the pomp or accessories usually associated with royalty in the ancient
kingdoms of the East. Saul, as King of Israel, led much the same sort of
life as when he was merely a Benjamite chief. He preferred to reside at
Gibeah, in the house of his forefathers, with no further resources than
those yielded by the domain inherited from his ancestors, together with
the spoil taken in battle.***
* The part taken by Samuel in the narrative of Sauls war
against the Amalekites (1 Sam. xv.) is thought by some
critics to have been introduced with a view of exalting the
prophets office at the expense of the king and the
monarchy. They regard 1 Sam. xiv. 48 as being the sole
historic ground of the narrative.
** 1 Sam. xiv. 47. We may admit his successful skirmishes
with Moab, but some writers maintain that the defeat of the
Edomites and Aramaeans is a mere anticipation, and consider
that the passage is only a reflection of 2 Sam. viii. 8, and
reproduces the list of the wars of David, with the exception
of the expedition against Damascus.
*** Gibeah is nowhere expressly mentioned as being the
capital of Saul, but the name Gibeah of Saul which it bore
shows that it must have been the royal residence; the names
of the towns mentioned in the account of Sauls pursuit of
David--Naioth, Eamah, and Nob--are all near to Gibeah. It
was also at Gibeah that the Gibeonites slew seven of the
sons and grandsons of Saul (2 Sam. xxi. 6-9), no doubt to
bring ignominy on the family of the first king in the very
place in which they had governed.
All that he had, in addition to his former surroundings, were a
priesthood attached to the court, and a small army entirely at his own
disposal. Ahijah, a descendant of Eli, sacrificed for the king when the
latter did not himself officiate; he fulfilled the office of chaplain
to him in time of war, and was the mouthpiece of the divine oracles
when these were consulted as to the propitious moment for attacking the
enemy.
[Illustration: 319.jpg A PHOENICIAN SOLDIER]
Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from the bronze original in the
Louvre.
The army consisted of a nucleus of Benjamites, recruited from the
kings clan, with the addition of any adventurers, whether Israelites or
strangers, who were attracted to enlist under a popular military chief.*
It comprised archers, slingers, and bands of heavily armed infantry,
after the fashion of the Phoenician, bearing pikes. We can gam some
idea of their appearance and equipment from the bronze statuettes of an
almost contemporary period, which show us the Phoenician foot-soldiers
or the barbarian mercenaries in the pay of the Phoenician cities: they
wear the horizontally striped loin-cloth of the Syrians, leaving the
arms and legs entirely bare, and the head is protected by a pointed or
conical helmet.
* Ahijah (1 Sam. xiv. 3), son of Ahitub, great-grandson of
Eli, appears to be the same as Ahimelech, son of Ahitub, who
subsequently helped David (1 Sam. xxi. 1-10), and was
massacred by order of Saul (1 Sam. xxii. 9-19). The scribe
must have been shocked by the name Melech--that of the god
Milik [Moloch]--and must have substituted Jah or Jahveh.
Saul possessed none of the iron-bound chariots which always accompanied
the Qanaanite infantry; these heavy vehicles would have been entirely
out of place in the mountain districts, which were the usual field of
operations for the Israelite force.* We are unable to ascertain whether
the kings soldiers received any regular pay, but we know that the spoil
was divided between the prince and his men, each according to his
rank and in proportion to the valour he had displayed.** In cases of
necessity, the whole of the tribes were assembled, and a selection was
made of all those capable of bearing arms. This militia, composed mainly
of a pastoral peasantry in the prime of life, capable of heroic efforts,
was nevertheless ill-disciplined, liable to sudden panics, and prone to
become disbanded on the slightest reverse.***
* With regard to the use of the bow among Sauls soldiers,
cf. 1 Sam. xx. 18-42, where we find the curious scene of the
meeting of David and Jonathan, when the latter came out of
Gibeah on the pretext of practising with bow and arrows. The
accoutrement of the Hebrews is given in the passage where
Saul lends his armour to David before meeting with Goliath
(1 Sam. xvii. 38, 39).
** Cf. the quarrel which took place between the soldiers of
David about the spoil taken from the Amalekites, and the
manner in which the strife was decided by David (1 Sam. xxx.
21-25)
*** Saul, for instance, assembles the people and makes a
selection to attack the Philistines (1 Sam. xiii. 2, 4, 7)
against the Ammonites (1 Sam. xi. 7, 8) and against the
Amalekites (1 Sam. xv. 4).
Saul had the supreme command of the whole; the members of his own family
served as lieutenants under him, including his son Jonathan, to whom
he owed some of his most brilliant victories, together with his cousin
Abner, the _sar-zaba_, who led the royal guard.* Among the men of
distinguished valour who had taken service under Saul, he soon singled
out David, son of Jesse, a native of Bethlehem of Judah.** David was
the first Judæan hero, the typical king who served as a model to all
subsequent monarchs. His elevation, like that of Saul, is traced to
Samuel. The old prophet had repaired to Bethlehem ostensibly to offer a
sacrifice, and after examining all the children of Jesse, he chose the
youngest, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the spirit
of the Lord came mightily upon David. ***
* 1 Sam. xiv. 50, 51. There is no record of the part played
by Abner during Sauls lifetime: he begins to figure in the
narrative after the battle at Gilboa under the double reign
of Ish-bosheth and David.
** The name of David is a shortened form of Davdo, Dodo,
the favourite of Him, i.e. God.
*** The intervention of the prophet occupies 1 Sam. xvi. 1-
13. Some critics have imagined that this passage was
interpolated at a later date, and reflects the events which
are narrated in chap. x. They say it was to show that Saul
was not alone in enjoying consecration by the prophet, and
hence all doubt would be set at rest as to whether David was
actually that neighbour of thine, that is better than
thou, mentioned in 1 Sam. xv. 28.
His introduction at the court of Saul is variously accounted for.
According to one narrative, Saul, being possessed by an evil spirit,
fell at times into a profound melancholy, from which he could be aroused
only by the playing of a harp. On learning that David was skilled in
this instrument, he begged Jesse to send him his son, and the lad soon
won the kings affection. As often as the illness came upon him, David
took his harp, and Saul was refreshed, and the evil spirit departed
from him. * Another account relates that he entered on his soldierly
career by killing with his sling Goliath of Gath,** who had challenged
the bravest Israelites to combat; though elsewhere the death of Goliath
is attributed to Elhanan of Bethlehem,*** one of the mighty men of
valour, who specially distinguished himself in the wars against the
Philistines. David had, however, no need to take to himself the brave
deeds of others; at Ephes-dammîm, in company with Eleazar, the son of
Dodai, and Shammah, the son of Agu, he had posted himself in a field
of lentils, and the three warriors had kept the Philistines at bay till
their discomfited Israelite comrades had had time to rally.****
* 1 Sam. xvi. 14-23. This narrative is directly connected
with 1 Sam. xiv. 52, where we are told that when Saul saw
any strong man, or any valiant man, he took him unto him.
** 1 Sam. xvii., xviii. 1-5. According to some writers, this
second version, the best known of the two, is a development
at a later period of the tradition preserved in 2 Sam. xxi.
19, where the victory of Elhanan over Goliath is recorded.
*** 2 Sam. xxi. 19, where the duel of Goliath and Elhanan is
placed in the reign of David, during the combat at Gob. Some
critics think that the writer of Chronicles, recognising the
difficulty presented by this passage, changed the epithet
Bethlehemite, which qualified the name of Elhanan, into
Lahmi, the name of Goliaths brother (1 Citron, xx. 5). Say
ce thought to get over the difficulty by supposing that
Elhanan was Davids first name; but Elhanan is the son of
Jair, and not the son of Jesse.
**** The combat of Paz-Dammîm or Ephes-Dammîm is mentioned
in 1 Sam. xvii. 1; the exploit of David and his two
comrades, 2 Sam: xxiii. 9-12 (cf. 1 Chron. xi, 12-14, which
slightly varies from 2 Sam. xxiii. 9-12).
Saul entrusted him with several difficult undertakings, in all of which
he acquitted himself with honour. On his return from one of them, the
women of the villages came out to meet him, singing and dancing to the
sound of timbrels, the refrain of their song being: Saul hath slain his
thousands, and David his ten thousands. The king concealed the jealousy
which this simple expression of joy excited within him, but it found
vent at the next outbreak of his illness, and he attempted to kill David
with a spear, though soon after he endeavoured to make amends for his
action by giving him his second daughter Michal in marriage.* This did
not prevent the king from again attempting Davids life, either in
a real or simulated fit of madness; but not being successful, he
despatched a body of men to waylay him. According to one account it was
Michal who helped her husband to escape,** while another attributes the
saving of his life to Jonathan. This prince had already brought about
one reconciliation between his father and David, and had spared no pains
to reinstall him in the royal favour, but his efforts merely aroused
the kings suspicion against himself. Saul imagined that a conspiracy
existed for the purpose of dethroning him, and of replacing him by his
son; Jonathan, knowing that his life also was threatened, at length
renounced the attempt, and David and his followers withdrew from court.
* The account of the first disagreement between Saul and
David, and with regard to the marriage of David with Michal,
is given in 1 Sam. xviii. 6-16, 20-29, and presents every
appearance of authenticity. Verses 17-19, mentioning a
project of union between David and Sauls eldest daughter,
Merab, has at some time been interpolated; it is not given
in the LXX., either because it was not in the Hebrew version
they had before them, or because they suppressed it owing to
the motive appearing to them insufficient.
** 1 Sam. xix. 11-17. Many critics regard this passage as an
interpolation.
[Illustration: 324.jpg AÎD-EL-RA, THE SITE OF THE ANCIENT ADULLAM]
Drawn by Boudier, from photograph No. 430 of the _Palestine
Exploration Fund._
He was hospitably received by a descendant of Eli,* Ahimelech the
priest, at Nob, and wandered about in the neighbourhood of Adullam,
hiding himself in the wooded valleys of Khereth, in the heart of Judah.
He retained the sympathies of many of the Benjamites, more than one
of whom doubted whether it would not be to their advantage to transfer
their allegiance from their aged king to this more youthful hero.
* 1 Sam. xxi. 8, 9 adds that he took as a weapon the sword
of Goliath which was laid up in the sanctuary at Nob.
Saul got news of their defection, and one day when he was sitting, spear
in hand, under the tamarisk at Gibeah, he indignantly upbraided his
servants, and pointed out to them the folly of their plans. Hear, now,
ye Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and
vineyards? will he make you all captains of thousands and captains of
hundreds? Ahimelech was selected as the victim of the kings anger:
denounced by Doeg, Sauls steward, he was put to death, and all his
family, with the exception of Abiathar, one of his sons, perished with
him.* As soon as it became known that David held the hill-country,
a crowd of adventurous spirits flocked to place themselves under his
leadership, anticipating, no doubt, that spoil would not be lacking with
so brave a chief, and he soon found himself at the head of a small
army, with Abiathar as priest, and the ephod, rescued from Nob, in his
possession.**
* 1 Sam. xix.-xxii., where, according to some critics, two
contradictory versions have been blended together at a late
period. The most probable version is given in 1 Sam, xix. 8-
10 [11-18a], xxi. 1-7 [8-10], xxii., and is that which I
have followed by preference; the other version, according to
these writers, attributes too important a rôle to Jonathan,
and relates at length the efforts he made to reconcile his
father and his friend (1 Sam. xviii. 30, xix. 1-7, xx.). It
is thought, from the confusion apparent in this part of the
narrative, that a record of the real motives which provoked
a rupture between the king and his son-in-law has not been
preserved.
