphrates and the Orontes ; and it is most natural to suppose that another northern power should be named along with them. That this Northern Muzri was politically in touch with Israel and Syria is proved by the fact that a king of that land fought as an ally of Ahab and Ben-hadad at the battle of Karkar in 854 {KAT\ p. 42 ; COT, p. 196). The improbability of a "combination of Hittites and Egyptians for the II KINGS 7. 7-12. N 311 come upon us. Wherefore they arose and fled in the 7 twih'ght, and left their tents, and their horses, and their asses, even the camp as it was, and fled for their hfe. And when these lepers came to the outermost part of 8 the camp, they went into one tent, and did eat and drink, and carried thence silver, and gold, and raiment, and went and hid it ; and they came back, and entered into another tent, and carried thence also, and went and hid it. Then they said one to another. We do not well : 9 this day is a day of good tidings, and we hold our peace : if we tarry till the morning light, punishment will overtake us : now therefore come, let us go and tell the king's household. So they came and called unto the porter of 10 the city : and they told them, saying. We came to the camp of the Syrians, and, behold, there was no man there, neither voice of man, but the horses tied, and the asses tied, and the tents as they were. And he called ir the porters; and they told it to the king's household within. And the king arose in the night, and said unto 12 his servants, I will now shew you what the Syrians have done to us. They know that we be hungry ; therefore are they gone out of the camp to hide themselves in the relief of Samaria has long been felt ; and it was too rashly concluded by several scholars that the notice revealed the ignorance of the narrator, the only possible enemy in the background being the Assyrians. But a confusion between Assyria and Egypt is inconceivable on the part of any Hebrew writer ; while, on the other hand, a coalition of Muzri and Hittites against Damascus is well within the bounds of' historical probabilit}'. It may be doubted, however, if it would be likely to occur so late as the reign of Jehoahaz. 9. and we hold our peace : as i Kings xxii. 3. punishment will overtake us : or, ' guilt will be incurred byus'(Vulg.). 10. Read 'porters' (pi.), as marg. (see verse 11). 11. The porters are, of course, the keepers of the aVy gate ; hence the rendering of marg. is obviously right. 312 II KINGS 7. 13-T7. N field, saying, When they come out of the city, we shall 13 take them alive, and get into the city. And one of his servants answered and said, Let some take, I pray thee, five of the horses that remain, which are left in the city, (behold, they are as all the multitude of Israel that are left in it ; behold, they are as all the multitude of Israel 14 that are consumed :) and let us send and see. They took therefore two chariots with horses; and the king sent after the host of the Syrians, saying, Go and see. 15 And they went after them unto Jordan : and, lo, all the way was full of garments and vessels, which the Syrians had cast away in their haste. And the messengers 16 returned, and told the king. And the people went out, and spoiled the camp of the Syrians. So a measure of fine flour was sold for a shekel, and two measures of barley for a shekel, according to the word of the Lord. 17 And the king appointed the captain on whose hand he leaned to have the charge of the gate : and the people trode upon him in the gate, and he died as the man of God had said, who spake when the king came down to 12. take them alive : cf. i Kings xx. 18. 13. five is a round number (i Sam. xxi. 3). The confused text in the latter part of the verse has arisen partly from glosses and partly from duplication (the latter is avoided by the LXX). The clause wMcli are left in the city must be omitted as tautological ; and the parenthetic sentence must have read originally : ' (behold, they are as all the multitude that are con- sumed) ' ; i. e. the few remaining horses are rapidly going the waj' of all the rest, which have perished in the famine. 15. vessels: or 'weapons.' 16. This decisive proof of the precipitate flight of the besiegers allayed the fears of the king ; and the people were permitted to plunder the camp at their will. \*J relates how terribly the doom pronounced by Elisha on the flippant courtier was fulfilled. The last part of the verse should probabl3' be amended so as to read : ' according to the word of the rann of God which he spake,' 5rc, II KINGS 7. 18—8. 2. NEs 313 him. And it came to pass, as the man of God had 18 spoken to the king, saying, Two measures of barley for a shekel, and a measure of fine flour for a shekel, shall be to-morrow about this time in the gate of Samaria ; and 19 that captain answered the man of God, and said. Now, behold, if the Lord should make windows in heaven, might such a thing be ? and he said. Behold, thou shalt see it with thine eyes, but shalt not eat thereof: it came 20 to pass even so unto him ; for the people trode upon him in the gate, and he died. [Es] Now Elisha had spoken unto the woman, whose 8 son he had restored to life^ saying. Arise, and go thou and thine household, and sojourn wheresoever thou canst sojourn : for the Lord hath called for a famine ; and it shall also come upon the land seven years. And 2 the woman arose, and did according to the word of the man of God : and she went with her household, and sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven years. 18-20 are merely an expansion of the words just quoted, and were probably appended to the narrative by a later editor. viii. 1-15. Eltsli a- Narratives resumed. viii. 1-6. The Shunammite in Distress. The great lady who had so proudly said to Elisha, ' I dwell among mine own people ' (iv. 13), is obliged to emigrate to escape the famine, of which she had been forewarned by Elisha. She returns after seven 3'ears, to find that her property has been unlawfully appropriated by others. Her petition for redress comes before the king just as Gehazi is recounting to him the marvellous restoration of her dead child to life by the prophet. She is at once recognized b}' Gehazi ; whereupon the king grants her prayer, and appoints an official to look after her interests. 1. sojonrn wheresoever . . . sojourn: an ^ idem per idem idiom, often employed in the Semitic languages ' (Driver, Deuteronomy, P- 30- it shall also come. The Hebrew might mean, 'and it actuall}' came.' 2. the land of the Philistines: cf. Gen. xxvi. i. 314 n KINGS 8, 3-7. Es 3 And it came to pass at the seven years' end, that the woman returned out of the land of the Phihstines : and she went forth to cry unto the king for her house and 4 for her land. Now the king was talking with Gehazi the servant of the man of God, saying. Tell me, I pray thee, 5 all the great things that Elisha hath done. And it came to pass, as he was telling the king how he had restored to life him that was dead, that, behold, the woman, whose son he had restored to life, cried to the king for her house and for her land. And Gehazi said, My lord, O king, this is the woman, and this is her son, whom 6 Elisha restored to life. And when the king asked the woman, she told him. So the king appointed unto her a certain officer, saying, Restore all that was hers, and all the fruits of the field since the day that she left the land, even until now. 7 And Elisha came to Damascus; and Ben-hadad the 4. Gehazi is evidently no leper at this time, or he would not have been admitted to an audience with the king. 5. him that was dead: LXX(B}, 'a child that had died.' 6. all the fruits (or, 'produce ') of the field : a sum equivalent to the annual revenue of the estate for the time it had been alienated. viii. 7-15. Elisha and Haeael. Elisha visits Damascus ; and Ben-hadad the king, who was lying sick, sends Hazael (probably his general) to inquire of Yahweh about his prospects of recovery. Elisha sends back word that he would certainly recover ; but at the same time he privately tells Hazael that it has been revealed to him that the king is to die. Having said this, his face assumes the rigidity of the prophetic trance, and he bursts into tears. On being asked to explain his emotion, the prophet discloses his prevision of the atrocities which Hazael is to perpetrate on Israel ; and when the latter disclaims all pretensions to such eminence, he addresses him plainly as the future king of Syria. Hazael carries back to his master the favourable message of Elisha; but the next day Ben-hadad is secretly murdered, and is succeeded by Hazael. It is not expressly stated that Hazael was the assassin ; and a few scholars (Ewald, Winckler) have doubted II KINGS 8. 8-IO. Es 315 king of Syria was sick ; and it was told him, saying, The man of God is come hither. And the king said unto 8 Hazael, Take a present in thine hand, and go meet the man of God, and inquire of the Lord by him, saying. Shall I recover of this sickness ? So Hazael went to meet 9 him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden, and came and stood before him, and said. Thy son Ben-hadad king of Syria hath sent me to thee, saying. Shall I recover of this sickness ? And Elisha said unto him. Go, say unto 10 him, Thou shalt surely recover ; howbeit the Lord hath if this be the meaning. But the impression naturally made by the narrative is probably correct. Hazael {Haza'ilu) is twice mentioned, in an inscription of Shalmaneser II, as king of Damascus 1^842 and 839 B. c). Of his origin nothing is known except what may be fairly gathered from the passage before us. It is plain that he was not the legitimate heir of the crown, but a usurper and the founder of a new dynasty. It is practically certain that he was a high military officer, probably the commander-in-chief. Singularly enough, no record has been preserved of his having been actually anointed, either by Elijah or by Elisha. (See i Kings xix. 15.) *2. Since Hazael reigned contemporaneously with Jehu, there can be no doubt that the incident belongs to the reign of Jehoram, and that Ben-Iiadad is the king who fought unsuccessfully against Ahab (i Kings xx. i). The fame of Elisha had reached Damascus (in consequence of the event of ch. v ?). 9. The costliness of the gift is not incredible, considering the wealth of the city and the rank of the giver. 10. say unto him, Thou shalt surely recover. There cannot be a doubt that this is the correct sense, although in the Hebrew text the attempt was made (in defiance of grammar) to substitute * not ' for ' to him ' (see marg.), in order to clear the prophet from the suspicion of falsehood. It is in fact difficult to evade the conclusion that Elisha utters a misleading oracle. One may distinguish between the natural issue of the sickness, which was all that was in Ben-hadad's mind, and the adventitious cause of death, to which his question had no reference ; but practically Ben-hadad was deceived and thrown off his guard, while Hazael received the suggestion which (like the witches' prophecy in Macbeth) ripened into regicide. 3i6 II KINGS 8. 11-T5. Es 1 1 shewed me that he shall surely die. And he settled his countenance stedfastly tipoti him^ until he was ashamed : 12 and the man of God wept. And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord ? And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash in pieces their little ones, and rip up their women with 13 child. And Hazael said, But what is thy servant, which is but a dog, that he should do this great thing? And Elisha answered. The Lord hath shewed me that thou 14 shalt be king over Syria. Then he departed from Elisha, and came to his master; who said to him, What said Elisha to thee ? And he answered. He told me that thou 15 shouldest surely recover. And it came to pass on the morrow, that he took the coverlet, and dipped it in 11. And he settled . . . ashamed. The sentence is difficult. With a small change of pointing we might translate : ' his face took on a fixed look of unutterable horror.' The words rendered * till he was ashamed ' are common in the sense of * in the extreme,' &c. (ii. 17). It is a description of the prophet's appearance in the trance, in which there came to him the vision of future woe, a state from which he found relief in a flood of tears. 12 affords another glimpse (cf. iii. 25, xv. 16) of the atrocities of ancient warfare (see also Amos i. 3, 13). 13. thy servant . . . dogf: Hi. 'thy ser^'ant the dog'— a self- depreciatory epithet (cf. 2 Sam. ix. 8). This comparison, and the following expression this great thing-, shows that Hazael's feeling is not horror at the idea of his own future depravity, but simple incredulity of the great honour in store for him. hath shewed me : lit. ' hath made me see thee (in the ecstasy) as king over Syria.' 15. the coverlet; The word {inakher) is not known ; since the article was dipped in water, it must have been some kind of cloth, with which the king was suffocated. Ewald, who supposes that Ben-hadad was murdered in his bath by the attendants (and cites many parallel cases in histor}'), renders 'bath-cloth.' II KINGS 8. 16-18. EsD 317 water, and spread it on his face, so that he died : and Hazael reigned in his stead. [D] And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab 16 king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. Thirty and two years old was he when he began 1 7 to reign ; and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. And 18 he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab : for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife : and he did that which was evil in the sight of the viii. 16-24. Jehoram of Judah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xxi.) Of these verses, 16-19 ^"^ 23, 24 belong to the compiler, while 20-22 are an extract from the chronicles of Judah. It will be observed that at this point the systematic arrangement of the material, which is on the whole so strictly adhered to, is entirely abandoned. In accordance with his ordinary procedure the compiler should have carried on his account of the reign of Jehoram of Israel to its conclusion, and then turned back to those kings of Judah who had begun to reign meanwhile. As a matter of fact, the concluding formula for Jehoram (of Israel) and the introductory formula for Jehu are omitted ; and the two contemporary Judaean reigns are introduced before the death of Jehoram. A reason for the irregularity is found in the consideration that it became necessary to record the deaths of a king of Israel and a king of Judah on the same day. There was therefore an advantage in breaking down the barrier of the * framework ' at this point, so as to allow the two separate streams of narrative to coalesce for a moment and converge on a single incident. But whether the arrangement is due to the compiler himself is not so certain. The Lucianic text contains a number of scattered indications which go far to show that there were old MSS. of Kings in which a different order obtained, and in which it is conceivable that the usual chronological scheme was observ.ed. See below on viii. 25-29, ix. 29, x. 28-36. viii. 16-19. Introduction. 16. The names Joram and Jehoram are of course identical, and seem to be used indiscriminately. The words Jehoshaphat . . . Jndahare a transcriber's error,and mustbe omitted, with LXX, &c. 18. the dauerhter of Ahab : Athaliah, verse 26, xi. i. Note the omission of the name of the queen-mother in this reign. 3i8 II KINGS 8. 19-24. DKJD 19 Lord, Howbeit the Lord would not destroy Judah, for David his servant's sake, as he promised him to give 20 unto him a lamp for his children alway. [KJ] In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and 21 made a king over themselves. Then Joram passed over to Zair, and all his chariots with him : and he rose up by night, and smote the Edomites which compassed him about, and the captains of the chariots : and the people 2 3 fled to their tents. So Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah,= unto this day. Then did Libnah revolt 23 at the same time. [D] And the rest of the acts of Joram, and all that he did, are they not written in the 24 book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? And Joram slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David : and Ahaziah his son reigned in his stead. 19. See on i Kings xi. 36. for his children. But the children are themselves the lamp. Read 'before him ' (Klostermann, &c.). viii. 20-22. Revolt of Edom and Libnah. 20. and made a king. See on i Kings xxii. 47 ; 2 Kings iii. 9. 21 describes an attempt of Jehoram to subdue the rebellion, v^^hich ended in a disaster to the army of Judah, though this is made as little of as possible, after the manner of official records. The facts evidently were that the king found himself ambushed by a superior force of Edomites, but succeeded in breaking his way through and saving a part of his army by flight. There must be a lacuna in the verse between with him and he rose up. The captains of the chariots are those of Jehoram's ovv^n army, men- tioned in the beginning of the verse. A very small change would enable us to read : '■ and with him were the captains of the chariots,' which is necessary to obtain an intelligible sentence (Kittel). The place Zair is not known. 22 *. unto this day : probably added by the compiler. 22 *». Iiibnah was an important military position in the low- land plain, not far from Lachish (see on xix. 8). Its site has not been certainly determined. Since it is said to have 'revolted,' it cannot have formed an integral part of the kingdom of Judah, but must have been a Philistine city. II KINGS 8. 26-28. D 319 In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of 25 Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign. Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah 26 when he began to reign ; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah the daughter of Omri king of Israel. And he walked in the 27 way of the house of Ahab, and did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, as did the house of Ahab : for he was the son in law of the house of Ahab. And he 28 went with Joram the son of Ahab to war against Hazael king of Syria at Ramoth-gilead : and the Syrians wounded viii. 25-29. Ahaziah of Judah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xxii. 1-9.) The short reign of this king was unmarked by any incident save the one that led to his death. The narrative is wholly redac- tional; and, for the reason given in the note on p, 317, it breaks off abruptly, leaving the account of the death to be given in con- nexion with that of Jehoram. LXX (L) inserts between ch. x and xi a duplicate account of the reign, of which the conclusion (replacing verses 28, 29) is as follows : ' And Ahaziah went to war against Hazael king of Syria. Then Jehu the son of Nimshi conspired against Jehoram son of Ahab king of Israel, and smote him in Jezreel, and he died. And Jehu shot Ahaziah also the king of Judah in the chariot, and he died. And his servants brought him to Jerusalem, and buried him in the city of David.' Benzinger takes this to be the original form (and position?) of the section ; but it is equally possible that it may be but one of many tentative readjustments of the text. It certainly shows that the treatment of this complicated portion of the history was a source of great embarrassment to many editors. 25. For twelfth LXX (L) reads 'eleventh': cf. ix. 29. It is an instructive example of the difference between the two sj'stems of reckoning in use. In the usual system of the Hebrew part of a year is counted as a year : hence to have said that Aliaziah began to reign in the eleventli year of Jehoram would have implied that he reigned two years ; and conversely, since he was known to have reigned but one year, his accession must be assigned to the last (twelfth) year of Jehoram. 26. daug-hter : here in the sense of * granddaughter ' (marg.). The mention of Omri is an additional tribute to the fame of that monarch : see p. 218. 28, 29. See the inlroductory note above. The expression 320 II KINGS 8. 29—9. i. D N 29 Joram. And king Joram returned to be healed in Jezreel of the wounds which the Syrians had given him at Ramah, when he fought against Hazael king of Syria. And Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah went down to see Joram the son of Ahab in Jezreel, because he was sick. 9 [N] And Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of went down (from Jerusalem) would seem to imply that Ahaziah was not at the seat of war (so ix. 16). ix, X. The Great Revolution. The opposition of the prophets to the reUgious policy of the house of Omri, which had been initiated by the work of EHjah, broke out at last in the tragic events recorded in these two chapters. Elisha, inheriting the ideas of his master, had waited long for an opportunity to translate them into effective action ; but at last he deemed that the time was come to carry out his purpose by a military revolution. The instrument he selected for this purpose was Jehu the son of Nimshi, a dashing and popular officer of the army, in whom private ambition went hand in hand with some degree of sympathy with the aims of the prophetic party. Having received the signal for action, Jehu executed the task assigned to him with the impetuosity and ruthlessness that were character- istic of him, giving himself no rest till he had extirpated the reign- ing house, massacred the declared devotees of Baal, and seated himself on the throne as the founder of a new dynasty. The narrative rises at times to a height of descriptive power which is unsurpassed in the pages of the O. T. Although doubts have been expressed as to the complete literary unity of the pas- sage, they have scarcely sufficient weight to demand consideration here. The hand of the Deuteronomic compiler is manifest in ix. 7-10, X. 28-36 ; and there mav be some insertions caused by the omission of earlier portions of the document (e. g. ix. 14, 15). But that in the main the passage is taken from an ancient and contemporary source is certain ; and the literary evidence goes to prove that it was written by the same author as i Kings xx, xxii (see ix. a, 23, x. 14, &c.). The objection that a writer whose appreciation of the character of Ahab appears so clearly in ch. XX, xxii could not have written so dispassionately in ch. ix of the destruction of his house has little force. The suppression of the author's personal judgement is a feature of the record ; and it would not be easy to discover whether his own sympathies II KINGS 9. 2-5. N 321 the prophets, and said unto him, Gird up thy loins, and take this vial of oil in thine hand, and go to Ramoth- gilead. And when thou comest thither, look out there 2 Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat the son of Nimshi, and go in, and make him arise up from among his brethren, and carry him to an inner chamber. Then take the vial of 3 oil, and pour it on his head, and say, Thus saith the Lord, I have anointed thee king over Israel. Then open the door, and flee, and tarry not. So the young 4 man, even the young man the prophet, went to Ramoth- gilead. And when he came, behold, the captains of the 5 host were sitting ; and he said, I have an errand to thee, went with the successful usurper whose career he chronicles, or whether he shared the widespread horror of Jehu's crimes which breaks forth even from the pages of Hosea (i. 4). His real feel- ing is perhaps a sense of the tragedy in the history of the power- ful dynasty which had measured its human strength against the deepest spiritual forces of the age and been swept away before them. ix. 1-13. The Anointirtg of Jehu. Elisha sends one of his disciples to Ramoth-gilead to anoint Jehu king of Israel. The fortress was then held against the Syrians by the Israelitish army, in which Jehu was a superior officer ; while Jehoram had retired from the front because of wounds received in battle. The young prophet executed his commission with the celerity and secrecy which the occasion demanded, and vanished as suddenly as he came. Jehu is at first rallied by his brother officers on the strange appearance of his visitor ; but when he divulges to them the serious import of the interview they at once declare themselves in his favour, and proclaim him king by acclamation. 1. On Bamoth-gilead, see i Kings xxii. 3. That the city was now in possession of Israel follows from verse 14. 2. Jehu is called simply ' son of Nimshi ' in verse 20 and I Kings xix. 16. His grandfather was apparently a more impor- tant person than his father. to an inner chamber. See i Kings xx. 30, xxii. 25. 3. On the ceremony of anointing, see i Kings i. 39. 5. were sitting : probably holding a council of war. which of all ns ? The question hardly suggests that Jehu was in chief command. 322 II KINGS 9. 