The kingdom under David had been very much extended and brought under good regulations. The arms of the Hebrews were feared by all the neighbouring people, and consequently the reign of Solomon was peaceable. Now the predominant tribe of Judah lay as a lion, and as a lioness, which no nation ventured to rouse up. (Gen. xlix. 9. Numb. xxiii. 24; xxiv. 9.) The Hebrews were the ruling people, and their empire, the principal monarchy in Western Asia. From the Mediterranean Sea and the Phenicians to the Euphrates, from the river of Egypt and the Elanitic gulf to Berytus, Hamath and Thapsacus, and towards the east to the Hagarenes on the Persian gulf; all were subject to the sway of Solomon. The Canaanites indeed had been neither annihilated nor expelled, but they were obedient and quiet subjects. Their whole number might amount to between 400,000 and 500,000; since 153,000 were able to render soccage to the king. The warlike and civilized Philistines, the Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites, the Nomadic Arabians of the desert, and the Syrians of Damascus were all tributary to him. Peace gave to all his subjects prosperity, the trade which he introduced brought wealth into the country, and promoted the arts and sciences; which found an active protector in the king, who was himself one of the most distinguished of the learned men. The building of the temple, and of several palaces, introduced foreign artists by whom the Hebrews were instructed. Many foreigners and even sovereign princes, were attracted to Jerusalem in order to see and converse with the prosperous royal sage. (1 Kings v. 9-14; x. 1-13.) The regular progress of all business, and arrangements for security from foreign and domestic enemies, the army, the cavalry, the armouries, the chariots, the palaces, the royal household, the good order in the administration of the affairs of the empire, and in the service of the court, excited as much admiration, as the wisdom and learning of the viceroy of Jehovah. So much had been effected by the single influence of David, because he scrupulously conformed himself to the theocracy of the Hebrew state.

But in the midst of all this splendour, Solomon fell short of the virtues of his father. At first indeed, while the example of David and the instructions of his preceptor Nathan, were yet fresh in his mind, he showed himself as faithful to the theocracy as his father, and wished for nothing more than wisdom and understanding, that he might govern his subjects well. The severity with which he treated Joab and Adonijah, is not to be blamed; for they were seditious men who would otherwise have instigated a civil war. Also the removal of the high priest Abiathar, by which a prophecy was fulfilled, (1 Sam. ii. 30, 31; iii. 13,) was not a violation of the law, for the law did not determine by what power the high priest should be appointed. While there was no statute on the subject, it was a matter of policy that the nomination of so important and influential an officer should be retained in the crown. The people willingly offered their services for the building of the temple, and did not esteem it a burden. The administration of justice was also faithfully attended to.

Notwithstanding all this, Solomon, after the example of other oriental monarchs, governed in rather an arbitrary manner. His numerous harem, which consisted of one thousand females, was an express violation of the law of Moses. (1 Kings xi. 3.) The introduction of a body of cavalry, which amounted to twelve thousand men, might perhaps be excusable in an empire so extensive; and in this view it may be considered as not counteracting the law of Moses, which forbids the multiplication of horses. But the increase of the imposts to defray the expenses of the royal household, which in the east are always great, and in Solomon's court were extravagant, were burdens such as had been predicted; (1 Sam. viii. 9-18. 1 Kings xii. 1-4 ;) and which the Hebrews after the death of Solomon wished to have diminished. Even the decision respecting the two prostitutes, which called forth so many eulogies on the king's knowledge of mankind, betrays a leaning towards that arbitrary exercise of the royal power, which is so common among the eastern despots. Solomon, as he grew older, continually receded farther from the law of Moses, which every king of the Hebrews was bound to obey. That he as well as David should tolerate idolatry in the foreign countries they had conquered, was not a violation of the law, which was enjoined on the Hebrews only; but that he should allow the idolatry of his wives in his own dominions and even in his capital; that he should build temples to the gods, if he did not himself offer them sacrifices; this was a breach of the fundamental law of the Hebrew state; it was a seducing of the Hebrews to idolatry; it was encouraging them to rebel against Jehovah their king. (1 Kings xi. 4-8.) On this account the prosperity of Solomon was interrupted by disquiets in Idumea and Syria, and it was foretold to him that only one tribe, (Judah and Benjamin, mentioned as one because the capital Jerusalem was situated on the borders of each,) should remain to his heirs. The dominion over the other ten tribes was promised to Jeroboam by Ahijah the prophet. Solomon died in the year 975 B. C.; and notwithstanding his glory was but little lamented.*