** 1 Sam. xxii. 20-23, xxiii. 6. For the use of the ephod by
Abiathar for oracular purposes, cf. 1 Sam. xxiii. 9-12, xxx.
7, 8; the inquiry in 1 Sam. xxiii. 2-4 probably belongs to
the same series, although neither Abiathar nor the ephod is
mentioned.
The country was favourable for their operations; it was a perfect
labyrinth of deep ravines, communicating with each other by narrow
passes or by paths winding along the edges of precipices. Isolated
rocks, accessible only by rugged ascents, defied assault, while
extensive caves offered a safe hiding-place to those who were familiar
with their windings. One day the little band descended to the rescue of
Keilah, which they succeeded in wresting from the Philistines, but no
sooner did they learn that Saul was on his way to meet them than they
took refuge in the south of Judah, in the neighbourhood of Ziph and
Maôn, between the mountains and the Dead Sea.*
* 1 Sam. xxiii. 1-13; an episode acknowledged to be
historical by nearly-all modern critics.
[Illustration: 326.jpg THE DESERT OF JUDAH]
Drawn by Boudior, from photograph No. 197 of the _Palestine
Exploration Fund._ The heights visible in the distance are
the mountains of Moab, beyond the Dead Sea.
Saul already irritated by his rivals successes, was still more galled
by being always on the point of capturing him, and yet always seeing him
slip from his grasp. On one afternoon, when the king had retired into a
cave for his siesta, he found himself at the mercy of his adversary; the
latter, however, respected the sleep of his royal master, and contented
himself with cutting a piece off his mantle.* On another occasion David,
in company with Abishai and Ahimelech the Hittite, took a lance and
a pitcher of water from the kings bedside.** The inhabitants of the
country were not all equally loyal to Davids cause; those of Ziph,
whose meagre resources were taxed to support his followers, plotted to
deliver him up to the king,*** while Nabal of Maôn roughly refused
him food. Abigail atoned for her husbands churlishness by a speedy
submission; she collected a supply of provisions, and brought it herself
to the wanderers. David was as much disarmed by her tact as by her
beauty, and when she was left a widow he married her. This union insured
the support of the Calebite clan, the most powerful in that part of
the country, and policy as well as gratitude no doubt suggested the
alliance.
* 1 Sam, xxiv. Thought by some writers to be of much later
date.
** 1 Sam. xxvi. 4-25.
Skirmishes were not as frequent between the kings troops and the
outlaws as we might at first be inclined to believe, but if at times
there was a truce to hostilities, they never actually ceased, and
the position became intolerable. Encamped between his kinsman and the
Philistines, David found himself unable to resist either party except by
making friends with the other. An incursion of the Philistines near Maôn
saved David from the king, but when Saul had repulsed it, David had no
choice but to throw himself into the arms of Achish, King of Gath,
of whom he craved permission to settle as his vassal at Ziklag, on
condition of Davids defending the frontier against the Bedawin.*
* 1 Sam. xxvii. The earlier part of this chapter (vers. 1-6) is strictly
historical. Some critics take vers. 8-12 to be of later date, and
pretend that they were inserted to show the cleverness of David, and to
deride the credulity of the King of Gath.
Saul did not deem it advisable to try and dislodge him from this
retreat. Peace having been re-established in Judah, the king turned
northward and occupied the heights which bound the plain of Jezreel to
the east; it is possible that he contemplated pushing further afield,
and rallying round him those northern tribes who had hitherto never
acknowledged his authority. He may, on the other hand, have desired
merely to lay hands on the Syrian highways, and divert to his own
profit the resources brought by the caravans which plied along them.
The Philistines, who had been nearly ruined by the loss of the right to
demand toll of these merchants, assembled the contingents of their five
principalities, among them being the Hebrews of David, who formed
the personal guard of Achish. The four other princes objected to the
presence of these strangers in their midst, and forced Achish to dismiss
them. David returned to Ziklag, to find ruin and desolation everywhere.
The Amalekites had taken advantage of the departure of the Hebrews to
revenge themselves once for all for Davids former raids on them, and
they had burnt the town, carrying off the women and flocks. David at
once set out on their track, overtook them just beyond the torrent of
Besor, and rescued from them, not only his own belongings, but all the
booty they had collected by the way in the southern provinces of Caleb,
in Judah, and in the Cherethite plain.
He distributed part of this spoil among those cities of Judah which
had shown hospitality to himself and his men, for instance, to Jattir,
Aroer, Eshtemoa, Hormah, and Hebron.* While he thus kept up friendly
relations with those who might otherwise have been tempted to forget
him, Saul was making his last supreme effort against the Philistines,
but only ito meet with failure. He had been successful in repulsing them
as long as he kept to the mountain districts, where the courage of his
troops made up for their lack of numbers and the inferiority of their
arms; but he was imprudent enough to take up a position on the hillsides
of Gilboa, whose gentle slopes offered no hindrances to the operations
of the heavy Philistine battalions. They attacked the Israelites from
the Shunem side, and swept all before them. Jonathan perished in the
conflict, together with his two brothers, Malchi-shua and Abinadab;
Saul, who was wounded by an arrow, begged his armour-bearer to take his
life, but, on his persistently refusing, the king killed himself with
his own sword. The victorious Philistines cut off his head and those of
his sons, and placed their armour in the temple of Ashtoreth,**
while their bodies, thus despoiled, were hung up outside the walls of
Bethshan, whose Canaanite inhabitants had made common cause with the
Philistines against Israel.
* 1 Sam. xxviii. 1, 2, xxix., xxx. The torrent of Besor is
the present Wady Esh-Sheriah, which runs to the south of
Gaza.
** The text of 1 Sam. xxxi. 10 says, in a vague manner, in
the house of the Ashtaroth (in the plural), which is
corrected, somewhat arbitrarily, in 1 Chron. x. 10 iato in
the house of Dagon (B.V.); it is possible that it was the
temple at Gaza, Gaza being the chief of the Philistine
towns.
The people of Jabesh-Gilead, who had never forgotten how Saul had saved
them from the Ammonites, hearing the news, marched all night, rescued
the mutilated remains, and brought them back to their own town, where
they burned them, and buried the charred bones under a tamarisk, fasting
meanwhile seven days as a sign of mourning.*
* 1 Sam. xxxi. It would seem that there were two narratives
describing this war: in one, the Philistines encamped at
Shunem, and Saul occupied Mount Gilboa (1 Sam. xxviii. 4);
in the other, the Philistines encamped at Aphek, and the
Israelites by the fountain which is in Jezreel (1 Sam.
xxix. 1). The first of these accounts is connected with the
episode of the witch of Endor, the second with the sending
away of David by Achish. The final catastrophe is in both
narratives placed on Mount Gilboa and Stade has endeavoured
to reconcile the two accounts by admitting that the battle
was fought between Aphek and the fountain, but that the
final scene took place on the slopes of Gilboa. There are
even two versions of the battle, one in 1 Sam. xxxi. and the
other in 2 Sam. i. 6-10, where Saul does not kill himself,
but begs an Amalekite to slay him; many critics reject the
second version.
[Illustration: 330.jpg THE HILL OF BETHSHAN, SEEN FROM THE EAST]
Drawn by Boudier, from photograph No. 79 of the _Palestine
Exploration Fund._
David afterwards disinterred these relics, and laid them in the
burying-place of the family of Kish at Zela, in Benjamin. The tragic end
of their king made a profound impression on the people. We read that,
before entering on his last battle, Saul was given over to gloomy
forebodings: he had sought counsel of Jahveh, but God answered him not,
neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. The aged Samuel had
passed away at Ramah, and had apparently never seen the king after
the flight of David;* Saul now bethought himself of the prophet in his
despair, and sought to recall him from the tomb to obtain his counsel.
* 1 Sam. xxv. 1, repeated 1 Sam. xxviii. 3, with a mention
of the measures taken by Saul against the wizards and
fortune-tellers.
The king had banished from the land all wizards and fortune-tellers, but
his servants brought him word that at Endor there still remained a woman
who could call up the dead. Saul disguised himself, and, accompanied by
two of his retainers, went to find her; he succeeded in overcoming her
fear of punishment, and persuaded her to make the evocation. Whom
shall I bring up unto thee?--Bring up Samuel.--And when the woman saw
Samuel, she cried with a loud voice, saying, Why hast thou deceived me,
for thou art Saul? And the king said unto her, Be not afraid, for what
sawest thou?--I saw gods ascending out of the earth.--What form is
he of?--An old man cometh up, and he is covered with a mantle. Saul
immediately recognised Samuel, and prostrated himself with his face to
the ground before him. The prophet, as inflexible after death as in
his lifetime, had no words of comfort for the God-forsaken man who had
troubled his repose. The Lord hath rent the kingdom out of thine hand,
and given it to thy neighbour, even to David, because thou obeyedst not
the voice of the Lord,... and tomorrow shalt thou and thy sons be with
me. The Lord also shall deliver the host of Israel into the hands of the
Philistines. *
* 1 Sam. xxviii. 5-25. There is no reason why this scene
should not be historical; it was natural that Saul, like
many an ancient general in similar circumstances, should
seek to know the future by means of the occult sciences then
in vogue. Some critics think that certain details of the
evocation--as, for instance, the words attributed to Samuel
--are of a later date.
We learn, also, how David, at Ziklag, on hearing the news of the
disaster, had broken into weeping, and had composed a lament, full
of beauty, known as the Song of the Bow, which the people of Judah
committed to memory in their childhood. Thy glory, O Israel, is slain
upon thy high places! How are the mighty fallen! Tell it not in Gath,
publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon; lest the daughters of the
Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph!
Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew nor rain upon you, neither
fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty was vilely cast
away, the shield of Saul, not anointed with oil! From the blood of the
slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back,
the sword of Saul returned not empty. Saul and Jonathan were lovely and
pleasant in their lives, and in death they were not divided. *
* 2 Sam. i. 17-27 (R.V.). This elegy is described as a
quotation from Jasher, the Book of the Upright. Many modern
writers attribute its authorship to David himself; others
reject this view; all agree in regarding it as extremely
ancient. The title, Song of the Bow, is based on the
possibly corrupt text of ver. 18.