6-12. NDN captain. And Jel^u said, Unto which of all us? And 6 he said, To thee, O captain. And he arose, and went into the house ; and he poured the oil on his head, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, 1 have anointed thee king over the people of the Lord, 7 even over Israel. [D] And thou shalt smite the house of Ahab thy master, that I may avenge the blood of my servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants 8 of the Lord, at the hand of Jezebel. For the whole house of Ahab shall perish : and I will cut off from Ahab every man child, and him that is shut up and him 9 that is left at large in Israel. And I will make the house of Ahab like the house of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, 10 and like the house of Baasha the son of Ahijah. And the dogs shall eat Jezebel in the portion of Jezreel, and there shall be none to bury her. [N] And he opened 11 the door, and fled. Then Jehu came forth to the servants of his lord : and one said unto him, Is all well ? wherefore came this mad fellow to thee ? And he said unto them, Ye know the man and what his talk was. 12 And they said. It is false; tell us now. And he said. Thus and thus spake he to me, saying. Thus saith the 7-10* are an addition by the compiler (cf, i Kings xiv. lof., xxi. 2off.), and show acquaintance with i Kings xvii-xix, as well as xxi. 23. 10 •^ in the primary document followed immediately on verse 6. 11. one said: better (as LXX, &c.), 'they said.' this mad fellow. The lower ecstatic forms of prophecy being scarcely distinguishable from insanity, prophet and lunatic were kindred figures to the ancient mind, which attributed both to possession by a supernatural power. Although it be true that for this reason lunatics are still reverenced in the East, there is undoubtedly a shade of contempt in the choice of this epithet by the officers. Ye know the man. The meaning appears to be : ' You know the kind of wild talk in which these fellows indulge.' II KINGS 9. 13-16. N 323 Lord, I have anointed thee king over Israel. Then 13 they hasted, and took every man his garment, and put it under him on the top of the stairs, and blew the trumpet, saying, Jehu is king. So Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat 14 the son of Nimshi conspired against Joram. (Now Joram kept Ramoth-gilead, he and all Israel, because of Hazael king of Syria : but king Joram was returned to 15 be healed in Jezreel of the wounds which the Syrians had given him, when he fought with Hazael king of Syria.) And Jehu said, If this be your mind, then let none escape and go forth out of the city, to go to tell it in Jezreel. So Jehu rode in a chariot, and went to Jezreel; 16 13. took every man . . . under him (i. e. under Jehu) : pro- bably a symbol of subjection ; cf. Matt. xxi. 8. the top of the stairs. The word for ' top ' (properly bone) is not quite intelligible in this connexion (see marg.). ix. 14-28. The Murder of Jehoram and Ahaziah. Jehu, having taken all possible precautions against premature disclosure of his design, mounts his chariot and starts on his long ride to Jezreel. Here, by a most effective transition, the writer suddenly trans- ports us to the point of view of the watchman on the tower of Jezreel, who sees the cavalcade in the distance and reports its approach to the king. Two messengers are dispatched in quick succession to make inquiries, and each in his turn is detained by Jehu and compelled to ride behind him. By this time the watch- man has recognized the mad driving of the son of Nimshi ; and on learning this Jehoram, now thoroughly alarmed, gets ready his chariot, and drives forth to meet his fate. The chariots meet just by what had once been Naboth's portion ; and there after a brief parley Jehoram is shot through the heart from behind by Jehu, who orders his body to be thrown into the field of Naboth, in fulfilment of the prophecy of Elijah. Ahaziah of Judah also, who had accompanied Jehoram, is mortally wounded, but succeeds in reaching Megiddo, where he dies. 14* is a recapitulation of the preceding events. 14^, 15* are probably an abridgement of a still earlier part of the document, which had to be introduced here in explanation of what follows. 15 ^. If this be your mind : LXX, ♦ If your mind be with me ' ; i.e. * if you are heartily on my side.' V 2 324 11 KINGS 9. 17-22. N for Joram lay there. And Ahaziah king of Judah was I ; come down to see Joram. Now the watchman stood on the tower in Jezreel, and he spied the company of Jehu as he came, and said, I see a company. And Joram said. Take an horseman, and send to meet them, and let 18 him say. Is it peace ? So there went one on horseback to meet him, and said, Thus saith the king. Is it peace? And Jehu said, What hast thou to do with peace ? turn thee behind me. And the watchman told, saying. The messenger came to them, but he cometh not again. 19 Then he sent out a second on horseback, which came to them, and said. Thus saith the king, Is it peace ? And Jehu answered, What hast thou to do with peace ? turn 20 thee behind me. And the watchman told, saying. He came even unto them, and cometh not again : and the driving is like the driving of Jehu the son of Nimshi ; 21 for he driveth furiously. And Joram said, Make ready. And they made ready his chariot. And Joram king of Israel and Ahaziah king of Judah went out, each in his chariot, and they went out to meet Jehu, and found him 22 in the portion of Naboth the Jezreelite. And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said. Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the 16* is again an explanatory parenthesis, accounting for the presence of Ahaziah with Jehoram. See on viii. 29. 17. company: a rare word (= 'abundance'); cf. Isa. Ix. 6, Ezek. xxvi. 10. LXX renders, ' dust-cloud.' 18. * Is all well?' (marg.). The question can hardly be. Do you come with friendly intent ? or the king would not afterwards have ridden out unarmed to meet the danger. The source of his anxiety must be apprehension of bad news from the seat of war. 20. furiously : ' like a madman ' ; from the same root as ' mad fellow' inverse 11, 21. Jehoram, still unsuspicious of immediate danger, orders his chariot to be harnessed, that he might be ready to proceed at once to Ramoth-gilead if necessary. II KINGS 9. 23-27. N 325 whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many? And Joram turned his hands, and fled, 23 and said to Ahaziah, There is treachery, O Ahaziah. And Jehu drew his bow with his full strength, and smote 24 Joram between his arms, and the arrow went out at his heart, and he sunk down in his chariot. Then saidy^/^^^ 25 to Bidkar his captain, Take up, and cast him in the portion of the field of Naboth the Jezreelite : for remember how that, when I and thou rode together after Ahab his father, the Lord laid this burden upon him; Surely I have seen yesterday the blood of Naboth, and 26 the blood of his sons, saith the Lord ; and I will requite thee in this plat, saith the Lord. Now therefore take and cast him into the plat of ground, according to the word of the Lord. But when Ahaziah the king of 2 7 Judah saw this, he fled by the way of the garden house. 22. whoredoms and witchcrafts: metaphorical expressions for idolatry. 23. turned his hands : cf. i Kings xxii. 34. 24. Render : * But Jehu had filled his hand with the bow ' (see marg.) ; i. e. had held it ready for action (cf. 2 Sam. xxiii. 7). 25. his captain : 'adjutant' (as vii. 2% for remember : better, as LXX, &c., • for I remember how I and thou.' rode togfether : '■ rode in pairs ' ; but the Hebrew expression is difficult, and the text almost certainly at fault. burden: or, 'oracle': ///. a 'lifting up' (sc. of the voice), a term often used of a prophetic utterance : Isa. xiii. i ; Zech. ix. I ; Mai. i. i ; Jer. xxiii, 33 ff., &c. 26. Cf. I Kings xxi. 19. The reference is certainly to the same incident ; and although there is no material discrepancy between the two accounts, still the difference in the terms of the oracle makes it improbable that the author of either narrative was ac- quainted with the other. They embody separate traditions, and of these the one here followed is probably closer to the actual facts. 27. the garden house should probably be read as a proper name, Bcth-hag-gaii, which has been plausibly identified with En- gaitniiit (Joshua xix. 21 , now Jcnln, on the high road to Jerusalem, 326 II KINGS 9. 28-30. NZN And Jehu followed after him, and said, Smite him also in the chariot : and they sfuote him at the ascent of Gur, which is by Ibleam. And he fled to Megiddo, and died 28 there. And his servants carried him in a chariot to Jerusalem, and buried him in his sepulchre with his fathers in the city of David. 29 [Zj And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab began Ahaziah to reign over Judah. 30 [N] And when Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel about seven miles due south of Jezreel. The clause in italics ('and they smote him ') must have been accidentally omitted in the Hebrew. LXX, on the other hand, omits the command, reading : ' and he said, Him too ! And they smote him,' &c. Ibleam (or Bileam, i Chron. vi. 70) is the modern Bel'ameh, a mile further south. Megiddo {LejjitH, see i Kings iv. 12) lies north-west from Jenin, on anotlier road, at a distance of eleven miles. ix. 29 breaks the connexion, and its insertion here is difficult to account for. It is the introductory formula of the reign of Ahaziah, but with the chronology characteristic of LXX(L') (see on viii. 25). Now, it so happens that the duplicate which LXX has given at the end of ch. x lacks the introduction ; this verse, together with x. 37-43 of that version, would make up a complete account of Ahaziah's reign. It is possible, therefore, that in some early MSS. the complete notice of Ahaziah stood between ix. 28 and 30, following the death of Jehoram of Israel, which (be it observed) would be its proper place if, as there is reason to believe (see on i. 17), there existed a chronological sj'stem which placed the accession of Jehoram of Judah before that of Jehoram of Israel. Only, the entire omission of the concluding formula of Jehoram's reign would still remain unexplained ; and altogether the confusion in LXX is too great to be satisfactorily cleared up. ix, 30-37. The End of Jezebel. Jehu returns to Jezreel, and at the palace gate is hailed by the mocking challenge of Jezebel, who salutes him from an upper window as a second Zimri, a murderer of his master. At his command some eunuchs throw her down to the street, where she is trampled to death by his horses. After banqueting in the palace he gives orders for lier burial as a king's daughter ; but it was found that Elijah's words II KINGS 9. 31-37. N 327 heard of it ; and she painted her eyes, and tired her head, and looked out at the window. And as Jehu 31 entered in at the gate, she said, Is it peace, thou Zimri, thy master's murderer? And he hfted up his face to the 32 window, and said, Who is on my side ? who ? And there looked out to him two or three eunuchs. And he said, 3.'. Throw her down. So they threw her down : and some of her blood was sprinkled on the wall, and on the horses : and he trode her under foot. And when he 34 was come in, he did eat and drink; and he said, See now to this cursed woman, and bury her: for she is a king's daughter. And they went to bury her : but they 35 found no more of her than the skull, and the feet, and the palms of her hands. Wherefore they came again, 36 and told him. And he said, This is the word of the Lord, which he spake by his servant Elijah the Tishbite, saying, In the portion of Jezreel shall the dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel : and the carcase of Jezebel shall be as 37 had received a terribly literal fulfilment, the dogs having already devoured her flesh, 30. painted her eyes: lit. 'set her eyes in antimony,' a black powder or paste with which females in the East blacken the edge cf the eyelids above and below. The effect is said to be striking in enhancing the brilliancy of the eyes and increasing their apparent size. See Lane, Modern Egyptians, p. 29 ff. (Minerva edition). 31. Is it peace ? appears here to be no more than the form of salutation. The stinging vocative ' Zimri' carries with it, of course, a covert allusion to the fate of that regicide. 32. Who is on my side? who? The LXX has 'Who art thou ? Come down with me ' ; out of this Klostermann makes, ' Who art thou that thou shouldest contend wilh me? ' But the Massoretic text gives a good sense. 33. For and he trode it is better to read the plural, with the ancient versions : ' And they (the horses) trode.' 36. See on i Kings xxi. 23. 37. as duns', &c. The word is applied only to corpses, and always in phrases similar to this : Jer. viii. 2, ix. 22, &c., &c. 328 II KINGS 10. 1-4. N dung upon the face of the field in the portion of Jezreel ; so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel. 10 Now Ahab had seventy sons in Samaria. And Jehu wrote letters, and sent to Samaria, unto the rulers of Jezreel, even the elders, and unto them that brought up 2 fke sons of Ahab, saying, And now as soon as this letter Cometh to you, seeing your master's sons are with you, and there are with you chariots and horses, a fenced city 3 also, and armour ; look ye out the best and meetest of your master's sons, and set him on his father's throne, 4 and fight for your master's house. But they were exceedingly afraid, and said. Behold, the two kings stood X. 1-14. Massacre of the Royal Princes of Israel and Jiidah. Following the common practice of usurpers, Jehu takes measures to extirpate the numerous members of the house of Ahab. To the guardians of Jehoram's sons in Samaria he sends an ironical challenge, inviting them to set up one of the princes as king, and let the matter of the sovereignty be fought out on the field of battle. The magnates, however, at once declare their submission ; on which Jehu demands the heads of the seventy princes. These were accordingly sent to Jezreel, and exposed in two heaps at the gate of the city. The next day, over this ghastly spectacle, Jehu harangued the people, arguing that while he personally was responsible for the death of the late king, there was clearly a higher power at work, namely, the word of the Lord spoken by Elijah. Having ordered the execution of the remaining adherents of the late dynasty, he then set out for Samaria ; but on the way he met a party of Judaean princes who were going to visit their royal relatives : these also he caused to be butchered on the spot. 1. unto the rulers of Jezreel, even. Read, with LXX (L\ * to the rulers of the city and to ' : the city being Samaria. On the same authority the italicized words 'the sons of should be restored to the text. The rulers are, as usual, the officials ; the elders are the representatives of the people. them that "brougrht up: better, 'the guardians of : else- where the word means ' foster-father' (Num. xi. 12 ; Isa. xlix. 23). In the beginning of the verse the word 'sons' must mean descendants : it is implied that in that number were included children of Jehoram (verse 3). 2. The citation from the letter begins precisely as in v. 6. II KINGS 10. 5-10. N 329 not before him : how then shall we stand ? x\nd he that 5 was over the household, and he that was over the city, the elders also, and they that brought up the children^ sent to Jehu, saying, We are thy servants, and will do all that thou shalt bid us ; we will not make any man king : do thou that which is good in thine eyes. Then he 6 wrote a letter the second time to them, saying. If ye be on my side, and if ye will hearken unto my voice, take ye the heads of the men your master's sons, and come to me to Jezreel by to-morrow this time. Now the king's sons, being seventy persons, were with the great men of the city, which brought them up. And it came to pass, 7 when the letter came to them, that they took the king's sons, and slew them, even seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent them unto him to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, 8 They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said. Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning. And it came to pass in the 9 morning, that he went out, and stood, and said to all the people, Ye be righteous : behold, I conspired against my master, and slew him : but who smote all these? Know 10 now that there shall fall unto the earth nothing of the word of the Lord, which the Lord spake concerning 6. and come to me: LXX, 'and bring them to me.' 9. Ye toe righteous: or, 'innocent.' Jehu realizes that his ferocity has overshot the mark. Instead of being overawed, as he had intended, the people are full of foreboding lest they should be involved in the guilt of so hideous a crime. So, to reassure them, he accepts the responsibility for the murder of Jehoram ; but pretends that he and they are alike guiltless of this new atrocity. 10. With some inconsistency he bids them acquiesce in the signal verification of the word spoken by Elijah ; cf. i Kings 330 II KINGS 10. 11-14. N the house of Ahab : for the Lord hath done that which 1 1 he spake by his servant EHjah. So Jehu smote all that remained of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, and all his great men, and his familiar friends, and his priests, until 12 he left him none remaining. And he arose and departed, and went to Samaria. And as he was at the shearing 13 house of the shepherds in the way, Jehu met with the brethren of Ahaziah king of Judah, and said, Who are ye ? And they answered, We are the brethren of Ahaziah : and we go down to salute the children of the king and 14 the children of the queen. And he said, Take them alive. And they took them alive, and slew them at the pit of the shearing house, even two and forty men ; neither left he any of them. 11. all his great men: better, as LXX (L), ' all his kinsmen * (the same word as i Kings xvi. 11 ; see the note\ 12. There is something amiss in the opening of the verse, which strictly reads : * And he arose and came and went.' The second verb must either be omitted (as LXX\ or put last (Pesh.), or altered so as to be the subject of the sentence : * And Jehu arose and went.' the shearing honsc of the shepherds : a conjectural and doubtful rendering of a very uncertain phrase. LXX treats it as a proper name : ' Beth-'Eked of the shepherds ' ; and a place Betli Kadhas been discovered east of Jenin, but too far off the road to be identified with the locality here indicated. The Targum translates, * the meeting house of the shepherds,' a wayside inn or caravan- serai frequented by shepherds. 13. we go down is strictly 'we came down,' so that it is doubtful if they were on their way to Jezreel (see below). 14. Take them alive : cf. i Kings xx. 18. the shearing house : or Beth-'Eked ; see on verse 12, Stade has pointed out the improbability that the Judaean princes should still be pursuing their journey northwards in ignorance of the events of the last few days, an improbability enhanced by the fact that the royal princes of Israel were in Samaria, and not in Jezreel. The incident would be more intelligible if they had been intercepted on tlieir way home ; and that view is consistent with the terms of the section itself (see on verse 13), though not perhaps with the position in which it now stands. II KINGS 10. 15-17. N 331 And when he was departed thence, he Hghted on 15 Jehonadab the son of Rechab coming to meet him : and he saluted him, and said to him. Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart ? And Jehonadab answered, It is. If it be, give me thine hand. And he gave him his hand ; and he took him up to him into the chariot. And he said, Come with me, and see my zeal for the 16 Lord. So they made him ride in his chariot. And \*j X. 15, 16. Jehu and Jehonadab. On his way to Samaria Jehu meets with Jehonadab the son of Rechab, who was evidently well known to him by name as an ardent champion of the national faith. After a brief exchange of sentiments he invites him to ride with him in the chariot and witness his zeal for the worship of Yahweh. From Jer. xxxv we learn that Jehonadab was the ' father' (i. e. the founder) of a religious order called the Rechabites, who ob- served the rules imposed by him with scrupulous fidelity down to the fall of the kingdom of Judah. The institution of the order, with its vows of abstinence from wine, from agriculture, and from settled dwellings, was clearly meant as a radical protest against the whole system of civilization which the Hebrews had inherited through the conquest of Canaan. That civilization was so per- meated by the corrupting influence of Baal-worship, that to men like Jehonadab there appeared no way of preserving the purity of the religion of Yahweh except a return to the primitive sim- plicity of the nomadic state. The rise of such a movement at this juncture of the history is a sign of the profound and far- reaching issues involved in the conflict between Yahweh and Baal. It shows that others besides Elijah felt that the names Yahweh and Baal stood for two opposite and irreconcileable principles of religion. Jehonadab's extreme and one-sided asser- tion of that conviction reveals the depth of antagonism which rent the life of the nation in twain ; and it explains the eagerness with which he entered into the bloody measures planned by Jehu. 15. The question of Jehu should be read as in LXX : * Is thy heart honestly with my heart, as my heart is with thy heart?' The answer of Jehonadab consists of the words It is ; what follows is Jehu's reply to him. The LXX makes this clear ; * And Jehu said, If it be,' &c. 16. For they made hiia ride read 'he made him ride with him.' 332 11 KINGS 10. iS-21. N when he came to Samaria, he smote all that remained unto Ahab in Samaria, till he had destroyed him, ac- cording to the word of the Lord, which he spake to i8 Elijah. And Jehu gathered all the people together, and said unto them, Ahab served Baal a little; but Jehu 19 shall serve him much. Now therefore call unto me all the prophets of Baal, all his worshippers, and all his priests ; let none be wanting : for I have a great sacrifice to do to Baal ; whosoever shall be wanting, he shall not live. But Jehu did it in subtilty, to the intent that he 20 might destroy the worshippers of Baal. And Jehu said, Sanctify a solemn assembly for Baal. And they pro- 2 1 claimed it. And Jehu sent through all Israel : and all the worshippers of Baal came, so that there was not a man left that came not. And they came into the house of Baal ; and the house of Baal was filled from one end X, 17-27. Massacre of the Baal-ivorshippcrs. Arrived in Samaria, Jehu first exterminated the remaining adherents of the house of Ahab. Then, under the pretext of great zeal for the worship of Baal, he planned a treacherous and decisive blow against the devotees of that religion. On an appointed day he assembled in the temple of Baal a huge concourse of prophets, priests and followers of the false rehgion. After taking steps to ensure that no worshipper of Yahweh was present, he even went so far as to offer sacrifice with his own hand. But at a given signal his guards rushed in and carried out their orders by slaying every one of the worshippers. The emblems of the foreign cult were all destroyed, and the site of the temple was desecrated. 18, 19. It is difficult to explain the success which attended Jehu's somewhat transparent ruse. His victims were perhaps more terrorized than duped ; being threatened with death if they absented themselves, they may have deemed it the safer course to disguise their suspicions and hope for the best. The narrative reads more connectedly if (with Klostermann) we delete the words all his worshippers in verse 19. Jehu first summons the ciergy of the Baal-religion, and then verse 20) orders them to proclaim the feast to which all the initiated were invited. ^ 20. a solemn assemTjly : Heb. 'azardh. See W. R. Smith, Rel. o/Scm.'^, p. 456. II KINGS 10. 22-25. N 333 to another. And he said unto him that was over the 22 vestry, Bring forth vestments for all the worshippers of Baal. And he brought them forth vestments. And 23 Jehu went, and Jehonadab the son of Rechab, into the house of Baal ; and he said unto the worshippers of Baal, Search, and look that there be here with you none of the servants of the Lord, but the worshippers of Baal only. And they went in to offer sacrifices and burnt offerings. 24 Now Jehu had appointed him fourscore men without, and said, If any of the men whom I bring into your hands escape, he that letteth hivi go, his life shall be for the life of him. And it came to pass, as soon as he had 25 made an end of offering the burnt offering, that Jehu said to the guard and to the captains. Go in, and slay them ; let none come forth. And they smote them with the edge of the sword ; and the guard and the captains cast them out, and went to the city of the house of Baal. 22. tlie vestry. * As regards the matter of vestments, it was certainly an early and widespread custom to make a difference between the dress of ordinary life and that donned on sacred occasions. But, of course, the great mass of people in a poor society could not keep a special suit for sacred occasions. Such persons would either wash their clothes after as well as before any specially sacred function, or would have to borrow sacred garments (ibid. p. 452). ' At Mecca in the times of heathenism, the sacred circuit of the Kaaba was made by the Bedouin either naked or in clothes borrowed from one of the Horns, or religious communities of the sacred city' (ibid. p. 451). 24*. and they went : LXX, ' and he went ' ; cf. verse 25. 