NOTE.-1. The chronology from the departure out of Egypt to the death of Solomon, stands thus:

(1.) Josephus (Antiq. viii. 3. 1.) reads in this place 592; and he also (Jewish War, iv. 9. 7.) seems to compute in the same manner. See Michaelis, Alt. Or. Bibl. th. xii. s. 31, 32.

(2.) Paul (Acts xiii. 20,) reckons the period of the judges at 450 years, and without doubt his teacher Gamaliel allowed the same space of time. But so many years could not have been allowed if at that time the Palestine manuscripts had read in 1 Kings vi. 1, 480, and not 592.

(3.) The reading 592, in 1 Kings vi. 1, is farther confirmed by the circumstance, that it is so reckoned by the Jews of China, who wandered thither through Chorasan and Samarcand, A. D. 73. Consequently, at the time of their emigration the passage must have read 592 and not 480. See Michaelis, Alt. Orient. Bibl. th. v. no. 71. s. 81 f. and Schreiben an Hrn. Schlötzer die Zeitrechnung von der Sündfluth bis auf Salomo betreffend in den Zerstreut. klein. Schriften, Lieferung, ii. s. 224-232.

NOTE 2.-We find in these times no mention made of the Elamites and Babylonians. They took no part in the affairs of the western countries. Assyria, together with the king of Nisibis, afforded only twenty thousand auxiliaries to the Ammonites, and therefore it could not have been a very great kingdom. The most powerful empire of those times was the Nisibene, and even this could not long withstand the Hebrews. The Greeks, who place the great Assyrian monarchy very high in antiquity, have not accurately distinguished between the different predominant oriental monarchies which succeeded each other. Even Xenophon in his Cyropædia always calls the Chaldee-Babylonian empire, the Assyrian, and the Chaldeans and Babylonians he calls Assyrians. Nor is this at all strange, for even in the Bible the two names are frequently interchanged.

NOTE 3.-Hiram, king of Tyre, who sent timber and artificers to David and Solomon, and also Solomon, are mentioned by Menander. This authentic historian was a native of Ephesus, and he derived his history from the original sources in each of the nations respecting which he wrote. He celebrates Hiram, or as he calls him, Hiromos, as a lover of architecture and a hero; and Solomon, as a sage. His words, as quoted by Josephus against Apion, i. 18, are remarkable. "Upon the death of Abibalus, his son Hirom took the kingdom; he lived fifty-three years, and reigned thirty-four. He raised a bank on that called the broad place,' and dedicated that golden pillar which is in Jupiter's (Baal's) temple: he also went and cut down timber from the mountain called Libanus, and got timber of cedar for the roofs of the temples. He also pulled down the old temples and built new ones: besides this, he consecrated the temples of Hercules and Astarte. He first built Hercules' temple in the month Peritus, and that of Astarte, when he made his expedition against the Tityans who refused to pay tribute; and when he had subdued them to himself he returned home. Under this king there was a younger son of Abdemon, who by his acuteness mastered the problems which Solomon king of Jerusalem had recommended to be solved."-(Whiston's Translation.)

Although Menander here says nothing of the building of the temple at Jerusalem, it is easy to see how exactly every other circumstance corresponds with the Biblical history. It also plainly appears, that it was then customary to erect magnificent temples. We may even conjecture, that Menander confounded the temple of Jehovah at Jerusalem, with the temple of Jupiter at Tyre.

CHAPTER V.

HISTORY FROM THE REVOLT OF THE TEN TRIBES TO THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY.