The Philistines occupied in force the plain of Jezreel and the pass
which leads from it into the lowlands of Bethshan: the Israelites
abandoned the villages which they had occupied in these districts, and
the gap between the Hebrews of the north and those of the centre grew
wider. The remnants of Sauls army sought shelter on the eastern bank
of the Jordan, but found no leader to reorganise them. The reverse
sustained by the Israelitish champion seemed, moreover, to prove the
futility of trying to make a stand against the invader, and even the
useless-ness of the monarchy itself: why, they might have asked, burthen
ourselves with a master, and patiently bear with his exactions, if, when
put to the test, he fails to discharge the duties for the performance
of which he was chosen? And yet the advantages of a stable form of
government had been so manifest during the reign of Saul, that it never
for a moment occurred to his former subjects to revert to patriarchal
institutions: the question which troubled them was not whether they were
to have a king, but rather who was to fill the post. Saul had left a
considerable number of descendants behind him.* From these, Abner, the
ablest of his captains, chose Ishbaal, and set him on the throne to
reign under his guidance.**
* We know that he had three sons by his wife Ahinoam--
Jonathan, Ishbaal, and Malchi-shua; and two daughters, Merab
and Michal (1 Sam. xiv. 49, 50, where Ishvi should be read
Ishbaal). Jonathan left at least one son, Meribbaal (1
Chron. viii. 34, ix. 40, called Mephibosheth in 2 Sam. xxi.
7), and Merab had five sons by Adriel (2 Sam. xxi. 8). One
of Sauls concubines, Rizpah, daughter of Aiah, had borne
him two sons, Armoni and Meribbaal (2 Sam. xxi. 8, where the
name Meribbaal is changed into Mephibosheth); Abinadab, who
fell with him in the fight at Mount Gilboa (1 Sam. xxxi. 2),
whose mothers name is not mentioned, was another son.
** Ishbaal was still a child when his father died: had he
been old enough to bear arms, he would have taken a part in
the battle of Gilboa with his brothers.. The expressions
used in the account of his elevation to the throne prove
that he was a minor (2 Sam. ii. 8, 9); the statement that he
was forty years old when he began to reign would seem,
therefore, to be an error (ii. 10).
Gibeah was too close to the frontier to be a safe residence for a
sovereign whose position was still insecure; Abner therefore installed
Ishbaal at Mahanaim, in the heart of the country of Gilead. The house
of Jacob, including the tribe of Benjamin, acknowledged him as king, but
Judah held aloof. It had adopted the same policy at the beginning of
the previous reign, yet its earlier isolation had not prevented it from
afterwards throwing in its lot with the rest of the nation. But at that
time no leader had come forward from its own ranks who was worthy to be
reckoned among the mighty men of Israel; now, on the contrary, it had on
its frontier a bold and resolute leader of its own race. David lost no
time in stepping into the place of those whose loss he had bewailed.
Their sudden removal, while it left him without a peer among his own
people, exposed him to the suspicion and underground machinations of his
foreign protectors; he therefore quitted them and withdrew to Hebron,
where his fellow-countrymen hastened to proclaim him king.* From that
time onwards the tendency of the Hebrew race was to drift apart into two
distinct bodies; one of them, the house of Joseph, which called itself
by the name of Israel, took up its position in the north, on the banks
of the Jordan; the other, which is described as the house of Judah, in
the south, between the Dead Sea and the Shephelah. Abner endeavoured to
suppress the rival kingdom in its infancy: he brought Ishbaal to Gibeah
and proposed to Joab, who was in command of Davids army, that the
conflict should be decided by the somewhat novel expedient of pitting
twelve of the house of Judah against an equal number of the house of
Benjamin. The champions of Judah are said to have won the day, but the
opposing forces did not abide by the result, and the struggle still
continued.**
* 2 Sam. ii. 1--11. Very probably Abner recognised the
Philistine suzerainty as David had done, for the sake of
peace; at any rate, we find no mention in Holy Writ of a war
between Ishbaal and the Philistines.
** 2 Sam. ii. 12-32, iii. 1.
An intrigue in the harem furnished a solution of the difficulty. Saul
had raised one of his wives of the second rank, named Eizpah, to the
post of favourite. Abner became enamoured of her and took her. This was
an insult to the royal house, and amounted to an act of open usurpation:
the wives of a sovereign could not legally belong to any but his
successor, and for any one to treat them as Abner had treated Rizpah,
was equivalent to his declaring himself the equal, and in a sense the
rival, of his master. Ishbaal keenly resented his ministers conduct,
and openly insulted him. Abner made terms with David, won the northern
tribes, including that of Benjamin, over to his side, and when what
seemed a propitious moment had arrived, made his way to Hebron with
an escort of twenty men. He was favourably received, and all kinds of
promises were made him; but when he was about to depart again in
order to complete the negotiations with the disaffected elders, Joab,
returning from an expedition, led him aside into a gateway and slew him.
David gave him solemn burial, and composed a lament on the occasion, of
which four verses have come down to us: having thus paid tribute to
the virtues of the deceased general, he lost no time in taking further
precautions to secure his power. The unfortunate king Ishbaal, deserted
by every one, was assassinated by two of his officers as he slept in the
heat of the day, and his head was carried to Hebron: David again poured
forth lamentations, and ordered the traitors to be killed. There was now
no obstacle between him and the throne: the elders of the people met him
at Hebron, poured oil upon his head, and anointed him king over all
the provinces which had obeyed the rule of Saul in Gilead--Ephraim and
Benjamin as well as Judah.*
* 2 Sam. v. 1-3; in 1 Ghron. xi. 1-3, xii. 23-40, we find
further details beyond those given in the Book of Samuel; it
seems probable, however, that the northern tribes may not
have recognised Davids sovereignty at this time.
As long as Ishbaal lived, and his dissensions with Judah assured their
supremacy, the Philistines were content to suspend hostilities: the news
of his death, and of the union effected between Israel and Judah, soon
roused them from this state of quiescence. As prince of the house of
Caleb and vassal of the lord of Grath, David had not been an object of
any serious apprehension to them; but in his new character, as master
of the dominions of Saul, David became at once a dangerous rival, whom
they must overthrow without delay, unless they were willing to risk
being ere long overthrown by him. They therefore made an attack on
Bethlehem with the choicest of their forces, and entrenched themselves
there, with the Canaanite city of Jebus as their base, so as to separate
Judah entirely from Benjamin, and cut off the little army quartered
round Hebron from the reinforcements which the central tribes would
otherwise have sent to its aid.* This move was carried out so quickly
that David found himself practically isolated from the rest of his
kingdom, and had no course left open but to shut himself up in Adullam,
with his ordinary guard and the Judsean levies.**
* The history of this war is given in 2 Sam. v. 17-25, where
the text shows signs of having been much condensed. It is
preceded by the account of the capture of Jerusalem, which
some critics would like to transfer to chap, vi., following
ver. 1 which leads up to it. The events which followed are
self-explanatory, if we assume, as I have done in the text,
that the Philistines wished to detach Judah from Israel: at
first (2 Sam. v. 17-21) David endeavours to release himself
and effect a juncture with Israel, as is proved by the
relative positions assigned to the two opposing armies, the
Philistines at Bethlehem, David in the cave of Adullam;
afterwards (2 Sam. v. 22-25) David has shaken himself free,
has rejoined Israel, and is carrying on the struggle between
Gibeah and Gezer. The incidents recounted in 2 Sam. xxi. 15-
22, xxiii. 13-19, seem to refer almost exclusively to the
earlier part of the war, at the time when the Hebrews were
hemmed in in the neighbourhood of Adullam.
** The passage in 2 Sam. v. 17 simply states that David
went down to the hold, and gives no further details. This
expression, following as it does the account of the taking
of Jerusalem, would seem to refer to this town itself, and
Renan has thus interpreted it. It really refers to Adullam,
as is shown by the passage in 2 Sam. xxiii. 13-17. 1 2 Sam.
xxi. 15-17.
The whole district round about is intersected by a network of winding
streams, and abounds in rocky gorges, where a few determined men could
successfully hold their ground against the onset of a much more numerous
body of troops. The caves afford, as we know, almost impregnable
refuges: David had often hidden himself in them in the days when he fled
before Saul, and now his soldiers profited by the knowledge he possessed
of them to elude the attacks of the Philistines. He began a sort of
guerilla warfare, in the conduct of which he seems to have been without
a rival, and harassed in endless skirmishes his more heavily equipped
adversaries. He did not spare himself, and freely risked his own life;
but he was of small stature and not very powerful, so that his spirit
often outran his strength. On one occasion, when he had advanced too far
into the fray and was weary with striking, he ran great peril of being
killed by a gigantic Philistine: with difficulty Abishai succeeded in
rescuing him unharmed from the dangerous position into which he had
ventured, and for the future he was not allowed to run such risks on the
field of battle. On another occasion, when lying in the cave of Adullam,
he began to feel a longing for the cool waters of Bethlehem, and asked
who would go down and fetch him a draught from the well by the gates
of the town. Three of his mighty men, Joshebbasshebeth, Eleazar, and
Shammah, broke through the host of the Philistines and succeeded in
bringing it; but he refused to drink the few drops they had brought,
and poured them out as a libation to Jehovah, saying, Shall I drink the
blood of men that went in jeopardy of their lives? * Duels between
the bravest and stoutest champions of the two hosts were of frequent
occurrence. It was in an encounter of this kind that Elhanan the
Bethlehemite [or David] slew the giant Goliath at Gob. At length David
succeeded in breaking his way through the enemies lines in the valley of
Kephaîm, thus forcing open the road to the north. Here he probably fell
in with the Israelitish contingent, and, thus reinforced, was at last
in a position to give battle in the open: he was again successful,
and, routing his foes, pursued them from Gibeon to Gezer.** None of his
victories, however, was of a sufficiently decisive character to bring
the struggle to an end: it dragged on year after year, and when at last
it did terminate, there was no question on either side of submission or
of tribute:*** the Hebrews completely regained their independence, but
the Philistines do not seem to have lost any portion of their domain,
and apparently retained possession of all that they had previously held.
* 2 Sam. xxiii. 13-17; cf. 1 Ghron. xi. 15-19. Popular
tradition furnishes many incidents of a similar type; cf.
Alexander in the desert of Gedrosia, Godfrey de Bouillon in
Asia Minor, etc.
** The Hebrew text gives from Geba [or Gibeah] to Gezer
(2 Sam. v. 25); the Septuagint, from Gibeon to Gezer. This
latter reading [which is that of 1 Chron. xiv. 16.--Tr.] is
more in accordance with the geographical facts, and I have
therefore adopted it. Jahveh had shown by a continual
rustling in the leaves of the mulberry trees that He was on
Davids side.
*** In 2 Sam. viii. 1 we are told that David humiliated the
Philistines, and took the bridle of the mother city out of
their hands, or, in other words, destroyed the supremacy
which they had exercised over Israel; he probably did no
more than this, and failed to secure any part of their
territory. The passage in 1 Chron. xviii. 1, which
attributes to him the conquest of Gath and its dependencies,
is probably an amplification of the somewhat obscure wording
employed in 2 Sam. viii. 1.