24^*. The awkward construction which is felt even in the English is to be avoided by pointing the chief verb as a causative {yemallef for yimmdlct), rendering : ' The man who lets any of those men escape whom I bring to you. his life,' &c. 25. the city of the house of Baal is quite unintelligible, and none of the known meanings of the word for ' city ' gives an appropriate sense. Ewald says truly that it ' must mean much the same as the Holy of Holies,' and asserts 'that the image of the heathen god often stood in a loft^' and dark enclosure within the temple, resembling a fortress.' It has been proposed to 334 II KINGS 10. 26-30. ND 26 And they brought forth the pillars thac were in the house 27 of Baal, and burned them. And they brake down the pillar of Baal, and brake down the house of Baal, and 2S made it a draught house, unto this day. [D] Thus 29 Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel. Howbeit from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin, Jehu departed not from after them, to ivit^ the golden calves that were in Beth-el, and that were in 30 Dan. And the Lord said unto Jehu, Because thou hast change the word to dcbir, the ancient name for the inner shrine of the temple (see on i Kings vi. i6). LXX (L) has simply 'the temple of Baal.' 26. the pillars that were iu the house of Baal : LXX (^ L) has ' the pillar of Baal ' ; but since a pillar {mazzebdh) could not be burnt fbeing of stonei, it is perhaps better to read: 'the 'asherah of the house of Baal.' Cf. i Kings xvi. 32, 33, where Ahab is said to have erected both an altar and an Asherah in connexion with the worship of Baal. 27. To complete the correspondence with i Kings xvi. 32 f. some would here change pillar to ' altar.' But there is no evidence of direct dependence of the one passage on the other ; and if there were, the assumed error is just as likely to have occurred in the first as in the second. X. 28-36. Summary of the Reign of Jehu. The section is mainly the work of the compiler, although it incorporates an account of Hazael's conquests (verses 32, 33) which we may assign to the annals of the kingdom. In the introduction (verses 28-31) we miss the usual chronological notices at the beginning of a reign. The omission is partly supplied in verse 36, to which the Lucianic version adds the curious synchronism: 'In the second year of Athaliah, the Lord made Jehu the son of Nimshi king.' The obviously erroneous date is got by reckoning (on the LXX system) backwards from xiii. i ; allowing six years for Athaliah and twenty-three for Jehoash on the one side, and twenty-eight for Jehu on the other. We have further to note the absence of the concluding formula of the reign of Jehoram. It is not certain whether these anomalies are due to the compiler himself, or whether, as Benzinger argues, they arose subsequently, in order to bring verse 28 into immediate connexion with the detailed account of Jehu's reformation ;^see above, p. 317). 28. For Thus read simply * And.' II KINGS 10. 31 — n. I. DKIDKJ 335 done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, ajid hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy sons of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel. But Jehu took no heed 31 to walk in the law of the Lord, the God of Israel, with all his heart : he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, wherewith he made Israel to sin. [KI] In those days the Lord began to cut Israel short : 32 and Hazael smote them in all the coasts of Israel ; from 33 Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, and the Reubenites, and the Manassites, from Aroer, which is by the valley of Arnon, even Gilead and Bashan. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he 34 did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? And Jehu slept 35 with his fathers : and they buried him in Samaria. And Jehoahaz his son reigned in his stead. And the time 36 that Jehu reigned over Israel in Samaria was twenty and eight years. [KJ] Now when Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw II 32, 33. On Hazael's wars against Israel, see viii. 12, Amos i. 3. This renewed activity on the part of the Syrians coincides with a cessation of the Assyrian attacks on Damascus after 839 B.C. Jehu had aheady, in 842, put himself under the protection of Shalmaneser II, but Hazael twice offered a successful resistance to the attempt of that monarch to subdue his capital, and was able to direct his whole force against his weaker western neighbour. The first clause of verse 33 should be connected with verse 32 : 'all the territory of Israel from Jordan eastward.' Aroer (now 'Ard't'r) is situated a little north of the Arnon {Wadi Moj'ib), and about eleven miles from its mouth at the middle of the east shore of the Dead Sea. The other geographi- cal names are familiar, xi. The Revolution injudah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xxii. 10— xxiii. 2t.) The centre of interest is now transferred to the kingdom of Judah, whose less eventful history assumes a sudden importance 336 II KINGS 11. 2. KJ that her son was dead, she arose and destroyed all the 2 seed royal. But Jehosheba, the daughter of king Joram, from its belated share in the religious revolution just accomplished in Ephraim. Through the close political and dynastic ties between the two kingdoms the public worship of the Tyrian Baal had been introduced in Jerusalem (xi. i8) ; and Athaliah, the last survivor of Ahab's house, succeeded for six years in maintaining the family tradition against the better mind of the nation. But the crisis, though deferred, could not be averted ; and if its course was somewhat more constitutional than the parallel movement in the north, there lay behind it the same great force — the uprising of national sentiment against the heathenish tendencies of the court. It is instructive to observe that whereas in Israel the chief agitators on behalf of the true religion had been the prophets, in Judah the revolution was directed by the temple priesthood. These external differences, however, do not obscure the fact that the events now to be considered were a phase and outcome of the religious conflict initiated by Elijah. In chaps. xi,xiithecompiler for the first time incorporates lengthy documents in his history of the southern kingdom. These Judaean narratives are commonly supposed to be based on official records ; and, as literature, are certainly inferior to the best of the Israelitish sources. Whether in the present passage one or more such documents have been used is not quite clear. In the latter part of ch. xi there are certain incongruities which appear to indicate composite authorship, e. g. the double mention of Athaliah's death, the account of the demolition of the Baal- temple before the enthronement of the king, &c. These anomalies are best explained by the theory of Stade, that verses 13-18^ are a fragment of a second account which has been inserted in the main narrative '5-12, i8''-2o\ Similar instances of interwoven narratives in the compiler's sources have already come before us (e. g. I Kings xi. 14 ff.) ; and the probability is that ch. xi here is an extract from the book of the chronicles of Judah. xi. 1-3. Athaliah seizes the Throne. On hearing of the death of Ahaziah, the queen-mother Athaliah (viii. 26) destroyed all the males of the royal house of Judah, and reigned in her own name for six years. Unknown to her, however, Jehoash (Joash), an infant son of the late king, had been saved from the massacre, and was kept in concealment in the temple, under the protection of Jehosheba, a sister of Ahaziah, and her husband Jehoiada the chief priest. The regency of Athaliah is treated by the compiler as a sort of interregnum, and hence is not enclosed by the usual introductory and concluding formulas. II KINGS 11.3,4. KJ 337 sister of Ahaziah, look Joash the son of Ahaziah, and stole him away from among the king's sons that were slain, even him and his nurse, and put thetn in the bed- chamber; and they hid him from AthaHah, so that he was not skiin. And he was with her hid in the house of the 3 Lord six years : and Athaliah reigned over the land. And in the seventh year Jehoiada sent and fetched the 4 captains over hundreds, of the Carites and of the guard, a. Jehosheba was, as we learn from 2 Chron. xxii. 11, the wife of Jehoiada the priest. The words even him and his nurse are probably a gloss (Stade), the sentence having read originally: 'from among the king's sons that were to be slain in the bed- chamber' (cf. however, the expression in 2 Chron. xxii. ii). 3. For with her, Chronicles has 'with them'; i.e. Jehosheba and her husband. xi. 4-20. Pfodamation of Joash and Death of Athaliah. After six years Jehoiada thought that the time had come to overthrow the usurping queen and place the legitimate heir on the throne. He took into his confidence the officers of the palace guard, showing them the young prince, and submitting to them a care- fully considered plan of action, which they solemnly pledged themselves to carry out. In accordance with this arrangement the whole of the palace troops were assembled in the temple on a given sabbath ; the boy king was crowned with all the customary formalities, and hailed with acclamation by the guards. Athaliah, who on hearing the tumult had hastened to the temple, was by Jehoiada's orders conducted beyond the sacred precincts and put to death. The king and people then renewed their allegiance to Yahweh in a solemn covenant ; the temple of Baal was destroyed ; and Joash without further disturbance was firmly established on the throne. Following Stade's analysis of the passage (p. 336 above), we see that the writer of the main account (verses 4-12, 18^^-20) ignores the religious aspect of the affair, representing it as a political coup d'etat, carried through by the help of the royal bodyguard. The religious and popular character of the movement is emphasized in the parallel fragment (verses 13-18*), to which belongs also the more dramatic account of Athaliah's death. The amalgamation of the documents had certainly been made before the time of the chronicler, whose whole treatment of the incident affords a characteristic example of the freedom with which he accommodates the facts of history to the law and usage of his own time. 4. the Carites were foreign mercenaries employed as body- 338 II KINGS 11. 5-7. KJ and brought them to him into the house of the Lord } and lie made a covenant with them, and took an oath of them in the house of the Lord, and shewed them the 5 king's son. And he commanded them, saying, This is the thing that ye shall do : a third part of you, that come in on the sabbath^ shall be keepers of the watch of the 6 king's house ; and a third part shall be at the gate Sur ; and a third part at the gate behind the guard : so shall 7 ye keep the watch of the house, and be a barrier. And the two companies of you, even all that go forth on the sabbath, shall keep the watch of the house of the Lord guards by the kings of Judah, like the Krethi and Plethi in the time of Solomon (see on i Kings i. 38). It is important to notice that the same body of troops furnished the guard both for the palace and the temple. The presence of these * uncircumcized foreigners' was obnoxious to the later conception of the sanctity of the temple (see especially Ezek. xliv. 6ff.); hence in the narrative of 2 Chron. their place is taken by Levites assembled from all the cities of Judah. took an oath . . . ZiOl&D : or, ' made them swear by the house ofYahweh' (cf. Matt, xxiii. 16). shewed them ths king's son : of whose existence they had of course been ignorant. 5-8. These directions to the centurions presupposes a know- ledge of the routine observed in the disposition of the guards, which we unfortunately do not possess. What appears the best explanation was first given by Wellhausen. The guard was divided into three companies. On week days two of these were on duty in the palace and the third in the temple. On the sabbath the order was reversed, two companies being on guard in the temple and one in the palace. The essential feature of Jehoiada's scheme is the assembling of the whole guard within the temple at the critical time, so as to leave the palace entirely denuded of troops. For this purpose he chooses the moment when on the sabbath the two companies have come up from the palace to relieve the third, which ought immediately to return to its quarters. By detaining this third division he attains his end : the whole guard (as verse 9 clearly shows) is present, and takes part in the coronation of the king. The only obstacle to this interpretation lies in verse 6; but that verj' obscure verse appears on any view irreconcileable with verse 9, and must be omitted as II KINGS 11. 8-12. KJ 339 about the king. And ye shall compass the king round 8 about, every man with his weapons in his hand ; and he that Cometh within the ranks, let him be slain : and be ye with the king when he goeth out, and when he cometh in. And the captains over hundreds did according to 9 all that Jehoiada the priest commanded : and they took every man his men, those that were to come in on the sabbath, with those that were to go out on the sabbath, and came to Jehoiada the priest. And the priest de- 10 livered to the captains over hundreds the spears and shields that had been king David's, which were in the house of the Lord. And the guard stood, every man 11 with his weapons in his hand, from the right side of the house to the left side of the house, along by the altar and the house, by the king round about. Then he 12 brought out the king's son, and put the crown upon him, a gloss. With this excision, and some minor changes of text, the passage may be translated as follows : ' The third part of you — those that turn in [to their barracks in the palace] on the sabbath and keep guard in the palace ; and the two other companies of you — all those that turn out [from their barracks] on the sabbath and keep guard in the temple : ye shall compass the king/ &c. when he goeth out (i. e. from the temple), and . . . cometh in (to the palace) : see verse 19. 10. Ewald makes the interesting suggestion that the weapons were David's own spear and shield, which had been preserved as relics in the temple, and perhaps played some part at every coronation ceremony : 'it would be a mistake to suppose that in the original narrative the soldiers of the captains came to the temple without weapons, and that there the high priest distributed the weapons of David to them through the captains.' More probably, however, the verse is a gloss introduced from 2 Chron., where it has a meaning as applied to the arming of the Leviies for a particular occasion. 11. The meaning seems to be that the guards were drawn up in ranks right across the court from south to north, and facing the altar and the temple. The phrase by the king- round ahout cannot possibly be correct, since the king had not yet been brought out. Z 2 340 II KINGS 11. 13-16. KJ and ^i^ave him the testimony ; and they made him king, and anointed him ; and they clapped their hands, and 13 said, God save the king. And when Athaliah heard the noise of the guard and of the people, she came to the 14 people into the house of the Lord: and she looked, and, behold, the king stood by the pillar, as the manner was, and the captains and the trumpets by the king; and all the people of the land rejoiced, and blew with trumpets. Then Athaliah rent her clothes, and cried, 15 Treason, treason. And Jehoiada the priest commanded the captains of hundreds that were set over the host, and said unto them, Have her forth between the ranks ; and him that followeth her slay with the sword : for the priest said, Let her not be slain in the house of the Lord. 16 So they made way for her ; and she went by the way of 12. and gave him the testimony: i.e. the law-book, which was supposed to be handed to the king at his coronation. But there is no evidence of any such custom ; and context and con- struction ahke demand that some part of the regalia should be indicated. We may read with Wellhausen. 'and the bracelets^' (see 2 Sam. i. 10), or, 'and the ornaments-' (Oort). 13. Here we enter on the second narrative, in which the influential part is played, not by the guard and its centurions, but by the people under its military leaders. The word for the guard in this verse appears from its ungrammatical position in the Hebrew to be a harmonizing gloss to ' people,' carelessly inserted to connect the narrative with the preceding. 14. by the pillar : apparently the spot where the king usually stood when he worshipped in the temple (cf. xxiii. 3). Whether it was by one of the great entrance pillars, Jachin and Boaz, we cannot tell. 15. the captains of hundreds: probably another insertion borrowed from the other document (verses 4. 9, 10;. The clause immediately following should be rendered : ' the commanders of the army.' 16. they made way for her : better, ' they laid hands on her.' * Reading T\yys^x\ for T\'\'\sr\, ^ Dviyn. II KINGS 11. 17-20. KJ 341 the horses' entry to the king's house : and there was she slain. And Jehoiada made a covenant between the Lord 17 and the king and the people, that they should be the Lord's people; between the king also and the people. And all the people of the land went to the house of Baal, 18 and brake it down ; his altars and his images brake they in pieces thoroughly, and slew Mattan the priest of Baal before the altars. And the priest appointed officers over the house of the Lord. And he took the captains over 19 hundreds, and the Carites, and the guard, and all the people of the land; and they brought down the king from the house of the Lord, and came by the way of the gate of the guard unto the king's house. And he sat on the throne of the kings. So all the people of the land 20 rejoiced, and the city was quiet : and they slew Athaliah with the sword at the king's house. the horses' entry: as distinguished from the 'gate of the foot-guards ' (verse 19). 17. The covenant has two sides : it establishes fi) a religious relation between Yahweh on the one part and the king and people on the other — they are to be 'a people of Yahweh ' ; and (2) a political relation between the king on the one hand and the people on the other (cf. xxiii. 3). 18 *. The revolution culminates, according to this account, in the abolition of Baal- worship in Jerusalem. Mattan is a contraction of Mattan-Baal (gift of Baal), a name common in Phoenician (KA T^, p, io4\ 18'' is the immediate continuation of verse 12 in the principal narrative. For officers render * guards.' 19. Leaving these guards to keep order in the temple court, Jehoiada leads the main bod}' down to the palace to complete the installation of the king in the usual manner ( cf i Kings i. 35, 46). The fifate of the [foot-] guards was doubtless that through which the king regularly passed from the temple to the palace and back again, accompanied by his bodyguard (see i Kings xiv. 28). 20. the city was quiet : the change of government being acceptable to all classes. 342 II KINGS 11.21—12.4. DJ 21 [D] Jehoash was seven years old when he began to 12 reign. In the seventh year of Jehu began Jehoash to reign ; and he reigned forty years in Jerusalem : and his 2 mother's name was Zibiah of Beer-sheba. And Jehoash did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord all his ?, days wherein Jehoiada the priest instructed him. Howbeit the high places were not taken away : the people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places. 4 [J] And Jehoash said to the priests, All the money of xii. Jehoash ofjiidah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xxiv.) xi. 21 — xii. 3[= Hebrew, xii. 1-4 J. Introditcto>y Notice. The com- piler is not likely to have been responsible for the transposition of the first two clauses of the formula. LXX (L) gives them in the proper, and doubtless original, order : first the synchronism (xii. I, down to * reign'), and thea the age of accession (xi. 21). It is tills irregularity which has caused the divergence between the Hebrew printed editions and the E. V. in the numbering of the verses : the latter has been guided by the consideration that the synchronism regularly opens a new section. 1. the seventh year of Jehu: see xi. 4. Jehoash, therefore, must have been under a year old at the time of the massacre. On an irregularity in the synchronism, see on xiii. i. 2. wherein Jehoiada, &c. : rather, * forasmuch as . . .' The relative clause is anyhow not restrictive ; for the compiler cer- tainly means that Jehoash was a good king all his days (see xiv. 3). It is only the chronicler who, finding evidence of apostasy in the later troubles of his reign, limits his pietj' to the lifetime of Jehoiada (2 Chron. xxiv. 2). 3. See on i Kings iii. 2, 3. xii. 4-16 [s= Hebrew, xii. 5-17]. Repair of the Temple, The pas- sage describes the origin of certain standing regulations for the repair of the temple, which remained in force probably down to the Exile (see ch. xxii). In the earlier period the maintenance of the fabric had presumably been a charge on the royal exchequer ; and it is likely that the arrangements introduced b}' Jehoash re- present the first attempt to throw the expense on the public, and make the temple self-supporting. The first method tried was to entrust the priests with the collecting cf the temple-dues and voluntary offerings of the people, and hold them responsible for all needful repairs. But after some years it was found that the priests had neglected their obligations ; and a new system II KINGS 12. 4. J 343 the hallowed things that is brought into the house of the Lord, in current money, the money of the persons for whom each man is rated, and all the money that it had to be devised. The priests were reheved of the duty of re- pairing tlie house, and also of the privilege of collecting the money ; they were ordered to put all their receipts into a chest provided for the purpose, whose contents were to be removed from time to time by a palace official, and paid directly to those who had the oversight of the work. This plan seems to have worked admirably— a fact little creditable to the priesthood, for it is expressly attributed to the superior conscientiousness of the laymen who handled the money over their clerical brethren. The chronicler gives a different version : in particular he avoids anything reflecting on the honour of the priests, and only records a mild censure on the Levites for remissness in the performance of their allotted task. Wellhausen rightly calls attention to a close resemblance in style and matter between this section and chs. xxii, xxiii ; and infers that both passages (along with xi. 5 ff . and xvi. 10 ff.) are extracted from a continuous History of the Temple, written towards the end of the seventh century^. That, however, is perhaps a too narrow conception of the writer's standpoint : it is applicable to xii, 4 ff. and xvi. 10 ff., where the interest is con- centrated on the affairs of the temple itself; but hardly to chs. xi or xxii, xxiii, which deal with important national transactions of which the temple happened to be the scene. All that can safely be said is that the document (or documents) reveals the prominent place naturally occupied by the temple and its priest- hood in the history of the southern kingdom. There seems really no need to look for any other source than the book of the chroni- cles of Judah (see Introd. pp. 25, 29). 4. the money of the hallowed things, &c., includes all money payments that came into the temple treasury ; and these are of two kinds : (i) assessments imposed by the priests according to a fixed tariff, and (2) free-will offerings. Instead of in current money, we must read with LXX (L) * the money of each man's assessment.' The following clause, the money . . . rated, is merely an explanatory gloss, modelled on the technical terminology of the Priestly Code. An illustration of what is meant is supplied by Lev. xxvii. 2 ff., where the tariff by which persons dedicated to Yahweh were assessed, according to age and sex, is given. ^ To the same source he is inclined to assign the description of ti.e temple buildings in i Kings vi, vii. 344 II KINGS 12. 5-9. J Cometh into any man's heart to bring into the house of 5 the Lord, let the priests take it to them, every man from his acquaintance : and they shall repair the breaches of C the house, wheresoever any breach shall be found. But it was so, that in the three and twentieth year of king Jehoash the priests had not repaired the breaches of the 7 house. Then king Jehoash called for Jehoiada the priest, and for the of/ier priests, and said unto them, Why repair ye not the breaches of the house ? now therefore take no more money from your acquaintance, 8 but deliver it for the breaches of the house. And the priests consented that they should take no 7nore money from the people, neither repair the breaches of the house. 9 But Jehoiada the priest took a chest, and bored a hole in the lid of it, and set it beside the altar, on the right side as one cometh into the house of the Lord : and the The other class of oflTerings is described in the last clause of the verse : all the money that it cometh, &c. 5. Out of the money thus received the priests were to defray the cost of repairs. The word for acctuaiutance (which occurs only here) is of doubtful meaning : it is hardly credible that each priest dealt only with his own personal friends. 