And when Jehoshaphat looked upon that valley wherein their enemies had been encamped, and saw it full of dead men, he rejoiced at this surprising assistance of God; who by his own power, and without their labour, had given them the victory. He also permitted his army to take the prey of the enemies' camp, and to spoil their dead bodies; and indeed so they did for three days together, till they were weary; so great was the number of the slain. And on the fourth day, all the people were gathered together unto a certain hollow place, or valley, and blessed God for his power and assistance; from which the place was called the valley of Berachah or Blessing.*

When the king had brought his army back to Jerusalem, he celebrated festivals and offered sacrifices for many days. And indeed after the destruction of his enemies, and when it came to the ears of the foreign nations, they were all greatly affrighted; as supposing that God would openly fight for him hereafter. So Jehoshaphat from that time lived in great glory and splendour, on account of his righteousness and his piety towards God. He was also in friendship with Ahab's son,† who was king of Israel; and he joined with him in the building of ships that were to sail to Pontus and the commercial cities of Thrace;+ but the ships were destroyed, by being so great and unwieldy; and, being thus disappointed of his profit, he was no longer

2 Chron xx. 26.

This certainly was a great weakness in him, to make friendship with the son, when he had been so sharply reproved for joining with his father Ahab, especially since the son was as great an idolater as his father: but unto this he was betrayed by the affinity that was between them; and though he did not join with him in war, but only in trade, yet God was nevertheless displeased with him; which shews how dangerous a thing it is to have too near a familiarity or commerce with idolaters, or any other very wicked men. Patrick's Commentary. B.

What are here Pontus and Thrace, as the places whither Jehoshaphat's fleet sailed, are in our other copies Ophir and Tarshish; and the place whence it sailed is in them Eziongeber, which lay on the Red Sea, whence it was impossible for any ships to sail to Pontus or Thrace. So that Josephus's copy differed here from our other copies. But so far may we conclude, that Josephus thought one Ophir to be somewhere in the Mediterranean, and not in the South Sea; though perhaps there might be another Ophir in that South Sea also; and feets might then sail both from Phœncia and from the Red Sea to fetch the gold of Ophir, I mean all this, unless what our copies call Ophir, Josephus's temple copy called Pontus, as the word is here rendered by him. Which is perhaps the real truth, and clears the whole difficulty.

concerned about shipping. And this is the history of Jehoshaphat, the king of Jerusalem.

CHAP. II.

OF AHAZIAH KING OF ISRAEL; AND OF THE FURTHER ACTS OF THE PROPHET ELIJAH.

NOW Ahaziah, the son of Ahab, reigned over Israel, and made his abode in Samaria. He was a wicked man, and in all respects, like to both his parents; and to Jeroboam, who first of all transgressed, and began to deceive the people. In the second year of his reign the king of Moab revolted from his obedience, and left off paying those tributes which he had before payed to Ahab.

the

Now it happened that Ahaziah, as he was coming down from top of his house,† fell down from it, and in his sickness sent to the Fly, which was the god of Ekron; for that was this god's name, to inquire about his recovery. But the God of the

» An. 899.

In the eastern countries the roofs of the houses were flat, and surrounded with a battlement to prevent falling from them, because it was a customary thing for people to walk upon them, in order to take the air. Now, in this battlement, we may suppose that there were some wooden lattices for people to look through, of equal height with the parapet wall, and that Ahaziah negligently leaning on it, as it was rotten and infirm, it broke down, and let him fall into the court or garden belonging to his house. Or there is another way whereby he might fall. In these flat roofs, there was generally an opening which served instead of a sky-light to the house below; and this opening might be done over with lattice-work, which the king, as he was carelessly walking, might chance to step upon, and slip through. Nor is there any absurdity in supposing such lattice-work in a king's palace, when the world was not arrived at that height of art and curiosity that we find it in now. Pool's Annotations, and Calmet's Dissertation sur les edifices des anciens Hebreus. B.