But though they suffered no loss of territory, their position was in
reality much inferior to what it was before. Their control of the plain
of Jezreel was lost to them for ever, and with it the revenue which they
had levied from passing caravans: the Hebrews transferred to themselves
this right of their former masters, and were so much the richer at their
expense. To the five cities this was a more damaging blow than twenty
reverses would have been to Benjamin or Judah. The military spirit had
not died out among the Philistines, and they were still capable of any
action which did not require sustained effort; but lack of resources
prevented them from entering on a campaign of any length, and any chance
they may at one time have had of exercising a dominant influence in the
affairs of Southern Syria had passed away. Under the restraining hand
of Egypt they returned to the rank of a second-rate power, just strong
enough to inspire its neighbours with respect, but too weak to extend
its territory by annexing that of others. Though they might still, at
times, give David trouble by contesting at intervals the possession of
some outlying citadel, or by making an occasional raid on one of
the districts which lay close to the frontier, they were no longer a
permanent menace to the continued existence of his kingdom.
But was Judah strong enough to take their place, and set up in Southern
Syria a sovereign state, around which the whole fighting material of the
country might range itself with confidence? The incidents of the last
war had clearly shown the disadvantages of its isolated position in
regard to the bulk of the nation. The gap between Ekron and the Jordan,
which separated it from Ephraim and Manasseh, had, at all costs, to be
filled up, if a repetition of the manouvre which so nearly cost David
his throne at Adullam were to be avoided. It is true that the Gibeonites
and their allies acknowledged the sovereignty of Ephraim, and formed
a sort of connecting link between the tribes, but it was impossible to
rely on their fidelity so long as they were exposed to the attacks of
the Jebusites in their rear: as soon therefore as David found he had
nothing more to fear from the Philistines, he turned his attention
to Jerusalem.* This city stood on a dry and sterile limestone spur,
separated on three sides from the surrounding hills by two valleys of
unequal length. That of the Kedron, on the east, begins as a simple
depression, but gradually becomes deeper and narrower as it extends
towards the south. About a mile and a half from its commencement it is
nothing more than a deep gorge, shut in by precipitous rocks, which for
some days after the winter rains is turned into the bed of a torrent.**
* The name Jerusalem occurs under the form Ursalîmmu, or
Urusalîm, in the Tel el-Amarna tablets. Sion was the name of
the citadel preserved by the Israelites after the capture of
the place, and applied by them to the part of the city which
contained the royal palace, and subsequently to the town
itself.
** The Kedron is called a nalial (2 Sam. xv. 23; 1 Kings ii.
37; Jer. xxxi. 40), i.e. a torrent which runs dry during the
summer; in winter it was termed a brook. Excavations show
that the fall diminishes at the foot of the ancient walls,
and that the bottom of the valley has risen nearly twelve
yards.
During the remainder of the year a number of springs, which well up at
the bottom of the valley, furnish an unfailing supply of water to the
inhabitants of Gibon,* Siloam,** and Eôgel.*** The valley widens out
again near En-Kôgel, and affords a channel to the Wady of the Children
of Hinnôm, which bounds the plateau on the west. The intermediate space
has for a long time been nothing more than an undulating plain, at
present covered by the houses of modern Jerusalem. In ancient times it
was traversed by a depression in the ground, since filled up, which
ran almost parallel with the Kedron, and joined it near the Pool of
Siloam.**** The ancient city of the Jebusites stood on the summit of the
headland which rises between these two valleys, the town of Jebus itself
being at the extremity, while the Millo lay farther to the north on the
hill of Sion, behind a ravine which ran down at right angles into the
valley of the Hedron.
* Now, possibly, the Fountain of the Virgin, but its
identity is not certain.
** These are the springs which feed the group of reservoirs
now known as the Pool of Siloam. The name Siloam occurs
only in Neh. iii. 15, but is undoubtedly more ancient.
*** En-Rôgel, the Travellers Well, is now called the
Well of Job.
**** This valley, which is not mentioned by name in the Old
Testament, was called, in the time of Josephus, the
Tyropoon, or CheesemakersQuarter. Its true position, which
had been only suspected up to the middle of the present
century, was determined with certainty by means of the
excavations carried out by the English and Germans. The
bottom of the valley was found at a depth of from forty to
sixty feet below the present surface.
An unfortified suburb had gradually grown up on the lower ground to the
west, and was connected by a stairway cut in the rock* with the upper
city. This latter was surrounded by ramparts with turrets, like those
of the Canaanitish citadels which we constantly find depicted on the
Egyptian monuments. Its natural advantages and efficient garrison had so
far enabled it to repel all the attacks of its enemies.
* This is the Ophel of the Hebrew text.
When David appeared with his troops, the inhabitants ridiculed his
presumption, and were good enough to warn him of the hopelessness of his
enterprise: a garrison composed of the halt and the blind, without an
able-bodied man amongst them, would, they declared, be able successfully
to resist him. The king, stung by their mockery, made a promise to his
mighty men that the first of them to scale the walls should be made
chief and captain of his host. We often find that impregnable cities
owe their downfall to negligence on the part of their defenders: these
concentrate their whole attention on the few vulnerable points, and give
but scanty care to those which are regarded as inaccessible.* Jerusalem
proved to be no exception to this rule; Joab carried it by a sudden
assault, and received as his reward the best part of the territory which
he had won by his valour.**
* Cf. the capture of Sardis by Cyrus (Herodotus) and by
Antiochus III. (Polybius), as also the taking of the Capitol
by the Gauls.
** The account of the capture of Jerusalem is given in 2
Sam. v. 6-9, where the text is possibly corrupt, with
interpolated glosses, especially in ver. 8; Davids reply to
the mockery of the Jebusites is difficult to understand. 1
Citron, xi. 4-8 gives a more correct text, but one less
complete in so far as the portions parallel with 2 Sam. v.
6-9 are concerned; the details in regard to Joab are
undoubtedly historical, but we do not find them in the Book
of Samuel.
In attacking Jerusalem, Davids first idea was probably to rid himself
of one of the more troublesome obstacles which served to separate
one-half of his people from the other; but once he had set foot in the
place, he was not slow to perceive its advantages, and determined to
make it his residence. Hebron had sufficed so long as his power extended
over Caleb and Judah only. Situated as it was in the heart of the
mountains, and in the wealthiest part of the province in which it stood,
it seemed the natural centre to which the Kenites and men of Judah must
gravitate, and the point at which they might most readily be moulded
into a nation; it was, however, too far to the south to offer a
convenient rallying-point for a ruler who wished to bring the Hebrew
communities scattered about on both banks of the Jordan under the sway
of a common sceptre. Jerusalem, on the other hand, was close to the
crossing point of the roads which lead from the Sinaitic desert into
Syria, and from the Shephelah to the land of Gilead; it commanded
nearly the whole domain of Israel and the ring of hostile races by which
it was encircled. From this lofty eyrie, David, with Judah behind him,
could either swoop down upon Moab, whose mountains shut him out from a
view of the Dead Sea, or make a sudden descent on the seaboard, by way
of Bethhoron, at the least sign of disturbance among the Philistines,
or could push straight on across Mount Ephraim into Galilee. Issachar,
Naphtali, Asher, Dan, and Zebulun were, perhaps, a little too far from
the seat of government; but they were secondary tribes, incapable of
any independent action, who obeyed without repugnance, but also without
enthusiasm, the soldier-king able to protect them from external foes.
The future master of Israel would be he who maintained his hold on the
posterity of Judah and of Joseph, and David could not hope to find a
more suitable place than Jerusalem from which to watch over the two
ruling houses at one and the same time.
The lower part of the town he gave up to the original inhabitants,* the
upper he filled with Benjamites and men of Judah;** he built or restored
a royal palace on Mount Sion, in which he lived surrounded by his
warriors and his family.*** One thing only was lacking--a temple for his
God. Jerubbaal had had a sanctuary at Ophrah, and Saul had secured the
services of Ahijah the prophet of Shiloh: David was no longer satisfied
with the ephod which had been the channel of many wise counsels during
his years of adversity and his struggles against the Philistines. He
longed for some still more sacred object with which to identify the
fortunes of his people, and by which he might raise the newly gained
prestige of his capital. It so happened that the ark of the Lord,
the ancient safeguard of Ephraim, had been lying since the battle
of Eben-ezer not far away, without a fixed abode or regular
worshippers.****
* Judges i. 21; cf. Zech. xi. 7, where Ekron in its
decadence is likened to the Jebusite vassal of Judah.
** Jerusalem is sometimes assigned to Benjamin (Judges i.
21), sometimes to Judah (Josh. xv. 63). Judah alone is
right.
*** 2 Sam. v. 9, and the parallel passage in 1 Chron. xi. 7,
8.
**** The account of the events which followed the battle of
Eben-ezer up to its arrival in the house of Abinadab, is
taken from the history of the ark, referred to on pp. 306,
307, supra. It is given in 1 Sam. v., vi., vii. 1, where it
forms an exceedingly characteristic whole, composed, it may
be, of two separate versions thrown into one; the passage in
1 Sam. vi. 15, where the Lévites receive the ark, is
supposed by some to be interpolated.
The reason why it had not brought victory on that occasion, was that
Gods anger had been stirred at the misdeeds committed in His name by
the sons of Eli, and desired to punish His people; true, it had been
preserved from profanation, and the miracles which took place in its
neighbourhood proved that it was still the seat of a supernatural power.
[Illustration: 340.jpg MOUSE OF METAL]
Drawn by Faucher-Gudin, from a sketch published by Schick
and Oldfield Thomas.
At first the Philistines had, according to their custom, shut it up in
the temple of Dagon at Ashdod. On the morrow when the priests entered
the sanctuary, they found the statue of their god prostrate in front of
it, his fish-like body overthrown, and his head and hands scattered on
the floor;* at the same time a plague of malignant tumours broke out
among the people, and thousands of mice overran their houses. The
inhabitants of Ashdod made haste to transfer it on to Ekron: it thus
went the round of the five cities, its arrival being in each case
accompanied by the same disasters. The soothsayers, being consulted
at the end of seven months, ordered that solemn sacrifices should
be offered up, and the ark restored to its rightful worshippers,
accompanied by expiatory offerings of five golden mice and five golden
tumours, one for each of the five repentant cities.**
* The statue here referred to is evidently similar to those
of the Chaldæan gods and genii, in which Dagon is
represented as a man with his back and head enveloped in a
fish as in a cloak.
** In the Oustinoff collection at Jaffa, there is a roughly
shaped image of a mouse, cut out of a piece of white metal,
and perhaps obtained from the ruins of Gaza; it would seem
to be an ex-voto of the same kind as that referred to in the
Hebrew text, but it is of doubtful authenticity.
The ark was placed on a new cart, and two milch cows with their calves
drew it, lowing all the way, without guidance from any man, to the field
of a certain Joshua at Bethshemesh. The inhabitants welcomed it with
great joy, but their curiosity overcame their reverence, and they looked
within the shrine. Jehovah, being angered thereat, smote seventy men of
them, and the warriors made haste to bring the ark to Kirjath-jearim,
where it remained for a long time, in the house of Abinadab on the
hill, under charge of his son Eleazar.* Kirjath-jearim is only about two
leagues from Jerusalem. David himself went thither, and setting the ark
of God upon a new cart, brought it away.* Two attendants, called Uzzah
and Ahio, drove the new cart, and David and all Israel played before
God with all their might: even with songs, and with harps, and with
psalteries, and with timbrels, and with cymbals, and with trumpets.