6, 7. On discovering how the stipulated obligation had been evaded, Jehoash takes the whole body of the priests to task for their delinquency. The incident throws an instructive light on the position of the priesthood in pre-Exilic times. The king is the real head of the sanctuary, which is still, in spite of its in- creasing importance for the public religion, primaril}- the royal chapel ; and the priests exercise over it only a delegated authority (of. xvi. 10 ff.). 9. beside the altar . . . right side : the altar was in the middle of the court, whereas the natural position of a chest which was in charge of the priests that kept the threshold (marg.) would be near the entrance (so 2 Chron xxiv. 8). Hence Stade, on the authority of some MSS. of the LXX, would change altar {mizbedh) to inazsebalt, assuming that a mazzebah stood some- where near the gate. A better sense is given by a purelj' con- jectural emendation of Klostermann : ' near the southern (right hand) door-post.' II KINGS 12. 10-16. J 345 priests that kept the door put therein all the money that was brought into the house of the Lord. And it was so, 10 when they saw that there was much money in the chest, that the king's scribe and the high priest came up, and they put up in bags and told the money that was found in the house of the Lord. And they gave the money n that was weighed out into the hands of them that did the work, that had the oversight of the house of the Lord : and they paid it out to the carpenters and the builders, that wrought upon the house of the Lord, and to the 12 masons and the hewers of stone, and for buying timber and hewn stone to repair the breaches of the house of the Lord, and for all that was laid out for the house to repair it. But there were not made for the house of the i.^ Lord cups of silver, snuffers, basons, trumpets, any vessels of gold, or vessels of silver, of the money that was brought into the house of the Lord : for they gave 14 that to them that did the work^ and repaired therewith the house of the Lord, Moreover they reckoned not 15 with the men, into whose hand they delivered the money to give to them that did the work : for they dealt faithfully. The money for the guilt offerings, and the 16 tliat kept the threshold : evidently an important office : of, xxii. 4, xxiii. 4, xxv. 18, Jer. xxxv. 4. 10. and tlie higrh priest is thought by some to be an inter- polation. Throughout the passage Jehoiada is simply called ' the priest ' ; and it is doubted if the title here used {hakkdhm haggdddl) is anjrwhere genuine in pre-Exilic writings (see on xxii. 4). 11, 12. The list of artificers conveys some notion of the dilapi- dated condition of the edifice. 13, 14. On the utensils, see 1 Kings vii. 50. There was no money to spare for the renewal of these vessels, the whole being required for more urgent structural repairs. 16. Two classes of offerings were exempted from the regula- tions just described, and remained the perquisites of the priests, 346 II KINGS 12. 17-20. J K J D money for the sin offerings, was not brought into the house of the Lord : it was the priests'. 17 [KJ] Then Hazael king of Syria went up, and fought against Gath, and took it : and Hazael set his face to go 18 up to Jerusalem. And Jehoash king of Judah took all the hallowed things that Jehoshaphat, and Jehoram, and Ahaziah, his fathers, kings of Judah, had dedicated, and his own hallowed things, and all the gold that was found in the treasures of the house of the Lord, and of the king's house, and sent it to Hazael king of Syria : and 19 he went away from Jerusalem. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Joash, and all that he did, are they not written in 20 the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? And his servants arose, and made a conspiracy, and smote Joash at the house of Millo, on the way that goeth down viz. the gmlt offerings and the sin offering's. These represen- ted money payments for certain ritual offences, probably those atoned for at a later time by the special kinds of sacrifice de- signated by the same names (cf. Lev. iv, v. See W. R. Smith, OTJC^, p. 263 f. ; Rcl. of Sem. 2, pp. 347 f., 423). xii. 17, 18 [= Hebrew, xii. 18, 19]. Hazael threatens Jei'iisalcm. We have here an extract from the annals of Judah. The redoubt- able Hazael, extending his ravages from Israel (x. 32, xiii. 3) to the Philistine territory, captures the city of Gath (see on i Kings ii. 39), and has Jerusalem at his mercy. In order to save the capital Jehoash was obliged to hand over all the consecrated gifts that had accumulated in the temple and palace treasuries since they had been emptied for a similar purpose in the time of Asa (i Kings XV. 18). xii. 19-21 [= Hebrew, xii. 20-22]. Concluding Formula, A ssassi- jtation of Jehoash. It is remarkable that Jehoash and his son Amaziah both perished by the hands of assassins. No motive is here assigned for the crime ; but the chronicler credibl^'^ relates that it was in revenge for the execution of Zechariah the son of Jehoi- ada, whom Jehoash had caused to be stoned (2 Chron. xxiv. 25, 26). Verses 20, 21'' are probably taken from the annalistic document. 20. the house of Millo . . . Silla : hopelessly corrupt. The II KINGS 12. 21— 13. 4. DKIZ 347 to Silla. For Jozacar the son of Shimeath, and Jeho- 21 zabad the son of Shomer, his servants, smote him, and he died; and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David : and Amaziah his son reigned in his stead. In the three and twentieth year of Joash the son of 13 Ahaziah, king of Judah, Jehoahaz the son of Jehu began to reign over Israel in Samaria, and reigned seventeen years. And he did that which was evil in the sight of 2 the Lord, and followed the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin ; he departed not therefrom. [KI] And the anger of the Lord was 3 kindled against Israel, and he delivered them into the hand of Hazael king of Syria, and into the hand of Bcn- hadad the son of Hazael, continually. [Z] And Jeho- 4 one proper name may be a variant of the other ; but a place Silla is not known, and it is altogether doubtful if the ' house of Millo ' has anything to do with ' the Millo' of i Kings ix. 15, &c. xiii. 1-9. Jehoahaz of Israel. The section is in the main from the hand of the compiler, though the description of the Sj'rian oppression in verses 3 and 7 may be based on data from the official annals. The intermediate verses (4-6) are very perplexing (see below). They anticipate the recovery of Israel under Jehoash and Jeroboam II, but in such a way as to convey the erroneous impression that the tide began to turn during the reign of Jehoahaz (cf. verse 22 ff). On the contrary, the military power of Israel was completely shattered, and she lay prostrate at the feet of her hereditary foe throughout the reign. 1. the three and twentieth year. The synchronism is correct according to the ordinary Hebrew computation, though at variance with xii. I (if twenty-third of Joash = twenty-eighth of Jehu, then first of Joash ( = sixth of Athaliah) is sixth (not seventh) of Jehu). 3. continually: i.e. without intermission. It was perhaps the seeming absoluteness of this statement (as if the final rejection had already begun) which suggested to a late scribe to qualify it by the interpolation of verses 4-6. This writer is probably responsible for the kindred passages xiii. 23, xiv. 26 f. Whoever he was, he must have read the closing chapters of the northern 348 II KINGS 13.5-9. ZKID ahaz besought the Lord, and the Lord hearkened unto him : for he saw the oppression of Israel, how that the 5 king of Syria oppressed them. (And the Lord gave Israel a saviour, so that they went out from under the hand of the Syrians : and the children of Israel dwelt in 6 their tents, as beforetime. Nevertheless they departed not from the sins of the house of Jeroboam, wherewith he made Israel to sin, but walked therein : and there 7 remained the Asherah also in Samaria.) [KI] For he left not to Jehoahaz of the people save fifty horsemen, and ten chariots, and ten thousand footmen ; for the king of Syria destroyed them, and made them like the 8 dust in threshing. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Jehoahaz, and all that he did, and his might, are they not written in the book ot the chronicles of the kings of 9 Israel ? And Jehoahaz slept with his fathers ; and they history with a sympathy which neither of the Deuteronomic editors anywhere evinces. 4. besought tlie ZiOBD : as i Kings xiii. 6. 5. a saviour : ' deliverer ' ; cf. Judges iii. 9, 15. The deliverer in this instance is not, as some have supposed, the Assyrian king ; but (as xiv. 27 shows) Jeroboam II. 7. Per he left not, &c. : continuing verse 3^ The subject of the sentence is most naturally Yahweh. not Hazael. people is here used, as often, in the sense of ' army.' When we consider that the army was a militia, in which all the male population was liable to be enrolled, we can appreciate the signi- ficance of this serious reduction of the fighting strength of the kingdom : cf Amos iv. 10, v. 3. * This view of the construction, which is that of Stade, &c., is certainly preferable to the arrangement of R. V,, which connects verse 7 with the end of verse 4. It does not, indeed, quite satisfactorily account for all the linguistic phenomena of the passage. The phraseology of verses 35 has remarkable affinities with some parts of the 'framework' of the book of Judges, which might almost suggest that the whole was from one hand. The writer of verses 4, 5 would appear to have remodelled the language of verse 3. II KINGS 13. 10-I2. D2 349 buried him in Samaria : and Joash his son reigned in his stead. In the thirty and seventh year of Joash king of Judah lo began Jehoash the son of Jehoahaz to reign over Israel in Samaria, and rei^fied sixteen years. And he did that ii which was evil in the sight of the Lord ; he departed not from all the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin : but he walked therein. [Z] Now the rest of the acts of Joash, and all that he 12 xiii. 10-25, Jehoash of Israel. In addition to the framework (verses 10-13) the section contains (rt) the conclusion of the Elisha-history (verses 14-21), and (A) an extract from the annals of Israel (verses 22, 24, 25). But how are wc to account for the fact that both of these come after the con- cluding formula ? If («) alone were in question we might suppose that the insertion had been made later than the main redaction of the book; but obviously that theory fails to explain the displace- ment of \b). The easiest solution would be to follow the text of LXX (L\ which transfers verses 12, 13 to the end of the chapter. But there are other facts to be taken into account, of which this rearrangement furnishes no explanation. In the first place, the wording of verse 13 is not at all in accordance with the usual manner of the compiler ; and in the second place, the concluding notice on Jehoash is found in regular form in xiv. 15, 16, under Amaziah of Judah. Now the incident of xiv. 8-14 '^Amaziah's challenge to Jehoash) belongs as much to the one reign as to the other ; and its literary source is more likely to have been IsraeHtish than Judaean (see below, p. 353). We m::y therefore surmise that originally xiv. 8-14 followed xiii. 25, and was appropriately succeeded by the formula of xiv. 15 f. For some reason it was subsequently removed to its present position ; and by an inadver- tence of the editor the closing formula on Jehoash was transferred along with it. Finally, a still later scribe, struck by the absence of the concluding notice of Jehoash, made good the defect by inserting 12, 13. xiii. 10, II. InU'odiicHon. 10. The synchronism is here at fault, probably by a clerical error. Both xiii, i and xiv. i make the year of Jehoash 's accession to have been the thirty-ninth of Jehoash of Judah. xiii. 12, 13. On these verses, see the introductory note above ; and cf. xiv. 15, 16. 350 II KINGS 13. 13-16. ZEs did, and his might wherewith he fought against Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written in the book of the 13 chronicles of the kings of Israel? And Joash slept with his fathers ; and Jeroboam sat upon his throne : and Joash was buried in Samaria with the kings of Israel. 14 [Es] Now Elisha was fallen sick of his sickness whereof he died : and Joash the king of Israel came down unto him, and wept over him, and said, My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and the horsemen 15 thereof! And Elisha said unto him, Take bow and 16 arrows: and he took unto him bow and arrows. And he said to the king of Israel, Put thine hand upon the 13. sat upon his throne is a phrase never used in the framework. xiii. 14-21. Death a)id Burial of Elisha. The last scene in the life of EHsha is a pathetic tribute at once to his loyalty to the dynasty he had been the means of raising to the throne and to the great part he had played in his country's struggle for freedom. Over his death-bed the king of Israel shed tears of genuine and manly sorrow at the loss of one whose spirit had been the best defence of the realm — its chariots and its horsemen. The aged prophet roused himself to express once more in symbolic act his undying faith in Yahweh's power and Israel's victory. With hir> hands on the king's hands, as if he would infuse into him his own brave spirit, he made him shoot an arrow towards Damascus : it was the arrow of Yahweh's deliverance. Then he bade him smite the ground with the arrows ; and when after three strokes Jehoash paused, he rebuked him for his lack of energy ; and predicted that he should defeat the Syrians but thrice, whereas if he had gone on smiting he would have vanquished them utterly. After his death it was believed that his bones could work miracles ; for it was reported that on one occasion a dead body flung hurriedly into the prophet's tomb on the approach of a band of marauders was restored to life. 14. wept over his face (marg.) : cf. Gen. 1. i. My father : as vi. 21. the chariots of Israel, &c. See on ii. 12. Whatever be the meaning of the expression in the earlier passage, there is no doubt that here it is used metaphorically : Elisha had been more to Israel than its chariots and horsemen. H KINGS 13. 17-21. Es 351 bow : and he put his hand upo?i it. And Ehsha laid his hands upon the king's hands. And he said, Open the 17 window eastward : and he opened it. Then Ehsha said, Shoot : and he shot. And he said, The LoRiys arrow of victory, even the arrow of victory over Syria : for thou shalt smite the Syrians in Aphek, till thou have consumed them. And he said, Take the arrows : and he took them. iS And he said unto the king of Israel, Smite upon the ground: and he smote thrice, and stayed. And the 19 man of God was wroth with him, and said, Thou shouldest have smitten five or six times ; then hadst thou smitten Syria till thou hadst consumed it : whereas now thou shalt smite Syria but thrice. And Elisha died, and they buried him. Now the 20 bands of the Moabites invaded the land at the coming in of the year. And it came to pass, as they were 21 burying a man, that, behold, they spied a band; and they cast the man into the sepulchre of Elisha : and as 1*7. in Aphek : see on i Kings xx. 26. eastwa^rd: the direction of Damascus. Shooting an arrow into an enemy's country was a common symbol of the declaration ol war. The fighting at Aphek is not recorded, but must un- doubtedly have taken place. 18. and stayed. The action is to the prophet the revelation of a flaw in the character of Jehoash — a lack of grit and determina- tion, a disposition to rest satisfied with something less than the utmost attainable — which made high achievement impossible. 19. The promise of verse 17 is accordingly restricted, through the fault of the king. Thou shonldest have smitten : LXX reads : ' If thou hadst smitten.' 20. invaded should be ' used to invade ' : it was a yearly occurrence. How long after Elisha's death this occurred there is absolutely nothing to indicate. at the coming in of the year. The text is un grammatical and corrupt : perhaps ^ year by year.' 21. and as soon as, &c. Read, with LXX (L), 'and went away ; and when the man touched,' &c. (cf. marg.). 352 II KINGS 13.22-25. EsKIZKI soon as the man touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood up on his feet. 3 2 [KI] And Hazael king of Syria oppressed Israel all 23 the days of Jehoahaz. [Z] But the Lord was gracious unto them, and had compassion on them, and had respect unto them, because of his covenant with Abraham^ Isaac, and Jacob, and would not destroy them, neither 24 cast he them from his presence as yet. [KI] And Hazael king of Syria died ; and Ben-hadad his son 35 reigned in his stead. And Jehoash the son of Jehoahaz took again out of the hand of Ben-hadad the son of xiii. 22-25. Successes against the Syn'ans. The return of prosperity to Israel in the time of Jehoash was partly due perhaps to the death of Hazael and the succession of a feebler monarch ; but the principal cause was a renewal of Assyrian activity in the west. About 803, Ramman-nirari III led a great expedition to the Mediterranean coast, in the course of which he marched against Damascus, where he encountered no resistance. It is true that amongst the countries subdued at this time the inscrip- tion mentions also ' the land of Humri ' i i. e. Israel) ; but the net effect of the breaking of the power of Damascus was to restore the balance of power amongst the western states and enable Israel for a time to hold its own. Verses 22, 24, 25 may be taken from the Israelitish annals ; verse 23 is an interpolation of the same character as verses 4-6, LXX (L) inserts it between verses 6 and 7. 22. oppressed: better, 'had oppressed.' After this verse LXX (L) has preserved an ancient and valuable notice: 'And Hazael had taken the Philistine out of his (Jehoahaz's) hand from the western Sea unto Aphek.' 23. as yet : or, ' until now' (marg.) is wanting in LXX (B) and other MSS. 24. Ben-hadad his son : on the name, see on i Kings xx. i. The contemporary king of Damascus is called on Ramman-nirari's inscription Man. In all probability he is the same who is here called Ben-hadad, the third of that name mentioned in the O. T. (Winckler, Alttest. Untersuclnmgen, p. 66). 25. Amongst the cities retaken may have been Lo-debar and Karnaim, according to a conjectural emendation of Amos vi. 13 (see Driver, in Canib. Bible). II KINGS 14. 1-5. KID 353 Hazael the cities which he had taken out of the hand of Jehoahaz his father by war. Three times did Joash smite him, and recovered the cities of Israel. [D] In the second year of Joash son of Joahaz king of 14 Israel began Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah to reign. He was twenty and five years old when he began 2 to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem ; and his mother's name was Jehoaddin of Jerusalem. And he did that which was right in the eyes 3 of the Lord, yet not like David his father: he did according to all that Joash his father had done. How- 4 beit the high places were not taken away : the people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places. And it came to pass, as soon as the kingdom was 5 Three times : in fulfilment of Elisha's prediction (verse 19). xiv. 1-22. Amaziah of Judah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xxv.) The introduction (verses 1-4) is followed by a pair of annalistic notices (verses 5-7), on the execution of the murderers of the late king and the re-conquest of Edom. Then comes (in 8-14) a long and graphic narrative of how^ Amaziah, his head turned by his victories in Edom, was foolhardy enough to measure his strength with Jehoash of Israel, and suffered a humiliating defeat. The whole tone of this passage, as well as an incidental expression in verse II, shows that it is taken, not from a Judaean, but from an Ephraimitic source, possibly the chronicles of the northern king- dom. The remainder of the section is written by the compiler, with the exception of an interpolation in verse 17, and two extracts from the annals in verses 19-21, 22. xiv. 1-4. Introduction. 1. In the second year. See on xiii. 10. 2. twenty and nine years. A comparison with xiii. loandxv. i brings to light a discrepancy of twelve years between the duration of this reign and the synchronistic scheme, the first of two serious errors that have crept into the chronology of Kings. See Introd. p. 42 ; and below on xv. i. 4. Cf. I Kings iii. 2f. xiv. 5, 6. Punishment of the Murderers of Jehoash. See xii. 20, 21. Aa 354 n KINGS 14.6-8. DKJKI(?) established in his hand, that he slew his servants which 6 had slain the king his father : but the children of the murderers he put not to death : according to that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, as the Lord commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers ; but every man shall die for his own sin. 7 [KJ] He slew of Edom in the Valley of Salt ten thousand, and took Sela by war, and called the name of it Joktheel, unto this day. 8 [KI ?] Then Amaziah sent messengers to Jehoash, the 6. The sparing of the children of the guilty persons was evidently a new departure in jurisprudence, indicating an advance in the moral sentiment of the community. Examples of the older practice are found in the case of Achan (Joshua vii. 24 ff.), and even the quite recent instance of Naboth (ix. 26). The reference to the book of the law of Moses is to Deut. xxiv. 16, Deuteronomy being the only law-book known to the compiler. (Cf. I Kings ii. 3.) xiv. 7. Victory over the Edomites. Since Jehoram's abortive attempt to suppress the revolt (viii. 20-22) Edom had maintained its independence against Judah ; and the contemporary notices seem to show that even this signal success of Amaziah did not result in the permanent subjugation of the country. We may perhaps infer from verse 22 that the object of the campaign was to secure the possession of the port of Elath, and the trade-routes between it and Judah. *l. the Valley of Salt (cf. 2 Sam. viii. 13) is by most localized in the marshy plain to the south of the Dead Sea. Buhl {Geog. p. 88) identifies it with the modern vvadi of the same name \Wadi el-MiUi), east of Beer-sheba. Sela: or, 'the rock' (marg.) (Judges i. 36; Isa. xvi. i), has commonly been taken to be the name of Petra, the rock-city, the capital of Edom. The identification has been recently disputed (see Moore, on Judges i. 36) ; and the fact that the place bore the name Joktheel, unto this day is certainly not in favour of it. xiv. 8-14. Amaziah's Encounter with Jehoash. Elated by his recent success (see verse 10) Amaziah boastfully challenges Jehoash of Israel to a trial of strength. Jehoash at first answers with a contemptuous parable, advising him to rest on his laurels II KINGS 14.9-12. KI(?) 355 son of Jehoahaz son of Jehu, king of Israel, saying, Come, let us look one anotlier in the face. And Jehoash 9 the king of Israel sent to Amaziah king of Judah, saying, The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, saying. Give thy daughter to my son to wife : and there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down the thistle. Thou hast indeed 10 smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted thee up: glory thereof, and abide at home; for why shouldest thou meddle to thy hurt, that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and Judah with thee? But Amaziah would not n hear. So Jehoash king of Israel went up ; and he and Amaziah king of Judah looked one another in the face at Beth-shemesh, which belongeth to Judah. And Judah 13 and nurse his vanity at home. But when Amaziah refuses to take warning he marches against him, and the two armies meet at Beth-shemesh, west of Jerusalem, where the Judaeans suffer a crushing defeat. Their king is taken prisoner, a large piece of the north wall of the capital is destroyed, the temple and palace are rifled, and hostages are taken for future behaviour. The incident illustrates the relative importance of the two kingdoms ever since the disruption of the nation. The two latest commentators assume that the old relation of vassalship still subsisted between them, and understand Amaziah's challenge as an assertion of his inde- pendence. But the Israelitish suzerainty must have terminated with the dynasty of Omri, and it does not appear that any of the subsequent kings was strong enough to recover it, unless, indeed, it were Jehoash himself. The conduct of Amaziah has to be construed as the sheer insolence of success. On the original position of the verses, see above, p. 349. 8. look one another in the face : a strange expression for * confront one another in battle.' Jehoash's parable, to be sure, seems to interpret it as merely a claim to treat with him on terms of equality. But the details of the parable cannot be pressed ; and in verse 12 the fighting follows as a matter of course. 10. meddle to thy hurt should be rendered as marg. ' provoke calamity.' 11. Beth-shemesh. See on i Kings iv. 9. which belongeth to Judah shows that the writer is an Ephraimite (cf. i Kings xix. 3). A a 2 356 II KINGS 14. 