XXXIV. Revolt of thE TEN TRIBES.

THE events which took place after the death of Solomon, showed the effect of the arbitrary maxims of government that had prevailed at the court of this king during the last years of his reign. The rulers assembled at Shechem, the capital of the powerful tribe of Joseph, which had always been the jealous rival of Judah. They wished to enter into a new stipulation with Rehoboam, the heir to the throne,-a precaution that had been neglected at the accession of Solomon. They would submit to him only on condition that he would diminish the burdens which his father had laid upon them. Rehoboam required three days to deliberate on their proposal; and when, after that time, instead of granting their request without hesitancy, as the older and more prudent counsellors urged him to do, he threatened them, according to the advice of his younger courtiers, with a still more intolerable yoke, ten tribes renounced their allegiance to him, and elected Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, for their sovereign. He was of the tribe of Ephraim or Joseph, which had in ancient times received some obscure promises of a crown. (Gen. xlix. 26. Deut. xxxiii. 16.) During the reign of Solomon, Ahijah, the prophet, foretold that Jeroboam should reign over ten tribes. Jeroboam was soon after obliged to escape to Egypt, on account of his treasonable practices. (1 Kings xii. 1-20. 2 Chron. x. 1-19. 1 Kings xi. 26-40.)

Thus was the great and powerful empire of David and Solomon torn into two very unequal parts. Jeroboam possessed ten tribes, together with all the tributary nations as far as the Euphrates; and this was now called the kingdom of Israel. Rehoboam retained only the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, which were viewed as one tribe, because the capital, Jerusalem, was situated on the frontiers of both. Benjamin is comprehended in the name of Judah. (1 Kings xi. 36; xii. 20.) To this division also belonged Philistia and Edom; but the whole of this territory, which was now called the kingdom of Judah, included scarcely a fourth part of the dominions of Solomon. Rehoboam was determined to reduce the ten tribes to obedience, and for this purpose he collected an army; but the prophet Shemaiah announced to him the command of king Jehovah to relinquish the enter

prise. Rehoboam was still reasonable enough to see the propriety of this requisition. No definite treaty of peace, however, was concluded, and the frontiers of the two kingdoms always presented a hostile appearance. (1 Kings xii. 21-24. 1 Chron. xi. 1-4; xii. 15.)

XXXV. GENERAL VIEW OF THE TWO
KINGDOMS.

In the preceding history we have seen that King Jehovah, from the time of Moses to the death of Solomon, always governed the Hebrews according to the promises and threatenings which he had pronounced to them from mount Horeb. If they deviated from the principle of worshipping Jehovah as the only true God, that is, if they revolted from their lawful king, he brought them, by suitable chastisements, to reflect on their obligations to return to Jehovah, and again to keep sacred the fundamental law of their church and state. The same course we shall find pursued in the government of the two kingdoms. If the kings of both kingdoms had viewed the last great event, the sundering of the empire, which was a consequence of the idolatrous and unlawful principles of Solomon's court, as a warning, (for such it really was,) for them to uphold the authority of the fundamental law of the state, to govern their subjects according to the law, and to treat them as the subjects of Jehovah, then both kingdoms might have enjoyed uninterrupted prosperity. Even Jeroboam, though he had no promise of an eternal kingdom, as David had, yet received the assurance, that if he would obey the law as David did, there should be a long succession in his family. (1Kings xii. 21-24. 2 Chron. xi. 1—4; xii. 15. 1 Kings xi. 37, 38.) But as the kings of both kingdoms often disregarded the fundamental law of the commonwealth, by idolatry rebelled against their divine Sovereign, carried their disorders so far, and treated their subjects in such a manner, that they are very aptly described by Isaiah and Ezekiel, (Isa. lvi. 9-12. Ezek. xxxiv.) under the image of wicked shepherds; there arose a succession of prophets, who by impressive declarations and symbolic actions, reminded rulers and subjects of their duties to Jehovah, and threatened them with punishment; and there followed, as in ancient times, calamity after calamity, in order to bring the nation to reflection.

tars, appointed priests from all the tribes without distinction, and even performed the priestly functions himself. He appointed the festivals an entire month later than they had been formerly, and commanded that they should be celebrated before these images of Mnevis and Apis. The people took the images themselves for gods, and worshipped them as such. This kind of idolatry had formerly been very severely punished at mount Horeb. (1 Kings xii. 25-33. Exod. xxxii.) These arbitrary changes became now so interwoven with the constitution of the kingdom, that even the more pious successors of Jeroboam did not venture to abolish them, and re-establish the authority of the fundamental law of the commonwealth.