An accident leading to serious consequences brought the procession to
a standstill; the oxen stumbled, and their sacred burden threatened to
fall: Uzzah, putting forth his hand to hold the ark, was smitten by the
Lord, and there he died before the Lord. David was disturbed at this,
feeling some insecurity in dealing with a Deity who had thus seemed to
punish one of His worshippers for a well-meant and respectful act.**
* The text of 1 Sam. vi. 21, vii. 1, gives the reading
Kirjath-jearim, whereas the text of 2 Sam. vi. 2 has Baale-
Judah, which should be corrected to Baal-Judah. Baal-Judah,
or, in its abbreviated form, Baala, is another name for
Kirjath-jearim (Josh. xv. 9-11; cf. 1 Ghron. xiii. 6).
Similarly, we find the name Kirjath-Baal (Josh. xv. 60).
Kirjath-jearim is now Kharbet-el-Enab.
** The transport of the ark from Kirjath-jearim to Jerusalem
is related in 2 Sam. vi. and in 1 Ghron. xiii., xv., xvi.
He was afraid of the Lord that day, and would not remove the ark to
Jerusalem, but left it for three months in the house of a Philistine,
Obed-Edom of Gath; but finding that its host, instead of experiencing
any evil, was blessed by the Lord, he carried out his original
intention, and brought the ark to Jerusalem. David, girded with a linen
ephod, danced with all his might before the Lord, and all the house of
Israel brought up the ark of the Lord with shouting, and with the sound
of the trumpet. When the ark had been placed in the tent that David had
prepared for it, he offered up burnt offerings and peace offerings, and
at the end of the festival there were dealt out to the people gifts of
bread, cakes, and wine (or flesh). There is inserted in the narrative*
an account of the conduct of Michal his wife, who looking out of the
window and seeing the king dancing and playing, despised him in
her heart, and when David returned to his house, congratulated him
ironically--How glorious was the King of Israel to-day, who uncovered
himself in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants!
* Renan would consider this to have been inserted in the
time of Hezekiah. It appeared to him to answer to the
antipathy of Hamutal and the ladies of the court to the
worship of Jahveh, and to that form of human respect which
restrained the people of the world from giving themselves up
to it.
David said in reply that he would rather be held in honour by the
handmaids of whom she had spoken than avoid the acts which covered him
with ridicule in her eyes; and the chronicler adds that Michal the
daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death. *
* [Davids reply shows (2 Sam. vi. 21, 22) that it was in
gratitude to Jehovah who had exalted him that he thus
humbled himself.--Tr.]
The tent and the ark were assigned at this time to the care of two
priests--Zadok, son of Ahitub, and Abiathar, son of Ahimelech, who was
a descendant of Eli, and had never quitted David throughout his
adventurous career.* It is probable, too, that the ephod had not
disappeared, and that it had its place in the sanctuary; but it may have
gradually fallen into neglect, and may have ceased to be the vehicle
of oracular responses as in earlier years. The king was accustomed on
important occasions to take part in the sacred ceremonies, after the
example of contemporary monarchs, and he had beside him at this time a
priest of standing to guide him in the religious rites, and to fulfil
for him duties similar to those which the chief reader rendered to
Pharaoh. The only one of these priests of David whose name has come down
to us was Ira the Jethrite, who accompanied his master in his
campaigns, and would seem to have been a soldier also, and one of the
thirty. These priestly officials seem, however, to have played but a
subordinate part, as history is almost silent about their acts.** While
David owed everything to the sword and trusted in it, he recognised at
the same time that he had obtained his crown from Jahveh; just as the
sovereigns of Thebes and Nineveh saw in Amon and Assur the source of
their own royal authority.
* 2 Sam. viii. 17, xx. 25; cf. 1 Sam. xxi. 1, xxii. 20; 1
Chron. xv. 11.
** 2 Sam. xx. 26, where he is called the Jairite, and not
the Ithrite, owing to an easily understood confusion of the
Hebrew letters. He figures in the list of the _Gibborim_,
mighty men, 2 Sam. xxiii. 38.
He consulted the Lord directly when he wished for counsel, and accepted
the issue as a test whether his interpretation of the Divine will was
correct or erroneous. When once he had realised, at the time of the
capture of Jerusalem, that God had chosen him to be the champion of
Israel, he spared no labour to accomplish the task which the Divine
favour had assigned to him. He attacked one after the other the peoples
who had encroached upon his domain, Moab being the first to feel the
force of his arm. He extended his possessions at the expense of Gilead,
and the fertile provinces opposite Jericho fell to his sword. These
territories were in dangerous proximity to Jerusalem, and David
doubtless realised the peril of their independence. The struggle for
their possession must have continued for some time, but the details are
not given, and we have only the record of a few incidental exploits: we
know, for instance, that the captain of Davids guard, Benaiah, slew two
Moabite notables in a battle.* Moabite captives were treated with all
the severity sanctioned by the laws of war. They were laid on the ground
in a line, and two-thirds of the length of the row being measured off,
all within it were pitilessly massacred, the rest having their lives
spared. Moab acknowledged its defeat, and agreed to pay tribute: it had
suffered so much that it required several generations to recover.**
* 2 Sam. xxiii. 20-23: cf. 1 Chron. xi. 22-25. Ariel, who
is made the father of the two slain by Benaiah, may possibly
be the term in 11. 12, 17, 18 of the Inscription of Mesha
(Moabite Stone); but its meaning is obscure, and has
hitherto baffled all attempts to explain it.
** 2 Sam. viii. 2.
Gilead had become detached from Davids domain on the south, while
the Ammonites were pressing it on the east, and the Ararnæans making
encroachments upon its pasture-lands on the north. Nahash, King of the
Ammonites, being dead, David, who had received help from him in his
struggle with Saul, sent messengers to offer congratulations to his son
Hanun on his accession. Hanun, supposing the messengers to be spies
sent to examine the defences of the city, shaved off one-half of
their beards, and cut off their garments in the middle, even to
their buttocks, and sent them away. This was the signal for war. The
Ammonites, foreseeing that David would endeavour to take a terrible
vengeance for this insult to his people, came to an understanding with
their neighbours. The overthrow of the Amorite chiefs had favoured the
expansion of the Aramæans towards the south. They had invaded all that
region hitherto unconquered by Israel in the valley of the Litany to
the east of Jordan, and some half-dozen of their petty states had
appropriated among them the greater part of the territories which were
described in the sacred record as having belonged previously to Jabin
of Hazor and the kings of Bashan. The strongest of these
principalities--that which occupied the position of Qodshû in the
Bekâa, and had Zoba as its capital--was at this time under the rule of
Hadadezer, son of Behob. This warrior had conquered Damascus, Maacah,
and Geshur, was threatening the Canaanite town of Hamath, and was
preparing to set out to the Euphrates when the Ammonites sought his help
and protection. He came immediately to their succour. Joab, who was in
command of Davids army, left a portion of his troops at Babbath under
his brother Abishaî, and with the rest set out against the Syrians.
He overthrew them, and returned immediately afterwards. The Ammonites,
hearing of his victory, disbanded their army; but Joab had suffered such
serious losses, that he judged it wise to defer his attack upon them
until Zoba should be captured. David then took the field himself,
crossed the Jordan with all his reserves, attacked the Syrians at
Helam, put them to flight, killing Shobach, their general, and captured
Damascus. Hadadezer [Hadarezer] made peace with Israel, and Tou or
Toi, the King of Hamath, whom this victory had delivered, sent presents
to David. This was the work of a single campaign. The next year Joab
invested Kabbath, and when it was about to surrender he called the king
to his camp, and conceded to him the honour of receiving the submission
of the city in person. The Ammonites were treated with as much severity
as their kinsmen of Moab. David put them under saws and harrows
of iron, and under axes of iron, and made them pass through the
brick-kiln. *
* The war with the Aramaeans, described in 2 Sam. viii. 3-
12, is similar to the account of the conflict with the
Ammonites in 2 Sam. x.-xii., but with more details. Both
documents are reproduced in 1 Chron. xviii. 3-11, and xix.,
xx. 1-3.
[Illustration: 353.jpg THE HEBREW KINGDOM]
This success brought others in its train. The Idumæans had taken
advantage of the employment of the Israelite army against the Aramæans
to make raids into Judah. Joab and Abishaî, despatched in haste to check
them, met them in the Valley of Salt to the south of the Dead Sea, and
gave them battle: their king perished in the fight, and his son Hadad
with some of his followers took flight into Egypt. Joab put to the sword
all the able-bodied combatants, and established garrisons at Petra,
Elath, and Eziongeber* on the Red Sea. David dedicated the spoils to the
Lord, who gave victory to David wherever he went.
Neither Elath nor Eziongeber are here mentioned, but 1 Kings
ix. 25-28 and 2 Chron. viii. 17, 18 prove that these places
had been occupied by David. For all that concerns Hadad, see
1 Kings xi. 15-20.
Southern Syria had found its master: were the Hebrews going to pursue
their success, and undertake in the central and northern regions a
work of conquest which had baffled the efforts of all their
predecessors--Canaanites, Amorites, and Hittites? The Assyrians, thrown
back on the Tigris, were at this time leading a sort of vegetative
existence in obscurity; and, as for Egypt, it would seem to have
forgotten that it ever had possessions in Asia. There was, therefore,
nothing to be feared from foreign intervention should the Hebrew be
inclined to weld into a single state the nations lying between the
Euphrates and the Red Sea.
[Illustration: 354.jpg THE SITE OF RABBATH-AMON, SEEN FROM THE WEST]
Drawn by Boudier, from photograph No. 377 of the _Palestine
Exploration Fund._
Unfortunately, the Israelites had not the necessary characteristics of
a conquering people. Their history from the time of their entry into
Canaan showed, it is true, that they were by no means incapable of
enthusiasm and solidarity: a leader with the needful energy and good
fortune to inspire them with confidence could rouse them from their
self-satisfied indolence, and band them together for a great effort.
But such concentration of purpose was ephemeral in its nature, and
disappeared with the chief who had brought it about. In his absence,
or when the danger he had pointed out was no longer imminent, they fell
back instinctively into their usual state of apathy and disorganisation.
Their nomadic temperament, which two centuries of a sedentary existence
had not seriously modified, disposed them to give way to tribal
quarrels, to keep up hereditary vendettas, to break out into sudden
tumults, or to make pillaging expeditions into their neighbours
territories. Long wars, requiring the maintenance of a permanent army,
the continual levying of troops and taxes, and a prolonged effort to
keep what they had acquired, were repugnant to them. The kingdom
which David had founded owed its permanence to the strong will of its
originator, and its increase or even its maintenance depended upon the
absence of any internal disturbance or court intrigue, to counteract
which might make too serious a drain upon his energy. David had survived
his last victory sufficiently long to witness around him the evolution
of plots, and the multiplication of the usual miseries which sadden, in
the East, the last years of a long reign. It was a matter of custom as
well as policy that an exaltation in the position of a ruler should be
accompanied by a proportional increase in the number of his retinue
and his wives. David was no exception to this custom: to the two wives,
Abigail and Ahinoam, which he had while he was in exile at Ziklag, he
now added Maacah the Aramaean, daughter of the King of Geshur, Haggith,
Abital, Bglah, and several others.* During the siege of Babbath-Ammon he
also committed adultery with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite,
and, placing her husband in the forefront of the battle, brought about
his death. Rebuked by the prophet Nathan for this crime, he expressed
his penitence, but he continued at the same time to keep Bathsheba, by
whom he had several children.** There was considerable rivalry among
the progeny of these different unions, as the right of succession would
appear not to have been definitely settled. Of the family of Saul,
moreover, there were still several members in existence--the son which
he had by Eizpah, the children of his daughter Merab, Merib-baal, the
lame offspring of Jonathan,*** and Shimei****--all of whom had partisans
among the tribes, and whose pretensions might be pressed unexpectedly at
a critical moment.