13-17. KI(?)DZ was put to the worse before Israel ; and they fled every 13 man to his tent. And Jehoash king of Israel took Aniaziah king of Judah, the son of Jehoash the son of Ahaziah, at Beth-shemesh, and came to Jerusalem, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem from the gate of Ephraim unto the corner gate, four hundred cubits. 14 And he took all the gold and silver, and all the vessels that were found in the house of the Lord, and in the treasures of the king's house, the hostages also, and 15 returned to Samaria. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Jehoash which he did, and his might, and how he fought with Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written in the 16 book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel ? And Jehoash slept with his fathers, and was buried in Samaria with the kings of Israel ; and Jeroboam his son reigned in his stead. 17 [Z] And Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah 13. and came. Read, as LXX and s Chron. xxv. 23, < and brought him.' the grate of Ephraim, as the name indicates, must have been that through which the road to Ephraim issued : therefore, in the northern wall. the corner gate was probably at the north-west angle of the wall, four hundred cubits : 200 yards or upwards (see on i Kings vi. 2). xiv. 15, 16. On the displacement of these verses, see above, P- 349- xiv. 17-22. Concluding Formula. Death of Amaziah. Like his father Jehoash (xii. 20 f), Amaziah was put to death by his own subjects. The ' conspiracy,' however, was in this case no mere palace intrigue, but a popular insurrection in favour of the young prince Azariah, a result probably of the misfortunes into which the state had been plunged by the folly of Amaziah. The king fled to Lachish, where the insurgents overtook and slew him ; but his body was buried with due honours at Jerusalem. The section un- doubtedly incorporates annalistic material, and is not quite in the compiler's usual vein. II KINGS 14.18-23. ZDKJD 357 lived after the death of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel fifteen years. [D] Now the rest of the acts of 18 Amaziah, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah ? [KJ] And they made 19 a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem ; and he fled to Lachish: but they sent after him to Lachish, and slew him there. And they brought him upon horses : and he ao was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the city of David. And all the people of Judah took Azariah, who a i was sixteen years old, and made him king in the room of his father Amaziah. He built Elath, and restored it 23 to Judah, after that the king slept with his fathers. [D] In the fifteenth year of Amaziah the son of Joash 23 17 is a note inserted by a scribe to mark the interval between the two concluding formulas. The chronology corresponds with xiii. 10, xiv. 2. 19. Lacliisli is now pretty surely identified (by Petrie) with Tell el-Hast, at the mouth of a valley in the Shephelah, about thirty-five miles south-west of Jerusalem (G. A. Smith, Hist Geog. p. 234). See xviii. 14. 22. The peculiar position of the verse cannot be fully explained. It has certainly a connexion with verse 7 ; and perhaps the most natural interpretation is that Amaziah had succeeded in capturing Elath, but had afterwards lost it owing to his defeat by Jehoash ; and that its recovery was one of the first exploits of Azariah after his accession. But if that be the meaning, it is difficult to see why the notice was not reserved for the history of Azariah. On the situation of Elath, see i Kings ix. 26. xiv. 23-29. Jeroboam TI of Israel. The reign of Jeroboam 11 was the most brilliant, as it was by far the longest, in the history of the northern kingdom. His success was largely due to the crippling of Damascus and the neighbouring states by repeated raids of the Assyrians under Shalmaneser III (78a 772) and Asshurdan III (772-754) ; while the inactivity of Asshur-nirari (754-746) gave an opportunity for the expansion of Israel such as no previous monarch had enjoyed. Jeroboam accordingly extended his dominions to the utmost limits of Solomon's empire; and the country, enriched by the tribute 358 II KINGS 14. 24-27. D KI Z king of Judah Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel began to reign in Samaria, and reigned forty and one 34 years. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord : he departed not from all the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin. 25 [KI] He restored the border of Israel from the entering in of Hamath unto the sea of the Arabah, according to the word of the Lord, the God of Israel, which he spake by the hand of his servant Jonah the son of Amittai, the 26 prophet, which was of Gath-hepher. [Z] For the I,ord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter: for there was none shut up nor left at large, neither was 27 there any helper for Israel. And the Lord said not that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven : but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam the son of of subjugated states, rose rapidly to an unprecedented height of material prosperity. The brief and colourless narrative before us requires to be supplemented from the pages of Amos and Hosea before we can form a true estimate of the character and splendour of the reign of Jeroboam. xiv. 23, 24. IntwdudioH. 23. The chronology is still at fault. The synchronistic state- ment agrees with verses i and 17 (but not with xv. i) ; but the length of reign conflicts with xv. 8 (see on these verses). xiv. 25-27. Expansion of the Empire. See introductory note to the section. Verse 25 may be abridged from the annals ; verses 26 and 27 appear to be from the same writer as xiii. 4 f., 23. 25. Cf. Amos vi. 14. from the entering- in of Hamatli. See i Kings viii. 65. the sea of the Arabah is the Dead Sea ; the Arabah being to this day the name of the depression which connects the Jordan valley with the head of the Gulf of Akaba. The reference to Jonah the son of Amittai shows that in the prophets religion and patriotism still went hand in hand. Jonah was a confrere of Elisha rather than of Amos. G-ath-hepher was a town of Zebulon (Joshua xix. 13) ; and the grave of Jonah is still shown in the vicinity of Nazareth. 26. shut up nor left .... See on i Kings xiv. 10. 27. said not that . . . : * had not purposed to blot out.' hut he saved: 'and so he delivered.' II KINGS 14.28—15.2. ZD 359 Joash. [D I Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and 28 all that he did, and his might, how he warred, and how he recovered Damascus, and Hamath, which had belonged to Judah, for Israel, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? And Jeroboam 29 slept with his fathers, even with the kings of Israel ; and Zechariah his son reigned in his stead. In the twenty and seventh year of Jeroboam king of 15 Israel began Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah to reign. Sixteen years old was he when he began to reign ; 2 and he reigned two and fifty years in Jerusalem : and his xiv. 28, 29. Conclusion. 28. and how lie recovered . . . Israel. The sentence is un« intelligible in the Hebrew ; and even the excision of the words to Judah hardly yields a tolerable sense. The idea conveyed by the R. v., that Damascus and Hamath had once been in the possession of Judah and were now transferred to Israel, is wholly baseless ; and a 'recovery* of these territories either to Israel or Judah could not be spoken of. The meaning remains obscure. XV. 1-7. Azariah of Judah. (Cf. 2 Chron. xxvi.) The record of this long and fortunate reign is disappointingly meagre. There is evidence that under Azariah (or Uzziah) the kingdom of Judah enjoyed a period of exceptional prosperity, although the causes of that prosperity may not be so obvious as those to which the contemporary greatness of North Israel can be traced. The early prophecies of Isaiah prove that the resources of the state had been wisely administered for a considerable time ; and the Book of Chronicles has much to tell of Uzziah's successful military enterprises, and his measures for the defence of the land and the development of its natural advantages. It has been thought that further evidence of his power was found in an Assyrian inscription of Tiglath-pileser III, which mentions an Azariah of Ja'udi as the leader of a great confederacy of North Syrian states, in 738 b. c. But it seems no longer possible to uphold the identification of Ja'udi with Judah, or of its king with the Azariah of the O. T. (see Whitehouse in DB, iv. p. 844 f.). 1. In the twenty and seventh year: at variance with xiv. 2, 23. If Jeroboam began to reign in the fifteenth year of Amaziah (xiv. 23), and Amaziah reigned twenty-nine years (xiv. 2, 17), the first year of Azariah must have been the fifteenth of Jeroboam. Sec further on verse 8 below ; Introd. p. 42. 36o II KINGS 15.3-8. DKJD 3 mother's name was Jecoliah of Jerusalem. And he did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, according 4 to all that his father Amaziah had done. Howbeit the high places were not taken away : the people still sacrificed 5 and burnt incense in the high places. [KJ] And the Lord smote the king, so that he was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house. And Jotham the king's son was over the household, judging 6 the people of the land. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Azariah, and all that he did, are they not written in the 7 book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah ? And Azariah slept with his fathers ; and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David : and Jotham his son reigned in his stead. 8 In the thirty and eighth year of Azariah king of Judah The name Azariali is all but peculiar to the Book of Kings ; elsewhere (except i Chron. iii. 12) the form Uzziah is used. Uzziah appears in verses 13, 30, 32, 34 of this chapter ; but in each case the LXX reads Azariah, which probably stood in the original text. 5. in a several house. The phrase was unintelligible to the Greek translators, and its exact sense is uncertain. The king was certainly isolated and relieved of the duties of government ; but that he was confined in * a lazar house ' (marg.) is in itself improbable, and is not justified by the Hebrew text. The most attractive interpretation is obtained by an ingenious correction of Klostermann, who reads : 'he dwelt in his own house unmolested^ (strictly, * at liberty '), in contrast with ordinary lepers, who were expelled from the city (vii. 3,) How long the regency of Jotham lasted we cannot determine (see Introd. p. 45 f.). XV. 8-12. Zechariah 0/ Israel. After the death of Jeroboam \l the northern kingdom plunged into another period of anarchy and civil war, which lasted till the end : usurper after usurper seizing the crown, and royal assassina- tions being the order of the day. His son and successor, Zechariah, thus perished after a reign of six months. Verse 10 may be assigned to the annals. 8. In the thirty and eighth year. In order to reconcile the synchronism with xiv. 23, wc should have either to read : ' In II KINGS 15.9-14. DKIDKI 361 did Zechariah the son of Jeroboam reign over Israel in Samaria six months. And he did that which was evil in 9 the sight of the Lord, as his fathers had done: he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin. [KI] And 10 Shallum the son of Jabesh conspired against him, and smote him before the people, and slew him, and reigned in his stead. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Zechariah, n behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. This was the word of the Lord 12 which he spake unto Jehu, saying, Thy sons to the fourth generation shall sit upon the throne of Israel. And so it came to pass. Shallum the son of Jabesh began to reign in the nine 13 and thirtieth year of Uzziah king of Judah; and he reigned the space of a month in Samaria. [KI] And 14 Menahem the son of Gadi went up from Tirzah, and came to Samaria, and smote Shallum the son of Jabesh in Samaria, and slew him, and reigned in his stead. the twenty-seventh year,' or else to assign to Jeroboam a reign of fifty-two years. On the other hand, if we accept the statement of XV. I, we find a discrepancy of no less than twenty-three years. Two independent errors of considerable magnitude appear to vitiate the chronology (Introd. p. 42). 10. before the people. Read, with LXX (L), 'in Ibleam ' (see on ix. 27). 12. Cf. X. 30. XV. 13-16. Shallum of Israel. Shallum's possession of the throne was so soon contested that Kittel concludes that after the death of Jeroboam II two rival parties had been contending for the mastery, one under Shallum, and the other under Menahem, who held Tirzah, the ancient capital of the kingdom {History^ Eng. trans., ii. p. 332 f.). The order of the section is somewhat irregular ; the annalistic notices of verses 14 and 16 (which appear to stand in reversed order) being separated by the closing formula. 14. Tirzali. See i Kings xiv. 17. 362 II KINGS 15.15-19. DKIDKI 15 [D] Now the rest of the acts of Shallum, and his con- spiracy which he made, behold, they are written in the 16 book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. [KI] Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the borders thereof, from Tirzah : because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up. 1 7 [D] In the nine and thirtieth year of Azariah king of Judah began Menahem the son of Gadi to reign over 18 Israel, and reig7ied ten years in Samaria. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord : he departed not all his days from the sins of Jeroboam the son of 19 Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin. [KI] There 16. Tiphsah cannot be the Tiphsah on the Euphrates (i Kings iv. 24% and no town of the name in Palestine is known. We may probably read Tappuah, a town on the borders of Ephraim and Manasseh (Joshua xvi. 8, xvii. 7). It was held by the partisans of Shallum ; and Menahem attacks it from Tirzah, the centre of his own power. XV. 17-22. Menahem of Israel. The reign of Menahem is memorable for the first decisive in- tervention of Assyria in the internal affairs of Israel. Tiglath- pileser III mentions in his annals the name of Minihimmit of Samirinai, as one of a long list of kings from whom he received tribute in the eighth year of his reign (738 b.c.) (COT, p. 223 ff.) ^ The Hebrew side of the incident is given in verses 19, 20, which are probably taken directly from the annals of the kingdom. We learn that Tiglath-pileser liad actually invaded the country ; and that in consideration of the tribute he not only withdrew his troops, but confirmed Menahem on the throne, which probably means that he supported him against the rival party. The trans- action must apparently belong to the end of the reign ; for we shall see presently that between 738 and 734 the crown twice changed hands. (Introd. p. 44 f.) 18. The phrase all his days stands in the Hebrew at the end ; it is properly the beginning of verse 19, and ought to be read : 'In his days' (so LXX). * The identification has, however, been disputed by Oppert and others. II KINGS 15.20-24. KID 363 came against the land Pul the king of Assyria; and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of silver, that his hand might be with him to confirm the kingdom in his hand. And Menahem exacted the money of Israel, even 20 of all the mighty men of wealth, of each man fifty shekels of silver, to give to the king of Assyria. So the king of Assyria turned back, and stayed not there in the land. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Menahem, and all that 21 he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? And Menahem slept with his 22 fathers ; and Pekahiah his son reigned in his stead. In the fiftieth year of Azariah king of Judah Pekahiah 23 the son of Menahem began to reign over Israel in Samaria, aiid reigned two years. And he did that which 24 19. Pul the kingf of Assyria is, as had long been suspected, Tiglath-pileser III (see verse 29). The two are indeed distin- guished in I Chron. v. 26 ; but the identity is put beyond reason- able doubt by a comparison of two Babylonian inscriptions, one of which shows the name Pulu where the other has Tiglath- pileser {Tukulti-abal-isarra). See KIB, ii. p. 290 f. The most probable theory is that Pulu is the king's real name, and Tiglath- pileser that which he assumed when he usurped the throne of Assyria. a thousand talents of silver: roundly about ;^400,ooo in quantity. The last clause to confiLrm . . . hand is wanting in LXX (B). 20. exacted . . .of: perhaps 'distributed over' (///. 'made to go out'). Klostermann changes the verb to 'commanded'; but this entails further alterations of the text, which are liardly justified, mighty men of wealth (///. ' heroes of valour '; means simply well-to-do people, not necessarily landed proprietors merely. Taking the talent at 3,000 shekels, we find that there must have been sixty thousand such persons in Israel. XV, 23-26. Pekahiah of Israel. 23. For two years LXX (L) reads 'ten years' ; and even in the Hebrew text of xvii. i the synchronism seems based on the assumption of a ten years* reign of Pekahiah (see Introd. p. 43). 364 II KINGS 15. 25-28. DKID was evil in the sight of the Lord : he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith 25 he made Israel to sin. [KI] And Pekah the son of Remaliah, his captain, conspired against him, and smote him in Samaria, in the castle of the king's house, with Argob and Arieh ; and with him were fifty men of the Gileadites : and he slew him, and reigned in his stead. 36 [D] Now the rest of the acts of Pekahiah, and all that he did, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. 27 In the two and fiftieth year of Azariah king of Judah Pekah the son of Remaliah began to reign over Israel in a 8 Samaria, and reigned twenty years. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord : he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith The Assyrian chronology proves that two years is the utmost that can be allowed for the reign. 25. his captain: or, 'adjutant'; see on vii. 2, i Kings ix. 22. the castle of the kingr's house : cf. i Kings xvi. 18. with Argfob and Arieh. Argob is the name of a district in Bashan (i Kings iv. 13), and Arieh means 'the Hon.' The clause is hopelessly obscure. The fifty men . . . Oileadites are of course the accomplices of Pekah, who was therefore presumably himself a Gileadite. XV. 27-31. Pekah of Israel. The chief event of Pekah's reign was the seizure of the northern province of the kingdom by Tiglath-pileser, and the deportation of the inhabitants to Assyria (verse 29). The annals of Tiglath- pileser show that this expedition belongs to the year 734 or 7isv" It had been preceded and occasioned by the Syro-Ephraimivf'. league against Judah, the notice of which is reserved for the he'- tories of Jotham and Ahaz (see verse 37 and xvi. 5 ff.). Pek ^' must therefore have entered into the alliance with Damascus "i^ the very beginning of his reign ; and the prompt interference of Tiglath-pileser leaves no doubt as to what the ultimate aim if the confederacy was. It was an attempt to form a new coahticn of Syrian states against Assyria ; and Judah was to be coerced into it by force. The circumstances suggest that Pekah hal II KINGS 15.29-31. DKID 365 he made Israel to sin. [KI] In the days of Pekah king 29 of Israel came Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abel-beth-maacah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali ; and he carried them captive to Assyria. And 3° Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and smote him, and slew him, and reigned in his stead, in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah. [D] Now the rest of the acts 31 risen to power as the leader of an anti- Assyrian faction, and that Pekahiah had been assassinated because, like his father Menahem, he ruled as a protected vassal of the Assyrian empire. Pekah was in his turn murdered by Hoshea, the nominee of Tiglath- pileser; and the Assyrian records confirm the impression given by verse 30, that this took place in connexion with the punitive expedition of 734/3. The statement that Pekah reigned for twenty years is quite erroneous. 29. The depopulated district corresponds generally with that ravaged by the Syrians in the time of Asa : see on i Kings xv. 20. Two of the cities here named, Ijon and Abel-beth-iuaacah, are mentioned there, as well as the tribal name Naphtali ; Jauoali is unknown ; Kedesh is the modem Kades, north-west of Lake Huleh ; on Hazor and Oalilee, see i Kings ix. 15, 11. Oilead cannot be the familiar name of the trans-Jordanic district : it is probably identical with a city Grt/[. . .], mentioned along with Abel in the Assyrian account of the incident (the second syllable of the name is undecipherable). carried them captive : or, * exiled them ' ; the verb (as dis- tinct, e. g., from that used in verse 2) expresses the idea of migra- tion from home, though here the difference is perhaps inappreci- able. 30. Hoshea is the leader of the pro-Assyrian party. Tiglath- pileser, indeed, claims for himself the honour of putting Pekah to death and setting AusV (Hoshea) on the throne ; but the boasts of Assyrian kings are not always veracious. The truth seems to have been that Hoshea committed the murder, and then submitted to Tiglath-pileser and reigned as his vassal. in the twentieth year of Jotham. The date would agree with verse 27, but is glaringly inconsistent with xvii. i ; moreover the Book of Kings assigns only sixteen years to Jotham. Since the statement is not in the compiler's usual manner, and could not have been in the chronicles of Israel (which never date events 366 II KINGS 15. 32-35. D of Pekah, and all that he did, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. 33 In the second year of Pekah the son of Remaliah king of Israel began Jotham the son of Uzziah king of Judah 33 to reign. Five and twenty years- old was he when he began to reign ; and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem: and his mother's name was Jerusha the daughter of 34 Zadok. And he did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord : he did according to all that his father Uzziah 35 had done. Howbeit the high places were not taken away : the people still sacrificed and burned incense in the high places. He built the upper gate of the house by the records of the sister kingdom), it may be regarded as an interpolation. (But see Introd. p. 45, note ^) XV. 32-38. Jotham of Judah, (Cf. 2 Chron. xxvii.) The only occurrences thought worthy of record in this reign are the making of a new gate in the temple-court and the commencement of hostilities by Rezin and Pekah, annalistic notices of which are preserved in verses 35*^ and 37. From the narrative of Chronicles, which is no doubt based on authentic documents, Jotham seems to have continued the vigorous policy of his father, and to have reigned with credit and success. 35. built the upper g-ate. Of the gates in Solomon's temple very little is known. In xi, 19 we read {a) of a ' gate of the foot- guards,' which may have been that which communicated directly between the palace and the temple ; if so, it must have been in the south wall of the temple-court. Jeremiah mentions {h) an ■ * upper gate of Benjamin ' (xx. 2), (c) a ' new gate ' (xxvi. 10, xxxvi. 10), and (q. yathan, and explains the name as * primaeval serpent.' horn incense: 'sacrifice.* We have here an interesting proof of the persistence of serpent-worship in Israel down to this comparatively late date. That the idol stood in the temple and was an emblem of Yahweh, as is often assumed, is not stated. 7. he rebelled : anticipating the fuller account in verses 13 ff. 8. This Philistine campaign may also belong to the latter half of Hezekiah's reign. In 701 Sennacherib assigned a portion of Judaean territory to his faithful vassal the king of Gaza ; and it is not improbable that the re-conquest of this territory was the occasion of the struggle which ended in the defeat of Gaza. from the tower : cf. xvii. 9. II KINGS 18. 9-13. KJDKJ 385 [KJ] And it came to pass in the fourth year of king 9 Hezekiah, which was the seventh year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Shalmaneser king of Assyria came up against Samaria, and besieged it. And at the 10 end of three years they took it : even in the sixth year of Hezekiah, which was the ninth year of Hoshea king of Israel, Samaria was taken. And the king of Assyria 11 carried Israel away unto Assyria, and put them in Halah, and in Habor, 011 the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes : [D] because they obeyed not the voice of 12 the Lord their God, but transgressed his covenant, even all that Moses the servant of the Lord commanded, and would not hear it, nor do it. [KJ] Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah did 13 xviii. 9-12. The Fall of Samaria. Verses 9-1 1 are almost identical with xvii. 5, 6, and may possibly be an extract from the annals of Judah, which was repeated in the account of the northern kingdom : see on xvii. 3-6 above. The dates, however, must have been added bj' the compiler; we have already seen that they arc historically incorrect so far as Hoshea is concerned, and it is doubtful if they are reliable as regards Hezekiah, They are certainly irreconcileable with xviii. 