In the kingdom of Israel, there was from the first the greatest disregard of the Divine laws, and it was consequently destroyed one hundred and thirty-four years earlier than the kingdom of Judah. Jeroboam trusted little to the divine promise made to him by the prophet, and feared that if the people went to Jerusalem to attend the feasts, they would return to their allegiance to the house of David. To prevent such a step, he set up two golden or gilded calves as images of Jehovah, an imitation of the Apis and Mnevis of the Egyptians, among whom he had long dwelt in exile. One of these was located at Bethel, not far from Shechem, for the southern tribes, and the other at Dan, for the tribes in the north. He built temples for these images, erected al

These rebellious deviations from the law, which had been so impressively inculcated on the whole people at the first introduction of monarchy, and afterwards on Jeroboam himself, (1 Sam. xi. 14; xii. 1 Kings xi. 38,) did not prevent Jehovah from governing the kingdom of Israel uniformly according to its sanctions. We shall see in the sequel how he exterminated, one after another, those royal families who not only retained the arbitrary institutions of Jeroboam, but tolerated and patronised idolatry with all its vices, and even introduced and protected it by their royal authority. Such an extermination of a reigning family he caused to be announced beforehand by a prophet, and the successor appointed. We shall see, that the higher their corruptions rose, so much the more decisive and striking were the declarations and signs which showed to all the Israelites, that the Lord of the universe was their Lord and King, and that all idols were as nothing when opposed to him. Even Naaman the Syrian acknowledged, and the Syrians generally experienced to their sorrow, that the God of the Hebrews was not a mere national God, but that his power extended over all nations. The history represents a contest, (as Hess expresses it,) between Jehovah, who ought to be acknowledged as God, and the idolatrous Israelites; and every thing is ordered to preserve the authority of Jehovah in their minds. At last, after all milder punishments proved fruitless, these rebellions were followed by the destruction of the kingdom and the captivity of the people, which had been predicted by Moses, and afterwards by Ahijah, Hosea, Amos, and other prophets. (Deut. xxviii. 36. 1 Kings xiv. 15. Hos. ix. Amos v.)

We shall find Divine Providence likewise favourable or adverse to the kingdom of Judah, according as the people obeyed or transgressed the law; only here the royal family remained unchanged, in accordance with the promise given to David. We shall here meet indeed with many idolatrous and rebellious kings, but they are always succeeded by those of better views, who put a stop to idolatry, re-established theocracy in the hearts of their subjects, and by the aid of prophets, priests, and Levites, and of the services of the temple, restored the knowledge and worship of God. Judah therefore, though much smaller than Israel, continued her national existence one hundred and thirty-four years longer; but at last, as no durable reformation was

family, by Zimri, according to the prediction of Jehu. (1 Kings xvi. 8-14.)

When the army, who were besieging Gibbethon on the frontiers of the Philistines, heard of Zimri's treachery, they elected Omri, their general, king, and marched to Tirzah, where Zimri had elevated himself to the throne. Zimri made no resistance, but fled to the harem, which he set on fire, and perished in the flames. In the meantime a part of the people had made Tibni king, and though this was the weaker party, it existed for a considerable time, and it was not till after Tibni's death that Omri's claims were generally acknowledged. Omri reigned twelve years. He built Samaria, about thirty-two miles north of Jerusalem, and made it his capital, and there all the succeeding kings of Israel resided. (1 Kings xvi. 15—29.)

Ahab, his son, the weakest of all the Israelitish monarchs, reigned twenty-one years, from the year 57 to 78 of the Revolt, and from 918 to 897 B. C. He was entirely under the influence of his idolatrous wife, Jezebel, a daughter of Ethbaal or Ithobalus, king of Tyre. Hitherto the golden calves had been the only objects of idolatrous worship: but now Ahab and Jezebel united their authority to introduce the gods of other nations. The king built a temple at Samaria, erected an image, and consecrated a grove, to Baal, the god of the Zidonians. Jezebel maintained a multitude of priests and prophets of Baal. Idolatry became the predominant religion. Jehovah, and the golden calves as representations of him, were viewed with no more reverence than Baal and his image. It appeared as if the knowledge of God was forever lost to the Israelites. But Elijah, the prophet, boldly resisted the regal authority, and retained many of his countrymen in the worship of the true God. The greater the power was which supported idolatry, so much the more striking were the prophecies and miracles which directed the attention of the Israelites to Jehovah, and brought disgrace on the idols and their worshippers. At last the judgment of God on Ahab and his house was pronounced by Elijah, that during the reign of his son, his whole race should be exterminated. Ahab died of the wounds which he had received in a battle with the Syrians, according to the prediction of Micaiah, the son of Imlah. (1 Kings xvi. 29-xxii. 40.)