* Ahinoam is mentioned in the following passages: 1 Sam.
xxv. 43, xxvii. 3, xxx. 5; 2 Sam. ii. 2, iii. 2; cf. also 1
Chron. iii. 1; Maacah in 2 Sam. iii. 3; 1 Chron. iii. 2;
Haggith in 2 Sam. iii. 4; 1 Kings i. 5, 11, ii. 13; 1 Chron.
iii. 2; Abital in 2 Sam. iii. 4; 1 Chron. iii. 3; Eglah in 2
Sam. iii. 5; 1 Chron. iii. 3. For the concubines, see 2 Sam.
v. 13, xv. 15, xvi. 21, 22; 1 Chron. iii. 9, xiv. 3.
** 2 Sam. xi., xii. 7-25.
*** 2 Sam. ix., xvi. 1-4, xix. 25-30, where the name is
changed into Mephibosheth; the original name is given in 1
Chron. viii. 34.
**** Sam. xvi. 5-14, xix. 16-23; 1 Kings ii. 8, 9, 36-46.
The eldest son of Ahinoam, Amnon, whose priority in age seemed likely
to secure for him the crown, had fallen in love with one of his
half-sisters named Tamar, the daughter of Maacah, and, instead of
demanding her in marriage, procured her attendance on him by a feigned
illness, and forced her to accede to his desires. His love was thereupon
converted immediately into hate, and, instead of marrying her, he had
her expelled from his house by his servants. With rent garments and
ashes on her head, she fled to her full-brother Absalom. David was
very wroth, but he loved his firstborn, and could not permit himself to
punish him. Absalom kept his anger to himself, but when two years had
elapsed he invited Amnon to a banquet, killed him, and fled to his
grandfather Talmai, King of Geshur.*
* It is to be noted that Tamar asked Amnon to marry her, and
that the sole reproach directed against the kings eldest
son was that, after forcing her, he was unwilling to make
her his wife. Unions of brother and sister were probably as
legitimate among the Hebrews at this time as among the
Egyptians.
His anger was now turned against the king for not having taken up the
cause of his sister, and he began to meditate his dethronement. Having
been recalled to Jerusalem at the instigation of Joab, Absalom
prepared him chariots and horses, and fifty men to run before him,
thus affecting the outward forms of royalty. Judah, dissatisfied at
the favour shown by David to the other tribes, soon came to recognise
Absalom as their chief, and some of the most intimate counsellors of the
aged king began secretly to take his part. When Absalom deemed things
safe for action, he betook himself to Hebron, under the pretence of a
vow which he had made daring his sojourn at Geshur. All Judah rallied
around him, and the excitement at Jerusalem was so great that David
judged it prudent to retire, with his Philistine and Cherethite guards,
to the other side of the Jordan. Absalom, in the mean while, took up his
abode in Jerusalem, where, having received the tacit adherence of the
family of Saul and of a number of the notables, he made himself king. To
show that the rupture between him and David was complete, he had tents
erected on the top of the house, and there, in view of the people, took
possession of his fathers harem. Success would have been assured to
him if he had promptly sent troops after the fugitives, but while he was
spending his time in inactivity and feasting, David collected together
those who were faithful to him, and put them under the command of
Joab and Abishai. The kings veterans were more than a match for
the undisciplined rabble which opposed them, and in the action which
followed at Mahanaim Absalom was defeated: in his flight through
the forest of Ephraim he was caught in a tree, and before he could
disentangle himself was pierced through the heart by Joab.
David, we read, wished his people to have mercy on his son, and he wept
bitterly. He spared on this occasion the family of Saul, pardoned the
tribe of Judah, and went back triumphantly into Jerusalem, which a few
days before had taken part in his humiliation. The tribes of the house
of Joseph had taken no side in the quarrel. They were ignorant alike of
the motives which set the tribe of Judah against their own hero, and of
their reasons for the zeal with which they again established him on the
throne. They sent delegates to inquire about this, who reproached Judah
for acting without their cognisance: We have ten parts in the king, and
we have also more right in David than ye: why then did ye despise us,
that our advice should not be first had in bringing back our king?
Judah answered with yet fiercer words; then Sheba, a chief of the
Benjamites, losing patience, blew a trumpet, and went off crying: We
have no portion in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of
Jesse: every man to his tents, O Israel. If these words had produced
an echo among the central and northern tribes, a schism would have been
inevitable: some approved of them, while others took no action, and
since Judah showed no disposition to put its military forces into
movement, the king had once again to trust to Joab and the Philistine
guards to repress the sedition. Their appearance on the scene
disconcerted the rebels, and Sheba retreated to the northern frontier
without offering battle. Perhaps he reckoned on the support of the
Aramæans. He took shelter in the small stronghold of Abel of Bethmaacah,
where he defended himself for some time; but just when the place was on
the point of yielding, the inhabitants cut off Shebas head, and threw
it to Joab from the wall. His death brought the crisis to an end,
and peace reigned in Israel. Intrigues, however, began again more
persistently than ever over the inheritance which the two slain princes
had failed to obtain. The eldest son of the king was now Adonijah, son
of Haggith, but Bathsheba exercised an undisputed sway over her husband,
and had prepared him to recognise in Solomon her son the heir to the
throne. She had secured, too, as his adherents several persons of
influence, including Zadok, the prophet Nathan, and Benaiah, the captain
of the foreign guard.
Adonijah had on his side Abiathar the priest, Joab, and the people of
Jerusalem, who had been captivated by his beauty and his regal display.
In the midst of these rivalries the king was daily becoming weaker: he
was now very old, and although he was covered with wrappings he could
not maintain his animal heat. A young girl was sought out for him to
give him the needful warmth. Abishag, a Shunammite, was secured for the
purpose, but her beauty inspired Adonijah with such a violent passion
that he decided to bring matters to a crisis. He invited his brethren,
with the exception of Solomon, to a banquet in the gardens which
belonged to him in the south of Jerusalem, near the well of Eôgel. All
his partisans were present, and, inspired by the good cheer, began to
cry, God save King Adonijah! When Nathan informed Bathsheba of what
was going on, she went in unto the king, who was being attended on by
Abishag, complained to him of the weakness he was showing in regard to
his eldest son, and besought him to designate his heir officially. He
collected together the soldiers, and charged them to take the young
man Solomon with royal pomp from the hill of Sion to the source of the
Gibôn: Nathan anointed his forehead with the sacred oil, and in the
sight of all the people brought him to the palace, mounted on his
fathers mule. The blare of the coronation trumpets resounded in the
ears of the conspirators, quickly followed by the tidings that Solomon
had been hailed king over the whole of Israel: they fled on all sides,
Adonijah taking refuge at the horns of the altar. David did not long
survive this event: shortly before his death he advised Solomon to
rid himself of all those who had opposed his accession to the throne.
Solomon did not hesitate to follow this counsel, and the beginning of
his reign was marked by a series of bloodthirsty executions. Adonijah
was the first to suffer. He had been unwise enough to ask the hand of
Abishag in marriage: this request was regarded as indicative of a hidden
intention to rebel, and furnished an excuse for his assassination.
Abiathar, at whose instigation Adonijah had acted, owed his escape
from a similar fate to his priestly character and past services: he was
banished to his estate at Anathoth, and Zadok became high priest in his
stead. Joab, on learning the fate of his accomplice, felt that he was
a lost man, and vainly sought sanctuary near the ark of the Lord; but
Benaiah slew him there, and soon after, Shimei, the last survivor of the
race of Saul, was put to death on some transparent pretext. This was the
last act of the tragedy: henceforward Solomon, freed from all those who
bore him malice, was able to devote his whole attention to the cares of
government.*
* 1 Kings i., ii. This is the close of the history of David,
and follows on from 2 Sam. xxiv. It would seem that Adonijah
was heir-apparent (1 Kings i. 5, 6), and that Solomons
accession was brought about by an intrigue, which owed its
success to the old kings weakness (1 Kings i. 12, 13, 17,
18, 30, 31).
The change of rulers had led, as usual, to insurrections among the
tributary races: Damascus had revolted before the death of David, and
had not been recovered. Hadad returned from Egypt, and having gained
adherents in certain parts of Edom, resisted all attempts made to
dislodge him.*
* It seems clear from the context that the revolt of
Damascus took place during Davids lifetime. It cannot, in
any case, have occurred at a later date than the beginning
of the reign of Solomon, for we are told that Rezôn, after
capturing the town, was an adversary of Israel all the days
of Solomon (1 Kings xi. 23-25). Hadad returned from Egypt
when he had heard that David slept with his fathers, and
that Joab the captain of the host was dead (1 Kings xi. 21,
22, 25).
As a soldier, Solomon was neither skilful nor fortunate: he even failed
to retain what his father had won for him. Though he continued to
increase his army, it was more with a view to consolidating his power
over the Bnê-Israel than for any aggressive action outside his borders.
On the other hand, he showed himself an excellent administrator, and
did his best, by various measures of general utility, to draw closer the
ties which bound the tribes to him and to each other. He repaired the
citadels with such means as he had at his disposal. He rebuilt the
fortifications of Megiddo, thus securing the control of the network of
roads which traversed Southern Syria. He remodelled the fortifications
of Tamar, the two Bethhorons, Baâlath, Hazor, and of many other
towns which defended his frontiers. Some of them he garrisoned with
foot-soldiers, others with horsemen and chariots. By thus distributing
his military forces over the whole country, he achieved a twofold
object;* he provided, on the one hand, additional security from foreign
invasion, and on the other diminished the risk of internal revolt.
* 1 Kings ix. 15, 17-19; cf. 2 Chron. viii. 4-6. The
parallel passage in 2 Chron. viii. 4, and the marginal
variant in the _Book of Kings_, give the reading Tadmor
Palmyra for Tamar, thus giving rise to the legends which
state that Solomons frontier extended to the Euphrates. The
Tamar here referred to is that mentioned in Ezeh. xlvii. 19,
xlviii. 28, as the southern boundary of Judah; it is perhaps
identical with the modern Kharbêt-Kurnub.