13 ; for if 722 (the year of Samaria's fall) was the sixth of Hezekiah, his fourteenth 3'ear cannot have been 701 (the year of Sennacherib's invasion). How to adjust this important discrepancy is one of the standing problems of the chronology of Kings (see on verse 13 ; and Introd., p. 42 ff.). xviii. 13— xix. 37. Sennacherib'' s Campaign. (Cf. Isa. xxxvi,xxxvii.) The passage is divided by recent critics into three independent narratives, of which the first (A) was added by the compiler of Kings, while the other two (B and C) were perhaps found by him already amalgamated in the prophetical document (see above, p. 382) which he used as a source. (A) Ch. xviii. 13-16 is an annalistic account of the invasion, obviously of the same character as verses 9- 11 and many other notices which we have assigned to the roj^al annals. It has long been recognized that verses T4-16, which are not found in Isa. xxxvi, are distinct in origin from the rest of the section ; but it is impossible to separate verse 13 from verses 14-16; and the c c 386 II KINGS 18. 14. KJ Sennacherib king of Assyria come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them. And Hezekiah omission of the latter by the editor of Isaiah is simply a proof that he borrowed from the Book of Kings, and left out an incident which had no immediate bearing on the life of the prophet. An external mark of the diversity of sources is found in the spelling of the name Hezekiah (in 13-16, Hizkiyydh : in 17 ff, Hizkiyyahu). (B) The second narrative begins at xviii. 17 and ends either with xix. 8 or xix. 9^ It describes with great fullness an attempt of Sennacherib to obtain the surrender of Jerusalem by threats and cajolery, backed by some display of force. The summons was refused on the advice of Isaiah, who predicted that Senna- cherib would hear a rumour that would cause him to return to his own land. The question whether this ' rumour ' refers to the advanceof Tirhakah,or to something else not mentioned, determines whether xix. 9* belongs to this narrative or the following. On either view, the conclusion of the one and the beginning of the other will have been removed in the process of amalgamation. narrates how, three months after the battle of Megiddo, Necho summoned the young king of Judah to his head quarters at Riblah on the Orontes, put him in chains, and raised an older son of Josiah to the throne. The new king, whose name was changed 426 II KINGS 23. 33-35- D KJ was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that 33 his fathers had done. [KJ] And Pharaoh-necoh put him in bands at Riblah in the land of Hamath, that he might not reign in Jerusalem ; and put the land to a tribute of an hundred talents of silver, and a talent of 34 gold. And Pharaoh-necoh made Eliakim the son of Josiah king in the room of Josiah his father, and changed his name to Jehoiakim : but he took Jehoahaz away ; 35 and he came to Egypt, and died there. And Jehoiakim gave the silver and the gold to Pharaoh ; but he taxed the land to give the money according to the command- ment of Pharaoh : he exacted the silver and the gold of the people of the land, of every one according to his taxation, to give it unto Pharaoh-necoh. to Jehoiakim, accepted the Egyptian lordship, and taxed his subjects heavily to raise the tribute imposed by Necho on the country. The fate of Jehoahaz, who was taken a prisoner to Egypt and died there, is the theme of a striking elegy in ch. xix of Ezekiel. 33 appears the immediate continuation of verse 30, from which it is separated by the compiler's introductory formula. Siblah (still bearing the name) is in the Orontes valley, about fifty miles south of Hamath. Its strategically important position made it a suitable resting-place for an army operating either from the south against Assyria (as here) or from the north against Israel (as in xxv. 21). put the land to a tribute : better, ' imposed an indemnity on the land.' For a talent of gold LXX (L) reads ' ten talents,' which is more likely to be correct. 34. Eliakim (* God establishes') and Jehoiakim ('Yahweh establishes') being practically identical, the change of name can signify nothing in itself. It is simply a mark of vassalage (cf. xxiv. 17). 35. The method of raising the fine must have resembled that adopted by Menahem of Israel (xv. 20), but the description is obscure. The last clause might be rendered, ' each man according to his taxation extorted the silver and the gold from the common people,' &c. The meaning would then be that the king assessed the landed proprietors according to their ability, and that these in II KINGS 23. 36—21. I. DKJ 427 [D] Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he 36 began to reign ; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem : and his mother's name was Zebidah the daughter of Pe- daiah of Rumah. And he did that which was evil in the 37 sight of the Lord, according to all that his fathers had done. [KJ] In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of 24 Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant their turn squeezed the money out of their tenants and retainers. But we cannot be certain that this is the sense. xxiii. 36— xxiv. 7. The Reign of Jehoiakim. (2 Chron. xxxvi. 5-8.) Early in Jehoiakim's reign the fall of Nineveh (between 608 and 606) brought about a new distribution of power in Western Asia. In the partition of the Assyrian Empire, which followed that event, the western half fell to Nabopolassar, the founder of the neo-Chaldean dynasty in Babylon (625-605). We have seen that Necho of Egypt had already seized the provinces west of the Euphrates ; and accordingly one of the first acts of Nabopolassar was to expel the Egyptians from Syria. This task he entrusted to his son Nebuchadnezzar, who defeated Necho in the decisive battle of Carchemish (Jer. xlvi. 2) in the beginning of 605. Soon after the battle Nebuchadnezzar was recalled to Babylon by the news of his father's death ; but the Egyptian resistance had been utterly broken, and the conquest of Syria was virtually complete. We read that Jehoiakim willingly transferred his allegiance to the king of Babylon, and that after three years he rebelled, and was in consequence harassed b^' bands of foreign troops till the close of his reign. The dates of these events are uncertain. If the sub- mission took place immediately after the battle of Carchemish, the revolt must have occurred about 602, and five j-ears would have elapsed before a Babylonian army marched against Jerusalem. We know of no reason why Nebuchadnezzar should have delayed so long ; and it is perhaps easier to assume that the three years' service are reckoned from a settlement of the affairs of Syria some years subsequent to 605, and that the rebellion was near the end of Jehoiakim's reign. 36, compared with 31, shows that Jehoiakim was only a half- brother of Jehoahaz, and his senior by two years. xxiv. 1. In his days: resuming the extracts from the chronicle; see introductory note above. According to Jer. xxv. i and xlvi. 2 the fourth year of Jehoiakim coincides with the first year of Nebuchadnezzar and the battle of Carchemish. 428 II KINGS 24. 2-6. KJ D^ D three years : then he turned and rebelled against him. a [D^] And the Lord sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by the hand of his 3 servants the prophets. Surely at the commandment of the Lord came this upon Judah, to remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he 4 did ; and also for the innocent blood that he shed ; for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood : and the Lord 5 would not pardon. [D] Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in 6 the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah ? So 2. These predatory bands were doubtless employed b}' Nebu- chadnezzar to keep Jehoiakim in play till a regular army could be sent against him. The Chaldeans would be drawn from the Babylonian garrisons stationed in Syria ; and instead of Syrians {'Aram) we shouJd probably read ' Edomites ' {'Edom). To the nations here mentioned a parallel preserved in the LXX of 2 Chron. xxxvi. 5 adds the Samaritans ; so that Judah must have been completely isolated in its defection from the Chaldean Empire. The passage referred to says further that the raiders were compelled to withdraw ' according to the word of the Lord by the hands of his servants the prophets.' Klostermann has directed attention to that reading as giving a fuller force to the particle at the beginning of the next verse, which should be rendered ' Hovvbeit.' If it were correct the situation would present a striking similarity to the Syro-Ephraimitic war in the time of Ahaz, when Isaiah prophesied a collapse of the nearer peril, but pointed to the graver danger of the Assyrian invasion behind it. 3, 4 are from the hand of the younger redactor; cf. xxiii. 26 f. Surely : or, ' Howbeit' : see on verse 2. at the commandment, &c. Some prefer to read with the LXX, as in verse 20 : ' because of the anger of Yahweh it befell Judah,' &c. 5. The Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah is here referred to for the last time ; and with this we lose the last sure trace of the original compiler of Kings, who is supposed to have II KINGS 24. 7-II. DKJD^ 429 Jehoiakim slept with his fathers : and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. [KJ] And the king of Egypt came 7 not again any more out of his land : for the king of Babylon had taken, from the brook of Egypt unto the river Euphrates, all that pertained to the king of Egypt. [D'^] Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began 8 to reign ; and he reigned in Jerusalem three months : and his mother's name was Nehushta the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem. And he did that which was evil in the 9 sight of the Lord, according to all that his father had done. At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar 10 king of Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came n finished his work some time before the Captivity. We cannot determine the exact point at which he laid down his pen ; but it is probable that most of what follows was added during the Captivity by the younger editor. 6. LXX (L) adds the statement, which may very well be correct, that he ' was buried in the garden of Uzza with his father.' See on xxi. 18. 7. See introductory note above, p. 427. xxiv. 8-17. Jehoiachin and the First Captivity ofjttdah. (2 Chron, xxxvi. 9, 10.) Jehoiakim had died just in time to escape the vengeance of Nebuchadnezzar. Soon after the accession of his son Jehoiachin, a Babylonian army appeared before the walls of Jerusalem, and after a short siege the city surrendered. The king and his courtiers, with the elite of the upper classes, the men of war and the skilled artisans, were taken captive to Babylon ; and the government of the enfeebled kingdom was handed over to a son of Josiah, from whom Nebuchadnezzar exacted a solemn oath of allegiance (Ezek. xvii. 13). This first deportation of Jews to Babylon took place in the year 598 or 597 (see below). Amongst the exiles was the prophet Ezekiel, who dates the Captivity from this event Ezek. i. 2, &c.), and regards it as the real end of the Judaean state and monarchy. 8. three months: 2 Chron. xxxvi. 9 adds 'and ten days.' 11. The siege appears to have alread}' commenced when Nebuchadnezzar arrived in person. 430 II KINGS 24. 12-15. 0^702 12 unto the city, while his servants were besieging it; and Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers : and the king of Babylon took 13 him in the eighth year of his reign. [?] And he carried out thence all the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold which Solomon king of Israel had made in the temple of the Lord, as the Lord had said. 14 And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and the smiths; none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land. 15 [D'^J And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon ; and 12. went out: the usual phrase for surrender ; see xviii. 31. the eigfhth year of his (Nebuchadnezzar's) reigrn is really 597 B. c, 604 being the first complete year of Nebuchadnezzar. This, however, does not agree with xxv. 27. according to which the deportation of Jehoiachin must have happened in 598. It is possible that both in this verse and in xxv. 8, 605 is reckoned the first year of Nebuchadnezzar (in accordance with the usual method of the Hebrew chronologist), so that the first Captivity fell in 598 and the second in 587. The discrepancy of one year at all events exists, and in Jer. lii. 28 the date of the first Captivity is given as the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar. 13, 14 are wrongly inserted here as a duplicate to verses 15, 16, which form the original sequel to verse 12. Thai 3. partial spoliation of the temple took place in 598 we know from Jer. xxvii. 18 f. ; but it cannot have been so complete as is here suggested (see xxv, 15 ff*.) Neither was 'all Jerusalem ' carried away to Babylon on this occasion. It has been supposed by Stade that the two verses are a fragment taken from an account of the second Captivity under Zedekiah. 13. thence has no antecedent in the preceding narrative ; unless, with LXX (L), we supply the sentence: 'And the king of Babylon entered into the city.' 14. even ten thousand captives. It is obviously difficult to reconcile the number with the data of verse 16. the poorest sort, &c. This also agrees better with the view that the second Captivity is referred to. II KINGS 24. 16-18. D'' 431 the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his officers, and the chief men of the land, carried he into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon. And all the men of might, 16 even seven thousand, and the craftsmen and the smiths a thousand, all of them strong and apt for war, even them the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon. And 17 the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father's brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah. Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began 18 15. the kiugr's mother: the queen mother, as she is expressly called in Jer. xxix. 2. the chief men of the laud : the foremost, or leading men ; cf. Ezek. xvii. 13. 16. men of mig-ht : probably, in this instance, * men of sub- stance ' ; see on i Kings i. 42. strong: lit. 'heroes, 'but probably here with the weakened sense of * men liable to military service.' It is hardly to be supposed that all the artisans of Jerusalem were ' men of independent means ' (so Kittel). The object of the king of Babylon was plainly to remove all the elements of strength from the state, and to leave it incapable of further resistance. The event proved that he had greatly underrated the courage and patriotism of the race with which he had to deal. 17. On the change of name, see xxiii. 34. xxiv. 18 —XXV. 21. Zedekiah and the Final Captivity. (2 Chron. xxxvi. 11-23.) Of the reign of the last king of Judah nothing is here recorded save the events of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. From the Book of Jeremiah (xxvii f.) we learn that as early as the fourth year of his reign Zedekiah was implicated in treasonable negotia- tions with some of the neighbouring states; and it is highly probable that a journey which he made to Babylon in the same year (Jer. li. 59) was undertaken for the purpose of explaining his conduct to Nebuchadnezzar. Later, however, he gave way to the influence of the war-party, backed by Egyptian intrigue, and openly revolted. Jerusalem was speedily invested by a Chaldean army, but held out stubbornly for a year and a half, when a breach was made in the wall and the city was no longer defensible. The king and the army broke through the lines of the Chaldeans, and sought to save themselves by flight ; but Zedekiah was overtaken near Jericho, taken before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, and then sent in fetters to Babylon. A month later (evidently in consequence of orders 432 11 KINGS 24. 19—25. 3. D^ to reign ; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem : and his mother's name was Hamutal the daughter of 19 Jeremiah of Libnah. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that Jehoiakim 20 had done. For through the anger of the Lord did it come to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence : and Zedekiah rebelled 25 against the king of Babylon. And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and encamped against it ; and they built forts against it 2 round about. So the city was besieged unto the eleventh 3 year of king Zedekiah. On the ninth day of the fourth issued by Nebuchadnezzar from Riblah' Jerusalem was razed to the ground by the Chaldean officer in charge of the operations, the bulk of the population were taken captive to Babylon, while about seventy of the leading men were sent to Riblah to be exe- cuted. These events took place in 587 or 586. It is impossible to say whether the narrative was taken from an independent source, or written by the (younger) editor himself. Tlie parallel accounts in Jer. xxxix. i, 2, 4-10 and ch. Hi are probably extracted from the Book of Kings, though they have frequently preserved a purer text. 18. Hanmtal : as xxiii. 31. Zedekiah, therefore, was a full brother of Jehoahaz, but not of Jehoiakim (xxiii. 36^ 20. See on verse 3. Por refers to the wickedness of Zedekiah's reign ; the per- sistence of the king in the evil courses of Jehoiakim was itself a presage of judgement, and a proof of Yahweh's displeasure with the nation. XXV. 1. The numbering of the months was a late usage intro- duced with the Babj'lonian calendar, in which the beginning of the year was reckoned from the spring season. Hence the investment of the city commenced in the month of January, 588 (or 587). forts. The meaning of the Hcb. adyak is uncertain ; possibly a wall of circumvallation (siege-wair. 3. Read : ' In the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month.' The opening words have been dropped in the Hebrew, and must II KINGS 25. 4-7. D^^ 433 month the famine was sore in the city, so that there was no bread for the people of the land. Then a breach was 4 made in the city, and all the men of wdLifled by night by the way of the gate between the two walls, which was by the king's garden : (now the Chaldeans were against the city round about :) and the king went by the way of the Arabah. But the army of the Chaldeans pursued after 5 the king, and overtook him in the plains of Jericho : and all his army was scattered from him. Then they took 6 the king, and carried him up unto the king of Babylon to Riblah ; and they gave judgement upon him. And 7 be restored as in Jer. Hi, 6 (xxxix. 2). The date is July, 587 (? 586). the famine was sore : see Jer. xxxvii. 21, xxxviii. 9. 4. and all the men of war. The text is again defective, as a comparison with Jer. xxxix. 4 and Hi. 7 shows. We may read : 'and when the king and aH the men of war saw it, they fled and went out of the city by night,* &c. between the two walls denotes a spot on the south-east side of the city at the mouth of the Tyropoeon valley (see Isa. xxii. ii). The expression is explained in two ways: (i; It is supposed that an external wall had been thrown out from the main fortifica- tions in order to enclose the Pool of Siloani and protect it from an enemy. Isa. xxii. 11, however, rather suggests the opposite, viz, that the ' two walls ' were in existence before the reservoir be- tween them was made. (2) Another view is that the west wall of the eastern hill and the east wall of the western hill ran parallel to each- other for some distance up the Tyropoeon, and that the space between these is referred to. Such a spot would be suitable for deploying the troops after they passed through the gate, if their intention was to fight their wa}' through the Chaldean lines. But it is idle to discuss the question till more is known of the position of the walls of ancient Jerusalem. and the king went should probably be ' and they went ' (as Jer. Hi. 7}. the Arabah : the Jordan valley ; see xiv. 25. 5. and all his army was (read, * had been '; scattered : not by the Chaldean attack ; they had dispersed on reaching the open country. 6. Riblah. See xxiii. 33. For they gave judgement read ' he gave . . . ,' as Jer. lii. 9. Ff 434 II KINGS 25. 8-12. D» they slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, and put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him in fetters, and carried him to Babylon. 8 Now in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of king Ne- buchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, 9 unto Jerusalem : and he burnt the house of the Lord, and the king's house ; and all the houses of Jerusalem, 10 even every great house, burnt he with fire. And all the army of the Chaldeans, that were ivith the captain of the guard, brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about. 11 And the residue of the people that were left in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to the king of Babylon, and the residue of the multitude, did Nebuzaradan the 12 captain of the guard carry away captive. But the captain 7. Putting out the eyes was a punishment resorted to by the Assyrians in dealing with rebellious vassals. carried him to Babylon. Jer. lii. 11 adds : 'and put him in prison till the day of his death.' 8. tlie nineteentli year. Jer. lii. 29 dates the event in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar (i. e, 587); on the discrepancy, see above on xxiv. 12 and below on verse 27. The delay of nearly a month from the capture of the city means that express instructions from Nebuchadnezzar had been waited for. 9. The temple and palace are burned, and all the houses of Jerusalem : the following clause, which restricts the operation to the principal houses, must be an interpolation. 10. The walls are then broken down. 11. It would seem that the entire population of the capital was led into captivity, and of the rural population all but the very poorest (verse 12). Ewald points out that it is nowhere definitely asserted that the captives were taken to Babylonia, that fell away : lit. 'the deserters that had deserted' during the siege. the residue of the multitude would be the same as ' the residue of the people ' at the beginning of the verse. But instead of ' multitude ' Jer. lii. 15 reads ' artificers ' (R. V. marg.) ; cf. xxiv. 16. II KINGS 25. 13-18. D-?D^ 435 of the guard left of the poorest of the land to be vine- dressers and husbandmen. And the pillars of brass that 13 were in the house of the Lord, and the bases and the brasen sea that were in the house of the Lord, did the Chaldeans break in pieces, and carried the brass of them to Babylon. And the pots, and the shovels, and the 14 snuffers, and the spoons, and all the vessels of brass wherewith they ministered, took they away. And the 15 firepans, and the basons ; that which was of gold, in gold, and that which was of silver, in silver, the captain of the guard took away. [?] The two pillars, the one 16 sea, and the bases, which Solomon had made for the house of the Lord ; the brass of all these vessels was without weight. The height of the one pillar was 17 eighteen cubits, and a chapiter of brass was upon it : and the height of the chapiter was three cubits ; with network and pomegranates upon the chapiter round about, all of brass : and like unto these had the second pillar with network. [D-] And the captain of the guard 18 took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second 13-17. The larger temple utensils were broken up and carried as scrap-metal to Babylon. Neither the enumeration (verses 13-15) nor the description (16, 17) aims at being exhaustive. The latter, however, especially in verse 16, has been curtailed to the point of obscurity. The full text is given in Jer. Hi. 21-23, a passage to which we are indebted for valuable information regarding the workmanship of Solomon's pillars (see on r Kings vii. 15 ff.). In verse 17 three cubits (the height of the chapiters) must be corrected to 'five cubits' (as Jer. lii. 22; i Kings vii. 16). Ihe mention of the twelve brasen oxen in Jeremiah seems at variance with xvi. 17, which implies that these had been removed by Ahaz long before. Hence it is possible that the description of verses 16 f. ( - Jer. lii. 20-23) has been excerpted literally from an ancient document giving an account of the temple furniture. 18-21. A number of the leading officials and other citizens, who had remained in the city, are apprehended and sent to Riblah, where they are put to death by Nebuchadnezzar. F f 2 436 II KINGS 25. 19-22. D^ 19 priest, and the three keepers of the door : and out of the city he took an officer that was set over the men of war ; and five men of them that saw the king's face, which were found in the city ; and the scribe, the captain of the host, which mustered the people of the land ; and threescore men of the people of the land, that were found 20 in the city. And Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard took them, and brought them to the king of Babylon to 2 1 Riblah. And the king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So 22 Judah was carried away captive out of his land. And as for the people that were left in the land of Judah, whom Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had left, even over 18. The five officials here named were doubtless the heads of the temple hierarchy ; cf. xxiii. 