Ahaziah was no better than his father Ahab. In the second year of his reign, he fell through the lattice of an upper apartment of his palace, and died soon after, as Elijah had foretold. (1 Kings xxii. 50-2 Kings i.) Jehoram, the second son of Ahab, reigned twelve years, from 79 to 91 of the Revolt, and from 896 to 884 B. C. By the prophecies and miracles of Elijah, he had been brought to acknowledge Jehovah as his God and Sovereign. He, however, suffered the golden calves to remain, made no attempt to abolish idolatry, and even left undisturbed the temple of Baal at Samaria, probably because he feared the power of his mother Jezebel, who patronised these abominations. He however took away the idolatrous image of Baal which his father Ahab had made. Elisha, who, like Elijah, was a distinguished instrument of Divine Providence for the

preservation of the law, and consequently for the protection and prosperity of Israel, or, to use his own language, was "The chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof," always found a ready audience with Jehoram, and gave him many good counsels, in consequence of which the Syrians, with whom Israel had been at war ever since the reign of Omri, suffered several considerable repulses, and were forced to acknowledge the power of Jehovah. Jehoram also gained an important victory over the Moabites, who had revolted under the reign of Ahab, and under Ahaziah had made themselves completely independent. But idolatry and rebellion against Jehovah still continued. Even the seven years' famine, which forced many to emigrate, produced no reformation. Finally, the kingdom was promised to Jehu, the commander-in-chief, by a young disciple of Elisha; and he immediately executed the sentence pronounced against Ahab, and extirpated his whole family, in obedience to the orders of king Jehovah. (2 Kings iii.-viii.)

NOTE.-Ethbaal, king of Tyre, whose daughter Jezebel was Ahab's queen, is mentioned by Menander under the name Ithobalus.* This accurate historian gives from the Tyrian annals a catalogue of the kings of Tyre that succeeded Hiram, who was contemporary with Solomon, in the following words:

"After the death of Hirom, his son Balnazarus succeeded him in the throne, who lived fortythree years and reigned seven. Next to him his son Abdastartus, who lived twenty-nine years, reigned nine. He was murdered by the four sons of his nurse, the eldest of whom reigned twelve years. Then Astartus, the son of Deleastartus, who lived fifty-four years, reigned twelve. Next his brother Aserymus, who lived fifty-four years, reigned nine. He was slain by his brother Pheletes who then ascended the throne. He lived fifty years and reigned eight months. Ithobalus, a priest of Astarte, put him to death and assumed the sceptre. He lived sixty-eight years and reigned thirty-two. His successor was his son Badezorus, who lived forty years and reigned six. His son and successor, Margenus, lived thirtytwo years and reigned nine. Pygmalion succeeded him, who lived fifty-six years and reigned forty-seven. In the seventh year of his reign, his sister, Dido, fled, and built Carthage in Libya."

According to this, the time from the death of Hiram to the beginning of the reign of Ithobalus is about fifty years; and from the death of Solomon to the beginning of Ahab's reign there are fifty-seven years. Hiram, who was already king in the time of David, and reigned only thirty-two years, must have died at least ten years before Solomon, and consequently, from the death of Hiram to Ahab, there are about sixtyseven years. If all these numbers are correct, Ahab must have married Jezebel after he became king. In these calculations, allowance should be made for the mistakes which transcribers are apt to make, in copying numerals. We here see the reason why Jezebel, the daughter of a priest of Astarte, was so zealous a promoter of idolatry; and as twenty-one years after the death of IthoJosephus against Apion, i. 18.