The remnants of the old aboriginal clans, which had hitherto managed to
preserve their independence, mainly owing to the dissensions among the
Israelites, were at last absorbed into the tribes in whose territory
they had settled. A few still held out, and only gave way after long
and stubborn resistance: before he could triumph over Gezer, Solomon was
forced to humble himself before the Egyptian Pharaoh. He paid homage to
him, asked the hand of his daughter in marriage, and having obtained it,
persuaded him to come to his assistance: the Egyptian engineers placed
their skill at the service of the besiegers and soon brought the
recalcitrant city to reason, handing it over to Solomon in payment for
his submission.* The Canaanites were obliged to submit to the poll-tax
and the _corvée_: the men of the league of Gibeon were made hewers
of wood and drawers of water for the house of the Lord.** The Hebrews
themselves bore their share in the expenses of the State, and though
less heavily taxed than the Canaanites, were, nevertheless, compelled to
contribute considerable sums; Judah alone was exempt, probably because,
being the private domain of the sovereign, its revenues were already
included in the royal exchequer.***
* 1 Kings ix. 16. The Pharaoh in question was probably one
of the Psiûkhânnît, the Psûsennos II. of Manetho.
** 1 Kings ix. 20, 21. The annexation of the Gibeonites and
their allies is placed at the time of the conquest in Josh.
ix. 3-27; it should be rather fixed at the date of the loss
of independence of the league, probably in the time of
Solomon.
*** Stade thinks that Judah was not exempt, and that the
original document must have given thirteen districts.
In order to facilitate the collection of the taxes, Solomon divided the
kingdom into twelve districts, each of which was placed in charge of
a collector; these regions did not coincide with the existing tribal
boundaries, but the extent of each was determined by the wealth of the
lands contained within it. While one district included the whole of
Mount Ephraim, another was limited to the stronghold of Mahanaim and its
suburbs. Mahanaim was at one time the capital of Israel, and had played
an important part in the life of David: it held the key to the regions
beyond Jordan, and its ruler was a person of such influence that it was
not considered prudent to leave him too well provided with funds. By
thus obliterating the old tribal boundaries, Solomon doubtless hoped
to destroy, or at any rate greatly weaken, that clannish spirit which
showed itself with such alarming violence at the time of the revolt of
Sheba, and to weld into a single homogeneous mass the various Hebrew and
Canaanitish elements of which the people of Israel were composed.*
* 1 Kings iv. 7-19, where a list of the districts is given;
the fact that two of Solomons sons-in-law appear in it,
show that the document from which it is taken gave the staff
of collectors in office at the close of his reign.
Each of these provinces was obliged, during one month in each year,
to provide for the wants of the king and his household, or, in other
words, the requirements of the central government. A large part of these
contributions went to supply the kings table; the daily consumption at
the court was--thirty measures of fine flour, sixty measures of meal,
ten fat oxen, twenty oxen out of the pastures, a hundred sheep, besides
all kinds of game and fatted fowl: nor need we be surprised at these
figures, for in a country where, and at a time when money was unknown,
the king was obliged to supply food to all his dependents, the greater
part of their emoluments consisting of these payments in kind. The
tax-collectors had also to provide fodder for the horses reserved
for military purposes: there were forty thousand of these, and twelve
thousand charioteers, and barley and straw had to be forthcoming either
in Jerusalem itself or in one or other of the garrison towns amongst
which they were distributed.* The levying of tolls on caravans passing
through the country completed the kings fiscal operations which were
based on the systems prevailing in neighbouring States, especially that
of Egypt.**
* 1 Kings iv. 26-28; the complementary passages in 1 Kings
x. 26 and 2 Chron. i. 14 give the number of chariots as 1400
and of charioteers at 12,000. The numbers do not seem
excessive for a kingdom which embraced the whole south of
Palestine, when we reflect that, at the battle of Qodshû,
Northern Syria was able to put between 2500 and 3000
chariots into the field against Ramses II. The Hebrew
chariots probably carried at least three men, like those of
the Hittites and Assyrians.
** 1 Kings x. 15, where mention is made of the amount which
the chapmen brought, and the traffic of the merchants
contains an allusion to these tolls.
Solomon, like other Oriental sovereigns, reserved to himself the
monopoly of certain imported articles, such as yarn, chariots, and
horses. Egyptian yarn, perhaps the finest produced in ancient times, was
in great request among the dyers and embroiderers of Asia. Chariots,
at once strong and light, were important articles of commerce at a time
when their use in warfare was universal. As for horses, the cities of
the Delta and Middle Egypt possessed a celebrated strain of stallions,
from which the Syrian princes were accustomed to obtain their
war-steeds.* Solomon decreed that for the future he was to be the sole
intermediary between the Asiatics and the foreign countries supplying
their requirements. His agents went down at regular intervals to the
banks of the Nile to lay in stock; the horses and chariots, by the
time they reached Jerusalem, cost him at the rate of six hundred silver
shekels for each chariot, and one hundred and fifty shekels for each
horse, but he sold them again at a profit to the Aramæan and Hittite
princes. In return he purchased from them Cilician stallions, probably
to sell again to the Egyptians, whose relaxing climate necessitated a
frequent introduction of new blood into their stables.** By these and
other methods of which we know nothing the yearly revenue of the kingdom
was largely increased: and though it only reached a total which may seem
insignificant in comparison with the enormous quantities of the precious
metals which passed through the hands of the Pharaohs of that time, yet
it must have seemed boundless wealth in the eyes of the shepherds and
husbandmen who formed the bulk of the Hebrew nation.
* The terms in which the text, 1 Kings x. 27-29 (cf. 2
Citron, i. 16, 17), speaks of the trade in horses, show that
the traffic was already in existence when Solomon decided to
embark in it.
** 1 Kings x. 27-29; 2 Chron. i. 16, 17. Kuê, the name of
Lower Cilicia, was discovered in the Hebrew text by Pr.
Lenormant. Winckler, with mistaken reliance on the authority
of Erman, has denied that Egypt produced stud-horses at this
time, and wishes to identify the Mizraim of the Hebrew text
with Musri, a place near Mount Taurus, mentioned in the
Assyrian texts.
In thus developing his resources and turning them to good account,
Solomon derived great assistance from the Phoenicians of Tyre and Sidon,
a race whose services were always at the disposal of the masters of
Southern Syria. The continued success of the Hellenic colonists on the
eastern shores of the Mediterranean had compelled the Phoenicians to
seek with redoubled boldness and activity in the Western Mediterranean
some sort of compensation for the injury which their trade had thus
suffered. They increased and consolidated their dealings with Sicily,
Africa, and Spain, and established themselves throughout the whole of
that misty region which extended beyond the straits of Gibraltar on the
European side, from the mouth of the Guadalete to that of the Guadiana.
This was the famous Tarshish--the Oriental El Dorado. Here they had
founded a number of new towns, the most flourishing of which, Gadîr,*
rose not far from the mouths of the Betis, on a small islet separated
from the mainland by a narrow arm of the sea. In this city they
constructed a temple to Melkarth, arsenals, warehouses, and shipbuilding
yards: it was the Tyre of the west, and its merchant-vessels sailed to
the south and to the north to trade with the savage races of the African
and European seaboard. On the coast of Morocco they built Lixos, a town
almost as large as Gadîr, and beyond Lixos, thirty days sail southwards,
a whole host of depots, reckoned later on at three hundred.
* I do not propose to discuss here the question of the
identity of the country of Tartessos with the Tarshish or
Tarsis mentioned in the Bible (1 Kings x. 22).
By exploiting the materials to be obtained from these lands, such as
gold, silver, tin, lead, and copper, Tyre and Sidon were soon able to
make good the losses they had suffered from Greek privateersmen and
marauding Philistines. Towards the close of the reign of Saul over
Israel, a certain king Abîbaal had arisen in Tyre, and was succeeded by
his son Hiram, at the very moment when David was engaged in bringing
the whole of Israel into subjection. Hiram, guided by instinct or by
tradition, at once adopted a policy towards the rising dynasty which his
ancestors had always found successful in similar cases. He made friendly
overtures to the Hebrews, and constituted himself their broker and
general provider: when David was in want of wood for the house he was
building at Jerusalem, Hiram let him have the necessary quantity, and
hired out to him workmen and artists at a reasonable wage, to help him
in turning his materials to good account.*
* 2 Sam. v. 11; cf. the reference to the same incident in
1 Kings v 1-3.
The accession of Solomon was a piece of good luck for him. The new king,
born in the purple, did not share the simple and somewhat rustic tastes
of his father. He wanted palaces and gardens and a temple, which might
rival, even if only in a small way, the palaces and temples of Egypt and
Chaldæa, of which he had heard such glowing accounts: Hiram undertook
to procure these things for him at a moderate cost, and it was doubtless
his influence which led to those voyages to the countries which produced
precious metals, perfumes, rare animals, costly woods, and all those
foreign knicknacks with which Eastern monarchs of all ages loved to
surround themselves. The Phoenician sailors were well acquainted with
the bearings of Puanît, most of them having heard of this country when
in Egypt, a few perhaps having gone thither under the direction and by
the orders of Pharaoh: and Hiram took advantage of the access which the
Hebrews had gained to the shores of the Red Sea by the annexation of
Edom, to establish relations with these outlying districts without
having to pass the Egyptian customs. He lent to Solomon shipwrights and
sailors, who helped him to fit out a fleet at Eziôn-geber, and undertook
a voyage of discovery in company with a number of Hebrews, who were no
doubt despatched in the same capacity as the royal messengers sent
with the galleys of Hâtshopsîtû. It was a venture similar to those so
frequently undertaken by the Egyptian admirals in the palmy days of the
Theban navy, and of which we find so many curious pictures among the
bas-reliefs at Deîr el-Baharî. On their return, after a three years
absence, they reported that they had sailed to a country named Ophir,
and produced in support of their statement a freight well calculated to
convince the most sceptical, consisting as it did of four hundred and
twenty talents of gold. The success of this first venture encouraged
Solomon to persevere in such expeditions: he sent his fleet on several
voyages to Ophir, and procured from thence a rich harvest of gold and
silver, wood and ivory, apes and peacocks.*
* 1 Kings ix. 26-28, x. 11, 12; cf. 2 Citron, viii. 17, 18, ix. 10, 11,
21. A whole library might be stocked with the various treatises which
have appeared on the situation of the country of Ophir: Arabia, Persia,
India, Java, and America have all been suggested. The mention of almug
wood and of peacocks, which may be of Indian origin, for a long time
inclined the scale in favour of India, but the discoveries of Mauch and
Bent on the Zimbabaye have drawn attention to the basin of the Zambesi
and the ruins found there. Dr. Peters, one of the best-known German
explorers, is inclined to agree with Mauch and Bent, in their theory
as to the position of the Ophir of the Bible. I am rather inclined to
identify it with the Egyptian Pûanît, on the Somali or Yemen seaboard.
Was the profit from these distant cruises so very considerable after
all? After they had ceased, memory may have thrown a fanciful glamour
over them, and magnified the treasures they had yielded to fabulous
proportions: we are told that Solomon would have no drinking vessels or
other utensils save those of pure gold, and that in his days silver was
as stone, so common had it become.*
* 1 Kings x. 21, 27. In Chronicles the statement in the
_Book of Kings_ is repeated in a still more emphatic manner,
since it is there stated that gold itself was in Jerusalem
as stones (2 Chron. i. 15).