4, xii. 9, the second priest. The Hebrew might be rendered ' a priest of the second rank ' (see on xxiii, 4; ; but the parallel in Jeremiah (lii. 24) has the definite article. 19. an officer: *a certain eunuch' (marg.), probably a civilian minister of war. of them that saw the king's face : i. e. belonging to the inner circle of the king's advisers. Jeremiah gives the number as seven. the scribe. Read, as in Jeremiah, ' the scribe (secretary) of the captain of the host ' (marg.). The word for mustered is peculiar, and means apparently some- thing like 'mobilized,' 21. So Jndah was carried away: lit. 'went into exile.' In Jer, lii. 28-30 there follows (but from an independent source) a list of the numbers of Judaeans carried captive on various occasions by Nebuchadnezzar. XXV. 22-26. Judah under a Bahylonian Governor. The passage is an abridgement (made perhaps by the younger redactor) of the minute and thrilling narrative of Baruch in Jer, xxxix, ii-xliii. 7. Gedaliah, a Judaean of noble birth and a friend of Jeremiah (see below), was appointed governor of the desolated province. He fixed his residence at Mizpah, in the vicuiity of Jerusalem ; and speedily gained the confidence of the scattered commandos in the field, whom he induced to accept the new regime and settle down as peaceful cultivators of the soil. II KINGS 25. 23. D^ 437 them he made Gedah'ah the son of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, governor. Now when all the captains of the forces, they and 23 their men, heard that the king of Babylon had made Gedaliah governor, they came to Gedaliah to Mizpah, even Ishmael the son of Ncthaniah, and Johanan the This hopeful beginning of a new social order was, however, ruined by a mad act of revenge on the part of a scion of the Davidic house named Ishmael, who treacherously murdered Gedaliah and those who were about him, including some Chaldean soldiers. The fuller account in Jeremiah relates how one of Gedaliah's captains overtook Ishmael on his flight towards Ammon, and brought back the Jewish prisoners whom he was dragging into captivity. But the feeble community had received a shock from which it could not recover. Fearing that they would be held responsible by Nebuchadnezzar for the murder of his deputy, the leaders resolved to migrate to Egypt ; and thither accordingly they went, carrying with them the aged Jeremiah, who had vainly endeavoured to turn them from their purpose. 22. Gedaliah the son of Ahikam. Ahikam was one of the nobles who, on a memorable occasion, intervened to protect Jeremiah from the fury of the priests and the people (Jer. xxvi. 24). At an earlier period he had been one of the deputation who went to consult the prophetess Huldah regarding the book of the law discovered in the temple (xxii. 12). These incidents help to explain the choice of Gedaliah for the difficult post of governor under a foreign rule. His family stood high in the esteem both of the court and of the people, and probably belonged to the moderate party which was friendly to Jeremiah and opposed to the insensate policy which had brought about the conflict with Babylon. His fitness for the position appears clearly from the sympathetic narrative in Jeremiah. 23. the captains of the forces are, as we see from Jer, xl. 7, the commanders of armed bands in the open country which had not as yet surrendered to the Chaldeans. But whether thej' had been conducting guerilla warfare during the siege, or were detachments of the garrison of Jerusalem that had escaped, there is no evidence to decide. On Mizpah see on i Kings xv. 22. Ishmael the son of Nethaniah was soon discovc red by the other captains to be a traitor, in league with the king of Ammon (Jer. xl. 14) to assassinate Gedaliah. Johanan took the lead in exposing the plot, and afterwards 438 II KINGS 25. 24-27. D^ son of Kareah, and Seraiah the son of Tanhumeth the Netophathite, and Jaazaniah the son of the Maacathite, 24 they and their men. And Gedahah sware to them and to their men, and said unto them, Fear not because of the servants of the Chaldeans : dwell in the land, and serve the king of Babylon, and it shall be well with you. 25 But it came to pass in the seventh month, that Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, the son of Elishama, of the seed royal, came, and ten men with him, and smote Gedaliah, that he died, and the Jews and the Chaldeans that were 26 with him at Mizpah. And all the people, both small and great, and the captains of the forces, arose, and came to Egypt : for they were afraid of the Chaldeans. 27 And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of headed the expedition which intercepted Ishmael and recovered his captives. 24. Pear not because of the servants. Read, as in Jer. xl. 9, ' Fear not to serve.' 25. in the seventh month : of the same year in which Jerusalem was destroyed. The complete account of the incidents must be read in Jer. xl. 8ff. XXV. 27-30. The Release of Jehoiachin. The Book of Kings, which has been on the whole a history of national decline and misfortune, nevertheless closes with a note of hope. The legitimate sovereign Jehoiachin, who had languished in a Babylonian prison till the death of Nebuchadnezzar (562), was set free at the very commencement of the following reign, and for the remainder of his life was entertained with regal honours at the court of Babylon. The precise significance of the event is obscure ; and little is to be gained by speculation regarding the motives, political or other, of so remarkable an act of clemency on the part of Evil-merodach. But it is obvious that it must have excited the liveliest expectations in the Jewish community. The bestowal of royal honours on their king was at once a recognition of their nationality and, from a higher point of view, a pledge of Yahweh's continued favour to the d3'nasty of David, round which the Messianic hope had entwined itself (Meyer, Eutsiclniitg des Judenthums, p. 78). It was, in fact, the first indication of a better future for the people of Israel j and we can understand how II KINGS 25. 28-30. D2 439 the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the seven aiid twentieth day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the year that he began to reign, did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of prison ; and he spake kindly to him, and 28 set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon. And he changed his prison 29 garments, and did eat bread before him continually all the days of his life. And for his allowance, there was 3- a continual allowance given him of the king, every day a portion, all the days of his life. a contemporary historian should signaHze the incident as a proof that Jerusalem's warfare was accomplished and her sin pardoned. It is probable that the book was concluded boon alter the death of Jehoiachin, and before other and more decisive signs of the coming deliverance had appeared. 27. in the seven and thirtieth year. Nebuchadnezzar died in 562, and the liberation of Jehoiachin took place in the last days of the same (Bab^Monian) year, i.e. in the spring of 561 according to our calendar. Reckoning backwards, we find that the year of Jehoiachin's imprisonment must have been 598. This result agrees with Jer. lii. 28, and furnishes an additional argument for dating the first Bab3'lonian Captivity in 598 (not 597, see on xxiv. 12). Evil-merodach (Bab. Atml-Marduk) reigned only from 563 to 560. We must suppose that the favour he had extended to Jehoiachin was continued under his successors ; otherwise the expression ' all the days of his life ' would hardly have been employed. did lift up the head: as Gen. xl. 13. In Jer. lii. 31 an additional verb is inserted : ' And brought htm forth out of prison.' 28. the kings that were with him in Bahylon : i. c. he gave him precedence over the other subjugated kings who were detained in Babylon. 29. Cf I Kings ii. 7. 30. Before all the days of his life Jer. lii. 34 has the more explicit statement : 'until the day of his death.' APPENDIX Note I. On the Site of Solomon's Buildings. (p. 121.) In trying to understand the position of the suite of buildings described on pp. 116-121, the student will find it necessary to keep two facts before his mind. In the first place, the ancient city of Jerusalem extended much further south than the line of the present wall. In the second place, the natural conformation of the ground is obscured by the vast and irregular accumulation of debris (from 30 to 120 feet deep) over which the modern city is built. The leading features of the topography have, however, been ascertained by a series of excavations carried on during the last seventy j'ears ; and it is now possible to form a fairly distinct conception of the place where Solomon's palace must have stood. It may be necessary to premise that the natural site of the cit}' consists of two ridges, carved out of the main central plateau of Palestine by two deep valleys — the Kidron on the east and the IVddt er-Rabdbt on the west and south — and separated from each other by the shallower valley which Josephus calls the Tyropoeon, running nearly north and south between them. It may now be regarded as a settled point that the fortress of Zion, or the city of David, stood on the eastern ridge, near its southern extremit}', and therefore some four hundred yards south of the modern wall. Excavations conducted by the German Palestine Society seem to show (though the evidence has been disputed) that this part of the ridge was cut off from the higher ground to the north by a natural depression in the rock, which led down to the Kidron valley somewhere near the Virgin's Spring. This southern spur may at one time have risen to a higher elevation than at present ; and it is possible that this was the hill artificially lowered by Simon the Maccabee, so that it might not overlook the temple (Josephus, Ant. xiii. 215 ff., Bell. Jud. v. 139). However that may be, the next summit of the eastern ridge to the north now rises more than 200 feet above the level of the southern spur ; and this summit, forming a fairly even surface of about 5,500 square yards, and being as yet unbuilt in the time of David, offered the most tempting site in all the locality for a great palace-fortress, such as Solomon designed to erect. APPENDIX— NOTE I 441 Here the temple stood, for certain ; and as we have seen that the palace stood in the same 'great court' as the temple, we must seek a site for it on the same hill, where the topographical con- ditions may admit of it. But first it is necessary to determine the exact position of Solomon's temple. The whole of this higher summit is now enclosed in the Haram esh-Sherlf, which in all probability' represents the temple-area as enlarged by Herod, and which forms the south east angle of the modern city wall. The Haram is an irregular quadrangle, mea- suring roughly 1,500 feet from north to south, and i,ooo feet from east to west. It is bounded by huge retaining walls, built up from the adjacent valle3'S on all sides ; the south-west corner, indeed, actually crosses the bed of the Tyropoeon and rises from the slope of the western hill. Behind these walls the earth has been piled up so as to secure a somewhat uneven surface at the natural level of the summit. Almost in the middle of this area, but nearer its west side, stands the magnificent building called the Kuhbet essahra or 'Dome of the Rock' (often wrongly designated the Mosque of Omar}. It derives its name from a sacred rock in the interior, measuring about sixty feet long and forty-five broad, and projecting above the surface from four to six and a half feet. Although nowhere mentioned in the O. T., this rock figures largely in Jewish tradition •, and must undoubtedly be regarded as one of the most highly venerated sacra in Hebrew antiquity. Now, it is conjectured with much plausibility that the rock marks the spot where the altar of Solomon's temple stood ; and a channel is said to be still visible upon it, which is thought to have convej^ed the sacrificial blood to a cavern underneath. If this be correct, the temple must have been situated to the west of the rock, where there was just room, without any very extensive substructures, for a building of the prescribed dimensions. From this point the ridge shelved gradually down in a south- south-east direction ; and on this side alone could a natural site for the other buildings erected by Solomon have been found. It is concluded, therefore, that the palace lay to the south-east of the temple, at a somewhat lower elevation (probably on a series of terraces) ; and that the entire complex of buildings stood well within the lines of the present Haram. The result is in accordance with the constant usage of the O. T. : one ' goes up ' from the palace to the temple (Jer. xxvi. lo), and 'down' from the temple to the palace (2 Kings xi. 19 ; Jer. xxii. i, xxxvi, 12). Again, there is an ascent from the old city of David to the palace (i Kings ix. 24) as well as to the temple (viii. i) ; so that the palace must have stood higher than the city of David, but lower than the temple. The relative positions of the various buildings within the great court can only be infeiTed from the order in which they are 442 APPENDIX— NOTE I mentioned in ch. vii. From Ezek. xliii. 8 we gather that the royal residence was next to the temple — and with this all other indications agree— and therefore the most northerly of the series. Since this is mentioned last in vii. i -12, we may assume that the description proceeds from south (where the main entrance of tlie great court would naturally be) to north ; and that the order and approximate disposition of the buildings was somewhat as shown in the annexed plan (taken from Benzinger's Hebraische Archaologie). n ex u I. Great Court. 2. Second Court. 3. Temple Court. 4. House of the Forest of Lebanon. 5. Plall of Pillars. 6. Throne Hall. 7. Royal Palace. 8. House of Pliaraoh's daughter, g. Temple. lo. Altar. By permission of Messrs. T. i*i T. Clark and the Rev. T. W. Davies, author of the article ' Temple ' in Haslings's Dictionary of the Bible. For fuller information, see Stade, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, (•• P- 315 ff-) ; the Archaeologies of Benzinger (p. 233 ff.) and Nowack (i. p. 255 ff., ii. p. 27 ff.) ; Baedeker's Palestine and Syria (p. 36 ff.) ; Benzinger in Explorations in Bible Lands (p. 596 ff.) ; the articles * Jerusalem ' and ' Temple' in DB and EB, 443 Note II. On the Story of Jeroboam in the LXX. (p. 190.) In the existing texts of the LXX (B and L) the history of Jeroboam I is given in two distinct forms, of which one agrees substantially with the Hebrew, while the other is peculiar to the Greek version. Tliese we shall refer to as H and G respectively. The former is found in i Kings xi. 26-31, 40, 43, xii. 1-24, 25-32. The second account comes in between verses 24 and 25 of ch. xii (xii. 24*—^, in Swete's edition) ; and its variations are so striking and important that we give here first of all a summary of its con- tents: — xii. 24*. A notice of Solomon's death (|| xi. 43), followed by the introductory formula for the reign of Rehoboam, in a form differing considerably from xiv. 21 fl. Thus (in B), Rehoboam is said to have been sixteen years old at his accession, and to have reigned twelve years ; and his mother, Naamah, is described as the daughter of Ana the son of Nahash king of Ammon (cf. xiv. 21, * the Ammonitess'). 24^ Jeroboam is now introduced (evidently for the first time) as an Ephraimite, a servant of Solomon, and son of a harlot named Sareisa (B) or Sareira (L) (cf. xi. 26). In tlie remainder of the section there is some confusion of text ; but the probable sense of the original version is that Jeroboam was appointed overseer of the labour-bands of the house of Joseph, that he fortified Sareira, raised a force of 300 chariots, and rebelled against Solomon (II xi. 26-28). 24*^. Solomon seeks to kill Jeroboam, and the latter flees to Shishak king of Egypt, and remains with him till the death of Solomon (|| xi. 40). 24*^—^ Jeroboam hears of the death of Solomon, and requests permission of Shishak to return to his land. Shishak objects, and gives him Anoth, the elder sister of his own wife, in marriage ; and a son Abijah is born to them. Jeroboam renews his request for leave to depart ; and comes to Sareira, where he collects all the tribes of Ephraim, and builds a fort (|| xi. 43, LXX). The greater part of this section is plainly borrowed from the story of Hadad the Edomite (xi. 19 22), which no doubt represents here an interpolation in the original text. 24'''—". The incident of the sickness of Jeroboam's son, and the consultation of the prophet Ahijah (|| xiv, 1-18, Heb. ; wanting in the present LXX). Ahijah is introduced as a personage hitherto unknown ; the incident takes place at Sareira, and there- fore before Jeroboam becomes king ; his wife is called b}' her proper name Anoth, and not being a queen, of course does not 444 APPENDIX— NOTE II need to disguise herself. 24"' is in the style of the compiler of Kings, and pronounces a doom on Jeroboam's house for which no reason is assigned. 24". Jeroboam proceeds to Shechem, and gathers there all the tribes of Israel ; Rehoboam also comes to Shechem (|| xii. i). 24". Jeroboam is designated king of the ten tribes by the prophet Shemaiah (in place of Ahijah), with the symbolism of the rent garment (|| xi. 29-31). 24P-\ The people approach Rehoboam at Shechem with a petition for the redress of grievances ; Rehol^oam asks for a delay of three days, during which he consults first the elders and then the young men, and finally answers the people roughly in accor- dance with the advice of the latter (|| xii. 3-i4\ 24** ". The people renounce their allegiance to the house of David, and disperse to their homes. Rehoboam returns to Jerusalem, followed by the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (1| xii. i6\ 24^ At the turn of the year Rehoboam musters all Judah and Benjamin, and goes up to fight against Jeroboam at Shechem [II xii. 2i\ 24-S^ The message of Shemaiah the man of God, given in terms practically identical with those of xii. 22-24. Now, it is evident that this arrangement of the events of Jeroboam's career is an alternative version to that followed by the Hebrew, and could never have been intended to find a place alongside of it in the same work. It is therefore quite beside the point to argue that G is inferior to H because of the inconsistencies between xii, 24 '^"^ and the previous sections now found in the LXX ; the main point at issue being precisely whether these other sections were in the original LXX, or were introduced in the course of redaction in order to assimilate that version more nearly to the Hebrew. There are, in fact, just two questions to be considered: (i) which of the two accounts is the more original ; and (2) whether there can have been a recension of the Book of Kings in which G took the place of H. (i) To the first question it is hardly possible to return a decided answer. We must bear in mind, to begin with, that part of the original H has been displaced by the compiler to make way for the oracle of Ahijah in xi. 32-39 ; so that in their accounts of Jeroboam's first rebellion the two records may have been in closer agreement than now appears. In the next place, it must be allowed that in the present form of the text G does not come well out of a comparison with H. The account it gives of Jeroboam's breach with Solomon is confused, and (in LXX (B) especially) quite unintelligible. The story of his marriage with an Egyptian princess comes in in an impossible place, and is, besides, an obvious adapta- tion of the similar incident in the story of Hadad. Ahijah's strong denunciation of Jeroboam's house before he had come to the throne APPENDIX— NOTE II 445 is an anachronism which cannot possibly be attributed to an inde- pendent writer. And, lastly, the oracle of Shcmaiah, forbidding the people to go up to war with their brethren, is inconsistent with the previous statement that Rehoboam had already gone up against Shechem. But when we clear the text of certain excrescences — viz. the interpolated account of the marriage with Anoth (24^), the closing sentence of the oracle of Ahijah (24"", which is in the style of the compiler), and the warning of Shcmaiah (24'?% which we have seen reason (p. 189, to mark as possibly a late addition to Kings) — we obtain a kernel narrative of the course of events whose inferiority to H is by no means obvious. The following points at least deserve consideration: (a) The account of Jero- boam's overt act of rebellion in 24'' supplies a better explanation of Solomon's desire to kill him than Ahijah's prophecy, which is expressly said to have been a private communication to Jeroboam of which no third party was aware. (b) The circumstances of Jeroboam's return to Ephraim (leaving out the episode of the marriage'i are inserted at the proper point in the history (24'^>^}, whereas we have found that in the other account neither LXX nor Hebrew has been able to find a perfectly suitable place for them (^see on xi. 43, xii. 2). (c, With regard to the sickness of Abijah, there is room for difTerence of opinion ; but if we disconnect the incident from the denunciation of Jeroboam's dynasty, and look on it simply as an event in the domestic history of Jeroboam, there is something to be said for the priority of G. It is difficult to conceive that any writer who found it in the form in which it appears in xiv. 1-18 should have reduced it to the simple proportions of xii. 24^~K (if) 2^^ gives an explanation of the national congress at Shechem which we miss in 11. (e) The statement that Rehoboam actually went to war with Jeroboam (24") is in itself credible, and is confirmed by xiv. 30. On the other hand, it may be felt that the mantle-rending incident of 24" loses in significance by being postponed to a time when Jeroboam was engaged in active measures for seizing the crown. Whatever may be thought of the relative value of the two accounts, it seems clear that they represent two distinct recensions of the Hebrew text, based independently on some earlier document. For if it is impossible to derive G from H, it is equally impossible to derive H directly from G. H's account of the proceedings at Shechem is a lucid and self-consislent narrative, marked off" from G by its exclusion of Jeroboam from any share in the negotiations between the people and Rehoboam. The only serious gaps in the narrative of H are, (a) the account of Jeroboam's revolt under Solomon, and (b) the account of his return from Egypt, which, however, may be partly preserved in the LXX of xi. 43. Ch. xii. ao clearly presupposes that his return was unknown till after the tribes had assembled in Shechem. 446 APPENDIX— NOTE II (2^ The second question is whether we can suppose an edition of the Book of Kings in which G stood in the place of H. At first sight an affirmative answer is suggested by the circumstance that G is prefaced by an introductory formula for Rehoboam, which yet is independent of that in xiv. 21. Nevertheless it would be extremely rash to adopt that hypothesis, since it furnishes no explanation of the parallel account of H, which we have seen to be independent of G. Moreover, though G shows marks of the hand of the compiler, they are quite insignificant compared with the numerous traces of his activity in H. It would appear, therefore, that for a solution of this very complicated problem we shall have to go behind the redaction of the book to the sources from which it was compiled. We know that for this period of the history the compiler had two if not three 1 proximate sources at his disposal —the Chronicles of Judah and of Israel (if not also the History of Solomon). Now the account of Jerol;oam's elevation to the throne belongs as much to the history of the one kingdom as of the other. Is it conceivable, then, that the original of one of our narratives (presumably G) was taken from KJ, and the other (H) from KI? The chief objection to that theory would be the fact that G contains so many details that would be irrelevant in a history of Judah. On the other hand, it has in its favour the fact that it is prefaced by the introductory notice for a king of Judah, and also the fact tiiat it leads up to and breaks off with the account of the war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam, which was an event in the history of the southern kingdom. It is, to be sure, highly improbable that the compiler of Kings should have incorporated both these extracts in his work. But we have reason to believe that the sources were in existence long after the publication of the Book of Kings ; and there is no difficulty in assuming that they were accessible to editors and copyists till a very late period. One of these we may suppose to have transcribed the second account of Jeroboam from KJ, and inserted it in his MS. Whether he did so with the intention of supplanting the other account entirely we cannot tell ; but he is in all probability the person responsible for the omission of xiv. 1-18 in the LXX. The redactional additions and interpolations in G are presumably of still later date, and borrowed from the Hebrew text. See further, Kuenen. Onderzock, § 26, «. 10 ; W. R. Smith, OTJC\ p. 117 ff. ; Kittel. History, ii. p. 206 f.; Winckler, Alttest Untersuchmigen, p. 12 fF. ; Benzinger, Commentary, p. 97 f. ; Burney, Notes, p. 163 ff. 447 NoTK III. On the Chronology ok the Reigns or Amaziah, Azariah, and Jeroboam II (p. 361). It would be a great point gained if the two errors referred to in the note could be traced to a single source ; and a noteworthy attempt in this direction has been made by F. Riihl, in Deutsche Zcitsclir. fiir Geschichtswissetischaft, 1895, pp. 54-58, 171. The pi\ot of the theory is the statement of xiv. 17 (accepted by Riihl as historical) that Amaziah lived (not reigned) fifteen years after the death of Jehoash. This is taken to mean that after the battle of Beth-shemesh Amaziah was deposed by Jeiioash, and that the next twenty-nine years or so were really an interregnum in the history of Judah: since Jehoash must have died soon after the battle, that period falls almost entirely under the reign of Jeroboam II. Riihl next argues that Azariah is not likely to have recovered his independence during the life of so powerful a monarch as Jeroboam II ; and (accepting the s3'nchronism of xv. i as resting on a sound tradition) concludes that Azariah's real reign com- menced in the twent3--sevcnth of Jeroboam II, and also that Jeroboam II died in that same year! But it was natural for the chronologers of the kingdom of Judah to reckon the nominal reign of Azariah from the death of his father, who (as we see from xiv. 17) lived fourteen full 3'ears under Jeroboam II. The reign of Azariah was thus artificially lengthened by the diflference between these fourteen years and the total length of the reign of Jeroboam, i. e. by about twelve or thirteen years ; and out of the inevitable confusion between the real and the nominal reign of Azariah there arose naturally two serious miscalculations, (i) From the synchronism of xv. i it was concluded that the death of Amaziah had not taken place till the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam ; and since it was still remembered that Jeroboam had survived Amaziah for thirteen years it became necessary to lengthen the reign of the former by about that period : accordingly an interpolator changed the duration of Jeroboam's reign from twenty- seven to forty-one years. But (2) a still later chronologist, combining the forty-one years' reign of Jeroboam with a plausible construction of xiv. 17, arrived at the conclusions that Azariah had come to the throne in the fifteenth year of Jeroboam, and that consequently the two monarchs had reigned contemporaneously for twenty-six or twenty-seven years. Since, as a matter of fact, Azariah only began to reign on the death of Jeroboam, this amounts to increasing his reign by twenty- six or twenty-seven years. We must therefore reduce the traditional fifty-two years of Azariah by that amount, and assign to him a real reign of only twenty-five or 448 APPENDIX -NOTE III twenty-six years. There is no particular reason why we should stop at this point. We might go on to imagine a stage at which Azariah's yeal reign was reckoned from the fifteenth year of Jeroboam, with the result that he survived the latter by about thirteen 3'ears; and then we could explain the synchronism ofxv. 8 ('the thirty-eighth year') as a reckoning backward from the end of the fifty-two years' reign of Azariah. But this matter is not dealt with by Riihl. The truth is that the theory is too intricate and elastic to command acceptance. The misconceptions it at- tributes to successive chronologists are anything but natural ; they are such as might occur to a modern writer working towards a definite result, but they do not follow obvious!}' from the assumed data of the problem. It attaches a value to arbitrarily selected S3-nchronisms which they do not possess ; and ignores the really historical statement about the succession of Azariah in xiv. 21. Moreover, it requires us to abandon the fairly well established Assyrian sj^nchronism of the tribute of Menahem in 738 (see on XV. 17-22); and by making the reign of Azariah as a whole posterior to that of Jeroboam II, it introduces confusion into the chronology of the prophets Amos and Hosea. INDEX Abana (Amana), 299. Abel-beth-Maacah, sir, 365. Abel-meholah, 93, 241. Abiathar, 75 f. Abijah, son of Jeroboam, 200 ff., 443 f. : see Abijam. Abijam, kingof Judah, 40,207 f. Abishag, 59, 74 f. ' Abominable image,' 209. Absalom, 59 f., 207. Acts of Solomon, book of, 23, 25, 27, 82, 184, 446. Adad, 177 f. Adamah, 136. Additions, post-redactional, 32 f. Adonijah, 58 ff., 67 f., 74 ff. Adoniram, Adoram,9i, 102,188, Adrammelech, 400. Ahab, 17, 2i9ff., 243ff, 261 f., 283 f., 407. Ahaz, 364, 367 ff., 421 ; — dial of, 403. Ahaziah,kingoflsrael,40,27off.; — king of Judah, 319, 323 ff., 336. Ahijah the Shilonite, 180 f., 190, 200 ff., 213, 255, 443 f. 'Ain es-Sultan, 221, 281. 'Akaba, 165, 358. Almug, algum, 168. Altar, as asylum, 68, 77 ; — of shevvbread, 112, 137; — of incense, 137 ; brasen — , 154 f., 371 ; — built by Solomon, 164 ; — on Carmel, 233 ; — of Ahaz, 369 ff. Amaziah, king of Judali, 17, 3$3ff-,447f. Amnon, 59, 60. Amon, 410. Anathotb, 76. Angel, 197, 238 ; — of the Lord, 238, 273, 399. Annals of Solomon, 82, 90, 102, 158. Anointing, 65, 99, 241 f,, 315, 321 f. Anoth, 178, 443. Antimony, 327, Aphek, 249 f., 351, 352. Apis-cult, 191. Arabah, the, 358, 433. Ararat, 400. Architecture, Phoenician, 105. Argob, 93, 364. Ark, 67, 77, 87, 139 ff., 142. Armenia, 400. Arnon, 335. Aroer, 335. Arpad, 392. Arrian, 96. Arza, 215. Asa, king of Judah, 17, 208 ff., 365- Asher, 93. Asherah ('asherim), 203, 205, 209, 221, 334, 376, 384* 408, 418; — prophets of, 230. Ashtoreth, Astarte, 175,1 82, 205. Ass, 65. Ass's head, 306. Assessments by priests, 343 f. Asshurbanijpal, 379, 404, 406. Asshurdart III, 357. Asshur-nirari III, 357. Astral worship, 375 ?•, 407- G g 450 I AND II KINGS Asylum, right of, 68, 77. Athaliah. 317, 336 ff.. 340 f, Avva. 379. 'Azarah, 332. Azariah, son of Zadok. 90 ; — king of Judah, 17. 42 f., 45. 357. 359 ff.. 371. 447 f-; — king of Ja'udi, 359. Baal,Baal-worship,2 19 ff., 222 f. , 230, 283, 331 ff, 341, 375. Baal, prophets of, 230 ff., 286. Baal-shalisha, 296. Baal-zebub, 273. Baasha, kingof Israel, 209. 2i3f. Bahurim, 72. Baldness, 281 f. Balih, 375. Bamah, 85. Ban, 163, 254. Barzillai, 69, 72, 96. Bases (laver stands), 128 ff. , 37 1 . Bashan, 93 f. Bath (measure), loi, 127. Bath-sheba, 61 ff., 65, 74 f. Beer-sheba, 96, 237, 419. Beisan, 93. Beitin, 192. Beit 'Ur et-tahta, — el-foka, 162. Bel'ameh, 326. Belial, sons of, 257. Benaiah, 60, 91. Ben-hadad, 210, 245, 261, 306, 314 ff., 352. Benjamin, tribe of, 189. Beth-'Eked, 330 Beth-el, 190, 192, 278, 281 f. ,378 Beth-hag-gan. 325. Beth-hanan, 92. Beth-horon, 162. Beth nekoth, 404. Beth-shean, 93, 241. Beth-shemesh, 92, 355. Biographies of prophets. 28 ff., 222 f., 272 f., 276 ff.. 282 f.. 29off., 386ff. Bir es^Seba', 237. BTr 'Ej'yub, 6t. Blr Sitti Maryam, 66. Bir'idri, 243, 245. Bit 'Adini, 395. Bit Yakin, 403. 'Blessing'( ^-- present), 299,392. Blinding as punishment, 434. Blood-feud, 77 f. Boaz : see Jachin. Borders, 129 ff., 371. Bracelets, 340. Brook of Egypt, 155. Bui (month), ii6. Burden (= oracle), 325. Burial, in the house, 78 ; — in family sepulchre, 198 ; — of kings of Judah, 73, 409 f. ; — of the poor, 419. Burnt-offering, 154. Byword, 158. Cabul, 160. Calendar, 46, 116, 399, 432. ' Call on the name ' of God, 147. Calves, golden, 13, 17,170, 190 f., 219, 375 f-, 378. Candlesticks, 137. Canon of O. T., 3. Cappadocia, 173, 310. Captain, 163, 249, 275, 309, 325, 364; — of the host, 64, 71, 292 ; — of the forces, 437. Captives, treatment of, 305. Captivity, of northern kingdom, 374 ff. ; — first, of Judah, 429 ff. ; — final, of J udah , 43 1 ff. Carchemish, battle of, 427. Carites, 337 f. Carmel, 92, 230 f., 291, 293. Carob, 307. Castle, 217, 364. Chaboras, 375. Chapmen. 169. Chapiters, 123 ff. Chariots, 163: see Horses. Chemosh, 175 f., 182, 283, 288 f. Cherethitesand Pelethite.s, 65 f. INDEX 451 Cherith (brook), 224. Cherubim, 113 f.. 396. Children, sacrifice of, 368, 375, 407. Chinneroth, 211. Chronicles, books of (canonical), 31. Chronicles of Israel, book of, 23 ff-, 39» 185, 269, 446; — Judah, book of, 23 ff., 39, 317, 428, 446. Chronology, 38-51, and notes, passim. Cilicia, 173. Colocynth, 295 f. Compiler of Kings, 148".; — date of, 22. Confiscation, 258. Cor (measure , 95, loi. Corruption, mount of, 421. Corvee, 91, 102, 160, 163. Court-history (David), 27, 57, 185. Courts of Temple, 116 f., 121, 401, 407, 442. Covenant, loi f.,2io,34i,4i6f. ; — book of, 417, Creditor, rights of, 290. Cresset- altars, 126, 135. Cromlech, 278. Cubit, 105. Cultus : see Worship. Curse, 72, 148, 221, 257. Cuth, Cutha, 379. Cutting, of flesh, 232. Dad'idri, 243, 245. Damascus, 179!"., 299, 314 f., 335> 352, 357, 359' 369. Dan, 96, 192, 211. Dance, religious, 232. David, ideal king, 16, 201 ; — old age of, 58 ; — dying charge of, 69 f. ; — character of, 7off., 73. David, city of, 73, 139, 145, 440, Dead, mourning for, 199, 204 ; — raising of, 226 f, 293 ff., 351- Dead Sea, 284, 358. Dtibir, no, 112, 334. Dedication, Feast of, 154. Deshen, 195. Deuteronomy, 13 f., 70, 144, 354; — discovery of, 411 ff. ; — date of, 411 f. Dibon, 283. Didactic history, 5 f., 8, 15 ff. Diodorus Siculus, 88. Dog, comparison to, 316 ; — as scavenger, 202. Dome of the Rock, 441. Dor, 92. Dothan, 304. ' Double portion,' 279. Dove's dung, 307. Dream, 84 f., 156. Ecclesiasticus, 33. Ecstasy (prophetic), 286, 316. Eden, 395. Edom, 165, 1778*., 270, 285, 288, 318, 354, 369. Egypt, 84, 173, i77f-,390j 4o6, — brook of, 155. Ekron, 272 f., 386. Elah, king of Israel, 215. Elath, Eloth, 165, 354, 357, 369. Elders, 139, 256 f., 308, 328. Elegiac rhythm, 397. Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, 389 ; — see Jehoiakim. Elijah, 221 ft'., 254 ft",, 272 f., 276 ft". Elijah, biography of, 28, 222 f., 254 f., 262. Elisha, 241 ft"., 281 f., 290 flf., 305 ff".. 350 f, ; — Fountain of, 281. Elisha, biography of, 28, 276 fT., 290 ft;, 305 f., 313 ft"., 350. Elon, 92. Eltekeh, battle of, 386 f., 394. Enchantments, 407. G g 2 452 I AND II KINGS En-gannim. 325. F'n-NebT SamwTl. 211. Eii-rogel, 61. Entrails, inspection of, 371. ErTha, 221. Er-Ram, 210. Esarhaddon, 379. 400. 406. Esdraelon, 59, 93, 160, 162. 206. Es-Salt, 93, 262. Ethan,' 98. Ethanim (month), 139 f. Ethbaal (Ittobaal) I, 47, 220. Eusebius, 224, 241, 262. Evil-merodach, 439. Evocation of deity, 147. Eye-powder, 327. Ezekiel, 429. Ezion-geber, 165, 270 f. False prophecy, 263 if. Familiar spirit, 408. Famine, 223 ff., 295, 306. 313. Fasting, 257. Father (title of honour), 299, 305 ' 350. Feast, the, 140, 153 ff. Figs, used in medicine, 402. ' Fill the hand,' 199, 325. Forest of Lebanon, house of, 117 ff., 170, 206, 404. 442. Forgiveness, 148. ' Framework' of Kings. 10-15 ; religious judgements of, 13: see notes, passim. Friend, king's, 91, 94. Galilee, 159 1, 365. Garments, rending of : see ' Mourning.' Gates of Temple, 341. 366 ; — of Jerusalem, 356. Gath, 79, 346. Gath-hepher, 358. ^aza, 155, 384. Geba, 2ir, 419. Gebalites, 103 Gedaliah, 436 ff. Gehazi,29i ff.. 295, 30off., 3r3f. Gehenna. 420. Genubath, 177 f. Gerizim. 185. Gezer, 99, 160, 162. Gibbethon, 212, 216. Gibborim, 60. Gibeah of Saul, 2ir. Gibeon, 85, 157. Gihon, 61, 66, 405. Gilgal, 278, 291, 295. Gilead, Gileadites, 93, 223, 364 f. Girdle, 274. Go'el, 216. Governors, list of, 91 ff. Gozan, 375. Graves, family, 73, 78, 198. Gravestones, 422. Guardians, 328. Guards, of palace and temple, 338, 340 f. Guest-chamber, furniture of, 292, Guilt offering, 346. Habor, 375. Hadad (Edomite), 177 ff., 443; — (god), 245, 300. Hadadezer, 179, 245. Hagiographa, 4. Halah. 375. Hall, of Pillars, 119, 442; — of Justice, 119 f., 442. Hamath. 155, 243, 358 f-, 375) 379» 392. Hammurabi, code of, 148. Hand, lean on, 309. Hand of the Lord, 286. Hanukkah, 154. Haram esh-Sherif, 155, 441. Haran, 395. Hazael, 247, 314 ff.,334 f,, 346, 352. Hazor, 161, 365. Headband, 253. Head-rope, 251, Hekal, no. INDEX 453 Heman, 98. Hena, 392. Hepher, 92. Herem, 254. Hermon, 155. Herodotus, 125, 399, 403, 425. Hezekiah, 43 f., 367, 382 ft'. High-places, 13, 85, 192, 209, 270, 419. High priest, 345, 412 f. Hilkiah, 411ft: Hinnom (valley of Son of), 61, 420. Hiram I, 47, 99, 159 f., 164. Hiram : see Huram-abi. Historical books, 3. Historical method, 5. Hittites, 173, 310 f. Holy, 291. Homer (measure), 95. Horeb, 238. Horns of altar, 68. Horses, 66, 172 f., 312 ; — and chariots, 60, 96 ; of fire, 279? 304 ; of the sun, 279, 420; (figurative), 279, 350- Hoshea, 365, 372 ff. Host of heaven. 265, 376, 407, 418. Huldah, 408, 414 f., 437. Huleh (lake), 365. Humri, 218, 352, 379. Huram-abi, 121 f., 135 f. Hyssop, 98. Ibleam, 326, 361. Idolatry, 16, 156, 174 ft"., 325, 375 ft'., 407 ff-, 4188". Ijon, 211, 365. Inner chamber, 251, 266, 321. Inspiration of prophets, 264 ff. Interpolations, 31 f. Intreat the favour, 195. Isaiah, 368, 393 ff. Isaiah, biography of, 29, 382,. 386 ft;, 400 f. Ishmael, 437 f. Issachar, 93. Istar, 175, 381. Ivory, 170, 171, 269. Ivvah, 379, 392. Jabbok, 191. Jachin and Boaz, 125, 340. Jashar, book of, 143. Ja'udi, 359. Jealousy, 240. Jeba', 211. Jebeil, 103. Jebel Batn el-Hawa, 421. Jebel Hauran, 93. Jedidiah, 61. Jehoahaz, king of Israel, 306, 311, 347 f.; —king of Judah, 425 f. Jehoash, king of Israel, 347, 349ffv354f- ;—kingof Judah, 336 f., 342 fr. Jehoiachin, 429 ft"., 438 f. Jehoiada, 336 ft". Jehoiakim, 426 ff*. Jehonadab, son of Rechab, 331. Jehoram, king of Israel, 276, 2828"., 290, 306, 315, 323 ff-? — king of Judah, 276, 317 f. Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, 212, 219, 261 ft"., 2698". Jehosheba, 336 f. Jehu, son of Hanani, 214, 255; — king of Israel, 241, 320 ff. Jenin, 325 f. Jericho, 221, 278, 280 f. Jeroboam I, 170, 180 ft"., 190 ff., 205, 443 ff- ; — sin of, 190 ff.j 203, 375 f- 5 378. Jeroboam II, 347 f-, 357ff-> 360 f., 447 f. Jerome, 3, 411. Jerusalem, fortification of, 161; — sieges of, 355 f., 429 f. ; — districts of, 415 ; — fall of, 43, 431 ff. ; — topography of, 440. 454 I AND II KINGS Jezebel, 220, 255 f. ; — her persecution, 227 f. ; — and Elijah, 236 f. ; — her death, 326 f. Jezreel, 59, 93, 236, 256, 328. Jiljilia, 278, 296. Joab, 6;, 71 f., 91, 177. Joash, son of Ahab, 266 ; — see jehoash. Job, well of, 61, 66. Johanan, 437 f. Joktheel, 354. Jonah, 358. Joppa, loi, 162. Joram, 317 : s^^ Jehoram. Jordan, fords of, 136; — divid- ing of, 280. Josephus, 53, 86,99, 118, i6of., 220, 226, 440. Josiah, 411-425. Jotham, regency of, 45,360; — reign of, 366. Judaean narratives, 29, 336 ff., 343- Judas Maccabaeus, 154. Juniper, 237. Justify, 148. Kab (measure), 307. Kades, 365. Karkar, battle of, 46, 243 f,, 3IO' Kamaim, 352. Kedesh, 365. Kemarim, 418. Kerak, 289. Kiblah, 150. kidron (valley), 61, 418, 421, 440. * King's face, see the,' 436. Kinsmen, 216, 330. Kir-hareseth, 289. Kishon, 234. Kissing, 242. Krethi and Plethi, 60, 66, 338. Kubbet es-sahra, 441. Kue, 173.' ' Lachish, 318, 357, 388. Ladder, of Tyre, 94. Lamp (of David', 19, 183. Larnaka, laver-carriage of, 128. Lattice, 273. Lavers, 127 flf^ Law, book of, 70, 354, 411 ff. Lebanon, 155, 162, 397. Leddan, 211. Lejjun, 93, 326. Lepers, leprosy, 297, 310, 360. Letter, 257, 298, 328, 386,394f. Levites, 141, 192, 338 f., 4J9f. Levy, 91, 102, 161, 163, 188. Libnah, 318, 394. Line (measuring), 409. Litanl, 211. Local religious custom, 380 f. Locust, 149. Lo-debar, 352. '• Look in the face,' 355. Lord of hosts. 229, 279. Lucian of Antioch, 4, 36, 53, 57. Maacah, 207, 208. Madman, 232, 322, 324. Mahanaim, 93. Man of God, 190, 196, 250, 291 ; — from Judah, 1938". Manasseh, 404, 406 ff., 421. Maneh, 170. Mantle, 242, 280. Mari', 352. Mariaba, Marib, 166. Mas (forced labour), 91, Mattan-Baal, 341. Mazkir, 24, 91. Mazzal6th, mazzaroth, 418. Mazzebah, 125, 204 f., 283, 334, 344, 422. Meal offering, 154. Medinah, 248. Megiddo, 93, 162, 206, 326 ; — battle of, 424 f. Melek, 176. Melkarth, 125, 221. Meliihha, 386f. INDEX 455 Menahem, 361 ff., 365 ; — tri- bute of, 44 f., 362 f., 368, 426, 448. Menander of Ephesus, 47, 99, 220. Merodach-baladan, 403. Mesha, 283 f. Messianic expectations, 438. Micaiah, 261 ff., 263. Midian, 178, ' Might 3' man, — men,' 60, x8i, 297, 363- Milcom, 175, 182. Militarism, 163. Milk : see Melek. Millo, the, 161, 180 f., 346 f. Minaean inscriptions, 129 ; — kingdom, 166. Mines of Solomon, 163 ' Mingled people,' 169. Minhah, 154. Ministers, lists of, 90. Miscarrying, 281. Misgeroth, 129 f. Mizpah, 211, 436 f. Mnevis-cult, 191. Moab, 272, 282 ff. Moabite Stone, 85, 176, 218, 283, 289, 301. Molech, 175 f., 375. Month, names for, 104, 116. Monument, 422. Moses, Law of, 70, 354, 411, 424. Mosque of Omar, 441. Mourning customs, 251, 260 f., 307. Mule, 65. Music, religious, 286. Muzri, 84, 173, 310 f., 374. Naaman, 297 ff., 309. Nabopolassar, 427. Naboth, 254 ff., 354. Nabulus, 185, 203, 2i8. Nadab, king of Israel, 212 f. Nahr Barada, 299. Nahr el-A'waj, 299. Nahr el-Mukatta, 234. Nakad, nokad,' 284. Name, Divine, 145, 147, 166. Naphtali, 93, 160, 161, 211, 365- Narratives of North Israel, 28 f., 244, 305 ff. Nathan, 60, 61, 64 ff., 85. Navy, 171. Nebuchadnezzar, 427 ff. Necho, 424 f., 427. Nehushtan, 384. Nephesh, 167, 226. Nergal, 381. Nezib, nizzabim, 92. Nineveh, fall of, 427. Nisroch, 400. Nobles, 257. Nusku, 400. Oak of Deborah, 197. '6b, 408. Obadiah, 227 ff. Officials, royal, 90 ff., 96 f., 163. Oil, beaten, loi ; olive ~, 290. '6lah, 154. Olives, mount of, 176. Omri, 216, 218 f., 252, 283, 319- Ophel, 301. Ophir, 164 f., 270 f. Oracle, 106, no. Origen, 3, 35. Osnappar, 379. Ox, symbol of deity, 191. Palace, Solomon's, 1 16 ff. ; — site of, 440 ff. Palmyra, 162. Paran, 178. Parvarim, 421. ' Pass through the fire,' 368. Passover, Josiah's, 423. Peace-offerings, 154. 4S6 I AND II KINGS Pedestal, 128. Pekah, 44 f., 364 f. Pekahiah, 43, 363 f, Pelethites : see Cherethites. Pensioners, royal, 72, 96. Penuel, 190 f., 206. People = army, 216, 348. Persecution of prophets, 227 f., 406. Pestilence, 149, 388, 399. Petra, 354. Pharaoh's daughter, marriage of, 83 f., 98 f., 174 ; — house of, 1 20, 164, 442. Pharpar, 299. Philistines, 212, 313, 384, 386. Pilgrimages, 293. Pillars. 204, 283, 334, 340, 376 ; — of palace and temple, 136 ; frontal — , 124 f., 435. Planets, 418. Plethi : see Krethi. Pliny, 402. Plummet, 409. Poetry, gnomic and lyric, 98. Polygamy, 174. Pound, 170. Pragmatic history, 5. Prayer, attitude of. 146, 152. Present (tribute), 369. Priestly glosses, 31, no, 139 ff., 233- Priests, 78. 141, 192, sco, 336, 342 ff., 378, 380; — 'of second order,' 418, 436; idolatrous — , 418. Primogeniture, 58. Prophetic guilds, 228, 252 f., 295, 298, 302. Prophets, 16, 26, 189, 196 ff., 228, 247 ff., 252ff.,255.26lff., 285 f., 322, 336, 358, 408. Prostitution, religious, 205. Proverbs, 98. Providence, Hebrew views of, 8. Province, 248. Pul, Pulu, 363 i Punishment, postponement of, 176, 261, 405. Queen-mother, 74 f., 204, 209, 317, 431. Rabsaris, 389. Rabshakeh, 389. Ramah, 210. Ramman, 191, 300. Ramman-nirari III, 352. Ramoth-gilead,93,2i2,262,3ai. Ramoth-mizpeh, 262, Ravens, 224. Rechabites, 331. Recorder, 91. Records, official, 23, 26, 217,318. Red Sea traffic, 164 ff., 270. 354. Redactor, second, i8ff., 30; — date of, 22 f. Redeemers, 216. Reformation of Hezekiah,383f.; — of Josiah, 417 ff. Regalia, 340. Rehoboam, 184 ff., 204 ff., 444 ff. Reign, methodsof reckoning,40. Remnant, doctrine of, 399. Retribution, principle of, 15. ' Reviveth ' (of time), 292. Revolt of ten tribes, 184 ff. Revolution of Jehu, 320 ff. ; — in Judah, 335 ff. Rezeph, 395. Rezin, 367, 368. Rezon, i79f., 210. Riblah, 426, 431 ff. Riddles, 99, 167. Rimmon, 300. Ritual, innovations in, 370. River ( = Euphrates), 95 f. Rock, sacred, 155, 441. Roofs, place of sacrifice, 421. Rotem (shrub), 237. Ruali, 167. Runners (= footguards), 60. 206, 341. INDEX 457 Sabako, 374. Sackcloth: s^^ ' Mourning.' Sacrifice, kinds of, 153 ; morn- ing—, 287 ; evening—, 233 ; human — , 288, 368, 376. Sakkuth, 381. Salt, valley of, 354. Salutations, 294. Samaria, 194, 199, 218 f., 244 fF., 282, 306 ff. , 422 f. ; — fall of, 43, 372, 375, 385. Samaritans, 378 fF. Sarafend, 225. Sareira, 181, 184, 186, 443. Sargon, 372,375, 378 f.,386, 403. Satan, 177. Satyrs, 419. Scorpions, 187. Scribe, 90. Sea, molten, 126 f., 371. Seah, 233, 309. Sebustlyeh, 218. Seilun, 181. Sela, 354. Sennacherib, 384, 400, 403 ; campaign of — , 385 ff. Sepharvaim, 380, 392, Septuagint, 33-8. Serpent, brasen, 384. Serpent-worship, 384. Servant, king's, 414. Seve, 374. Shaalbim, 92. Shab'i, 374. ' Shake the head,' 397. Shalish, 163, 309. Shallum, 361. Shalmaneser II, 45, 243, 315, 335; — ni,357; — IV,372ff., 380. Shamash (sun god), 420. Shamash-shum-ukin, 406. Shaphan, 412, 414. Sharezer, 400. Sharon, plain of, 92, 249 f. Sheba, 166; — queen of, 82, 97, 166 flf. Shebna, 389, 393. Shechem, 185, 190, 203. 444. Sheepmaster, 284. Shelabbim, 129 f. Shelamim, 154. Shemaiah, 189 f., 444 f. Sheol, 71, 73. Shephelah, 172, 357. Shewbread, table of, 112, 137. Shields, 170, 206. Shiloh, 181. Shimei, 69, 72 f., 78 fF. Shishak, 46, 83, 184, 191, 443 ; — expedition of, 205 ff. Shunem, 59, 206, 291, 293. ' Shut up ' and ' at large,' 202, 358. Side-chambers, 106, 138. Sign, prophetic, 195, 398, 402. Siloam, canal, 405 ; — pool of, 405, 433- Sin, ancient views of, 63 f., 226. Sin ofFering, 346. Sinai, 238. Sippara, 380. So, king of Egypt, 374. Socoh, 92. Sodomites, 205, 419. ' Solemn assembly,* 156, 332. Solomon, 16 f ; — accession of, 57 fF. ; — David's charge to, 69 ; — character and policy of, 83 ; — wisdom of, 88, 97, 101, 171 f. ; — wealth of, 169 ; — apostas\' of, 173 fF. ; — death of, 184. Somali coast, 165, 171. Sons of the prophets. 228, 252 f., 278, 290, 295, 302. i Soul, 226. i Sources of Kings, 23-30. ! Sowing, time of, 399. I Spirit, 167, 279 f., 304 ; — fami- liar, 408 ; — of God, 229, I 265 f. j Stone-dressing, 103, 120. I Streets (= bazaars), 252. 45^ I AND II KINGS Styrax (slirub\ T48, Succession to throne, 57 f. Succoth, 136. Succoth-benotli, 381. Sundial, 403. Sunstroke, 293. Symbolic act, 181, 350 f. Syrian, language of diplomacy, "391- Syrian wars, 241, 243/?,, 261 ff., 303 ff., 321, 346, 348, 352 f. Syro-Ephraimitic league, 364, 366, 368 f. Taanach, 93, 206, Tabernacle, Mosaic, 85, 141. Tabernacles, feast of, 140, 155. 193- Tables, chronological, 48-51. Tadmor, 162. Tahpenes, 177 f. Talent, 160, 363. Tarn a r, 162. Tammuz, 125. Tappuah, 362. Targets, 170. Tarshish, 171 ; — ships of, 165, 171, 271. Tartan, 389. Tassets, 268. Tel-Amarna tablets, 84, 91. 99. 205. Telassar, 395. Tell-el-Ful, 21 r. Tell el-IIasi, 357. Tell el-KadI, 211. Tell el-Kasls, 231. Tell 'Erfad, 392. Tell Jezer, 162. Temple, building of, 28, 99 ff. ; — description of, 103 ff. ; — furniture of, 121, 435; — foreign symbolism in, 126, 127, 128 ; — dedication of, 138 ff., 146; — repairs of, 342 ff, ; — purification of, 418 ; — site of, 440 f. Temple dues, 343. Tent (of the ark), 67, 77 ; — of meeting, 140 f. 'Tents, to your,' 188. Teraphim, 424. Testimony, 340, Thapsacus, 96, Theocratic institutions, 16, 145. Theophany, 239 ff., 273. Threshold, keepers of, 345, 418. Throne of ivory, 170. Tibni, 217 f. Tiglath-pileser III, 44, 359, 362 f., 364 f., 367, 368 f., 372 f., 392. Tiphsah, 96, 362. Tirhakah, 387 ff., 394. Tirzah, 203, 211, 214 f., 361 f. Tishbe, 223. Topheth, 420. Treasures of temple, 138, 205, 209, 371 f. Tribes, number of, 182. Tribute, 369, 426. Tyropoeon, 420, 433, 440 f. Unleavened bread, 420. Upper chamber, 226, 272 f., I 291 f., 421. } Urijah, 370. Uzza, garden of, 409 f., 429. Uzziah, 359 f., 410. Vestments, sacred, 333. Virgin's Spring, 61, 66, 440. Wadi Barbar, 299. Wadi el-'Ahsa, 284, 286 f. I Wadi el-'Arish, 155. j Wadi el-Kelt, 224. I Wadi el-Milh, 354. Wadi er-Rababi, 420, 440. Wadi es-Sunt, 92. Wadi Mojib, 335. 1 Wall of Jerusalem, 84. 161, 355. INDEX 459 Warfare, barbarities of, 288 f., 3^6. Whoredoms (= idolatr3'\ 325. Wild vine, 295 f. Wilderness, of Judaea. 78. Windows, of temple, 106 ; — of heaven, 309. Wisdom of Hebrews, 88, 97. Witchcrafts (= idolatry), 325. Word of the Lord, 194, 253. World-ocean, 127. Worship, centralization of, i3f., 16, 84, 209, 383 f., 390, 407, 417 fr. ' Worthy man,' 67. ' Wrought stone,' 103. Xenophon, 96. Yahweh Z6ba'6th, 229, Yarmuk, 262. Yoke, 186. Zadok, 60. 78. 90, Zair, 318. Zarephath, 224 ; — widow of, 224 ff. Zarethan, 136. Zechariah, sonof Jehoiada, 346 ; — king of Israel, 360 f. Zedekiah, prophet, 263 ff. ; — king of Judah, 431 ff. Zeredah, 180. Zer'in, 93, 236, 256. Zeruah, 181. Zidonians, ick), 175. Zimbabwe, 165. Zimri, king of Israel, 215, 2i6f., 327. Zion, 67, 139 f., 440. Ziv (month ■, it6. Zobah, 179. Zodiac, signs of, 419. Zoheleth, stone of, 61. OXFORD; HORACE HART PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY A t ^'^^ni^ht Date Due""^"^^^^^^' N ?.s^ o. - 7;^^ , FACULTY i ^\Jm^0l'^^ 1 Jt^^^ \- ....^^ I 1 ! 1 1 1 i 1 f