[Illustration: 370.jpg MAP OF TYRE SUBSEQUENT TO HIRAM]
Doubtless Hiram took good care to obtain his fall share of the gains.
The Phoenician king began to find Tyre too restricted for him, the
various islets over which it was scattered affording too small a space
to support the multitudes which flocked thither. He therefore filled up
the channels which separated them; by means of embankments and fortified
quays he managed to reclaim from the sea a certain amount of land on the
south; after which he constructed two harbours--one on the north, called
the Sidonian; the other on the south, named the Egyptian. He was perhaps
also the originator of the long causeway, the lower courses of which
still serve as a breakwater, by which he transformed the projecting
headland between the island and the mainland into a well-sheltered
harbour. Finally, he set to work on a task like that which he had
already helped Solomon to accomplish: he built for himself a palace
of cedar-wood, and restored and beautified the temples of the gods,
including the ancient sanctuary of Melkarth, and that of Astarté. In his
reign the greatness of Phoenicia reached its zenith, just as that of the
Hebrews culminated under David.
[Illustration: 371.jpg THE BREAKWATER OF THE EGYPTIAN HARBOUR AT TYRE]
Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph published by the Duc de
Luynes.
The most celebrated of Solomons works were to be seen at Jerusalem. As
David left it, the city was somewhat insignificant. The water from its
fountains had been amply sufficient for the wants of the little
Jebusite town; it was wholly inadequate to meet the requirements of
the growing-population of the capital of Judah. Solomon made better
provision for its distribution than there had been in the past, and then
tapped a new source of supply some distance away, in the direction of
Bethlehem; it is even said that he made the reservoirs for its storage
which still bear his name.*
* A somewhat ancient tradition attributes these works to
Solomon; no single fact confirms it, but the balance of
probability seems to indicate that he must have taken steps
to provide a water-supply for the new city. The channels and
reservoirs, of which traces are found at the present day,
probably occupy the same positions as those which preceded
them.
[Illustration: 372.jpg one of Solomons reservoirs near Jerusalem]
Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph by M. C. Alluaud of
Limoges.
Meanwhile, Hiram had drawn up for him plans for a fortified residence,
on a scale commensurate with the thriving fortunes of his dynasty. The
main body was constructed of stone from the Judæan quarries, cut by
masons from Byblos, but it was inlaid with cedar to such an extent that
one wing was called the house of the forest-of-Lebanon. It contained
everything that was required for the comfort of an Eastern potentate--a
harem, with separate apartments for the favourites (one of which was
probably decorated in the Egyptian manner for the benefit of Pharaohs
daughter);* then there were reception-halls, to which the great men
of the kingdom were admitted; storehouses, and an arsenal. The kings
bodyguard possessed five hundred shields of beaten gold, which were
handed over by each detachment, when the guard was relieved, to the
one which took its place. But this gorgeous edifice would not have been
complete if the temple of Jahveh had not arisen side by side with the
abode of the temporal ruler of the nation. No monarch in those days
could regard his position as unassailable until he had a sanctuary and a
priesthood attached to his religion, either in his own palace or not far
away from it. David had scarcely entered Jerusalem before he fixed upon
the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite as a site for the temple,
and built an altar there to the Lord during a plague which threatened to
decimate his people; but as he did not carry the project any farther,**
Solomon set himself to complete the task which his father had merely
sketched out.
* 1 Kings vii. 8, ix. 24; 2 Ghron. viii. 11.
** 2 Sam xxiv. 18-25, The threshing-floor of Araunah the
Jebusite is mentioned elsewhere as the site on which Solomon
built his temple (2 Ghron. iii. 1).
The site was irregular in shape, and the surface did not
naturally lend itself to the purpose for which it was destined. His
engineers, however, put this right by constructing enormous piers for
the foundations, which they built up from the slopes of the mountain
or from the bottom of the valley as circumstances required: the space
between this artificial casing and the solid rock was filled up, and
the whole mass formed a nearly square platform, from which the temple
buildings were to rise. Hiram undertook to supply materials for the
work. Solomon had written to him that he should command that they
hew me cedar trees out of Lebanon; and my servants shall be with thy
servants; and I will give thee hire for thy servants according to all
that thou shalt say: for thou knowest that there is not among us
any that can skill to hew timber like unto the Zidonians. Hiram was
delighted to carry out the wishes of his royal friend with regard to the
cedar and cypress woods.
[Illustration: 374.jpg SOME OF THE STONE COURSE OF SOLOMONS TEMPLE AT
JERUSALEM]
Drawn by Boudier, from a photograph.
My servants, he answered, shall bring them down from Lebanon unto the
sea: and I will make them into rafts to go by sea unto the place that
thou shalt appoint me, and will cause them to be broken up there, and
thou shalt receive them; and thou shalt accomplish my desire, in giving
food for my household. The payment agreed on, which was in kind,
consisted of twenty thousand _kôr_ of wheat, and twenty _kôr_ of pure
oil per annum, for which Hiram was to send to Jerusalem not only the
timber, but architects, masons, and Gebalite carpenters (i.e. from
Byblos), smelters, sculptors, and overseers.* Solomon undertook to
supply the necessary labour, and for this purpose made a levy of men
from all the tribes. The number of these labourers was reckoned at
thirty thousand, and they were relieved regularly every three months;
seventy thousand were occupied in the transport of the materials, while
eighty thousand cut the stones from the quarry.**
* 1 Kings v. 7--11 * cf. 2 Chron. ii. 3--16, where the
writer adds 20,000 _kôr_ of barley, 20,000 baths of wine,
and the same quantity of oil.
** 1 Kings v. 13-18; of. 2 Chron. ii. 1, 2, 17, 18.
It is possible that the numbers may have been somewhat exaggerated in
popular estimation, since the greatest Egyptian monuments never required
such formidable levies of workmen for their construction; we must
remember, however, that such an undertaking demanded a considerable
effort, as the Hebrews were quite unaccustomed to that kind of labour.
The front of the temple faced eastward; it was twenty cubits wide, sixty
long, and thirty high. The walls were of enormous squared stones, and
the ceilings and frames of the doors of carved cedar, plated with gold;
it was entered by a porch, between two columns of wrought bronze, which
were called Jachin and Boaz.*
* 1 Kings vii. 15-22; cf. 2 Chron. iv. 11-13. The names were probably
engraved each upon its respective column, and taken together formed an
inscription which could be interpreted in various ways. The most simple
interpretation is to recognise in them a kind of talismanic formula to
ensure the strength of the building, affirming that it exists by the
strength of God.
The interior contained only two chambers; the _hekal,_ or holy place,
where were kept the altar of incense, the seven-branched candlestick,
and the table of shewbread; and the Holy of Holies--_debîr_--where the
ark of God rested beneath the wings of two cherubim of gilded wood.
Against the outer wall of the temple, and rising to half its height,
were rows of small apartments, three stories high, in which were kept
the treasures and vessels of the sanctuary. While the high priest was
allowed to enter the Holy of Holies only once a year, the holy place was
accessible at all times to the priests engaged in the services, and it
was there that the daily ceremonies of the temple-worship took place;
there stood also the altar of incense and the table of shewbread. The
altar of sacrifice stood on the platform in front of the entrance; it
was a cube of masonry with a parapet, and was approached by stone steps;
it resembled, probably, in general outline the monumental altars which
stood in the forecourts of the Egyptian temples and palaces. There stood
by it, as was also customary in Chaldæa, a molten sea, and some ten
smaller lavers, in which the Lévites washed the portions of the victims
to be offered, together with the basins, knives, flesh-hooks, spoons,
shovels, and other utensils required for the bloody sacrifice. A low
wall surmounted by a balustrade of cedar-wood separated this sacred
enclosure from a court to which the people were permitted to have
free access. Both palace and temple were probably designed in that
pseudo-Egyptian style which the Phoenicians were known to affect. The
few Hebrew edifices of which remains have come down to us, reveal
a method of construction and decoration common in Egypt; we have an
example of this in the uprights of the doors at Lachish, which terminate
in an Egyptian gorge like that employed in the naos of the Phonician
temples.
[Illustration: 377.jpg AN UPRIGHT OF A DOOR AT LACHISH]
Drawn by Paucher-Gudin, from the drawing by Petrie.
The completion of the whole plan occupied thirteen years; at length both
palace and temple were finished in the XVIIth year of the kings
reign. Solomon, however, did not wait for the completion of the work
to dedicate the sanctuary to God. As soon as the inner court was ready,
which was in his XIth year, he proceeded to transfer the ark to its new
resting-place; it was raised upon a cubical base, and the long staves by
which it had been carried were left in their rings, as was usual in the
case of the sacred barks of the Egyptian deities.* The God of Israel
thus took up His abode in the place in which He was henceforth to
be honoured. The sacrifices on the occasion of the dedication were
innumerable, and continued for fourteen days, in the presence of the
representatives of all Israel. The ornate ceremonial and worship which
had long been lavished on the deities of rival nations were now, for
the first time, offered to the God of Israel. The devout Hebrews who
had come together from far and near returned to their respective tribes
filled with admiration,** and their limited knowledge of art doubtless
led them to consider their temple as unique in the world; in fact, it
presented nothing remarkable either in proportion, arrangement, or in
the variety and richness of its ornamentation and furniture. Compared
with the magnificent monuments of Egypt and Chaldæa, the work of Solomon
was what the Hebrew kingdom appears to us among the empires of the
ancient world--a little temple suited to a little people.
* 1 Kings viii. 6-8, and 2 Ghron. v. 7-9.
** 1 Kings vi. 37, 38 states that the foundations were laid
in the IVth year of Solomons reign, in the month of Ziv,
and that the temple was completed in the month of Bui in the
XIth year; the work occupied seven years. 1 Kings vii. 1
adds that the construction of the palace lasted thirteen
years; it went on for six years after the completion of the
temple. The account of the dedication (1 Kings viii.)
contains a long prayer by Solomon, part of which (vers. 14-
66) is thought by certain critics to be of later date. They
contend that the original words of Solomon are confined to
vers. 12 and 13.
The priests to whose care it was entrusted did not differ much from
those whom David had gathered about him at the outset of the monarchy.
They in no way formed an hereditary caste confined to the limits of
a rigid hierarchy; they admitted into their number--at least up to a
certain point--men of varied extraction, who were either drawn by their
own inclinations to the service of the altar, or had been dedicated to
it by their parents from childhood. He indeed was truly a priest who
said of his father and mother, I have not seen him; neither did he
acknowledge his brethren, nor knew he his own children. He was content,
after renouncing these, to observe the law of God and keep His covenant,
and to teach Jacob His judgments and Israel His law; he put incense
before the Lord, and whole burnt offerings upon His altar.*
* Those are the expressions used in the Blessing of Moses
(Deut. xxxiii. 8-12); though this text is by some writers
placed as late as the VIIIth century B.C., yet the state of
things there represented would apply also to an earlier
date. The Hebrew priest, in short, had the same duties as a
large proportion of the priesthood in Chaldæ and Egypt.