Ekron was a city and government of the Philistines, which fell by lot to the tribe of Judah, in the first division made by Joshua, Josh. xv. 45, but was afterwards given up to the tribe of Dan, Josh. xix. 43, though it does not appear from history that the Jews ever had a peaceable possession of it. It was situated near the Mediterranean Sea, between Ashdod and Jamnia, in a moist and hot soil, and was therefore very much infested with flies. Calmet's Dictionary, and Patrick's Commentary. B.

The word signifies, The god of flies; but how this idol came to obtain that name, it is not so easy a matter to discover. Several are of opinion, that this god

Hebrews appeared to Elijah the prophet, and commanded him to go and meet the messengers that were sent; and to ask

was called Baal-semin, the lord of heaven, but that the Jews by way of contempt, gave it the name of Baal-zebub, or the lord of a fly, a god that was nothing worth, or, as others say, whose temple was filled with flies; whereas the temple of Jerusalem, notwithstanding all the sacrifices that were daily offered, never once had a fly in it, as their doctors relate. The sacred writings, indeed, when they speak of the gods of the Heathens, very frequently call them, in general, idols, vanity, abominations, &c. but they never change their proper names into such as are of an opprobrious import; neither can we think it likely, that the king of Israel would have called the god of Ekron, for whom he had so high a veneration as to consult him in his sickness, by any appellation of contempt. Whoever considers what troublesome and destructive creatures, especially in some hot countries, flies are known to be; in what vast swarms they sometimes settle, and not only devour all the fruits of the earth, but in many places occasioned a noisome pestilence; may reasonably suppose, that the Heathens had a proper deity to whom they paid their addresses, either for the prevention or removal of their sore plagues. And accordingly we are told by Pliny, (lib. xxix. c. 6,) that when there was a plague in Africa, occasioned by vast quantities of flies, after that the people had sacrificed to the god Achore, (he should have said the god of Ekron, for there is a plain affinity between their names,) the flies all died, and the distemper was extinguished. Now, it was a known maxim of the Heathen theology, that as all plagues were inflicted by some evil dæmon or other, so all evil dæmons were under the restraint of some superior one, who is their prince and ruler. As therefore Pluto was known to be the god of hell, and to have all the mischievous band of spirits under his control, to him the Heathens used to pray, and offer sacrifices, that he might not suffer any of his inferior agents to inflict this heavy judgment upon them. They worshipped him, I say, not to engage him to do them any good, but to prevail with him to do them no harm; and accordingly we may observe, that every thing in their service was dark and gloomy. Their offerings were in the night:

Such good reason have we to think, that the Baal-zebub, in Scripture called the prince of the devils, was the very same with the Pluto whom the Heathens made the god of hell, and worshipped in this manner. Patrick's and Le Clerc's Commentaries, and Jurieu Hist. des dogmes et cultes, part iv. c. 3. &c. B.

them, whether the people of Israel had not a God of their own, that their king sent to a foreign god to inquire about his recovery? and to bid them return and tell the king that he would not escape this disease. And when Elijah had performed what God had commanded, and the messengers had heard what he said, they returned to the king immediately. And when the king wondered how they could return so soon, and asked them the reason of it, they said, "A certain man met us,* and forbade us to go on any farther, but to return and tell thee, from the command of the God of Israel, that this disease will have a bad termination."+ And when the king desired them to describe the man who said this to them, they replied, "He was a hairy man; and was girt about with a girdle of leather." So the king understood that the man described by the messengers was Elijah. Hereupon he sent a captain to him; with fifty soldiers, and commanded them to bring Elijah to him. And when the captain that was sent found Elijah sitting upon the top of a hill, he commanded him to come down, and to come to the king; for so had he enjoined: but that in case he refused they would carry him by force. Elijah replied, "That you may have a trial whether I be a true prophet, I will pray that fire‡

* The description which the messengers give of Elijah is,―That he was a hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins, 2 Kings i. 8, where his being a hairy man, may either denote his wearing long hair on his head, and his beard, as the ancient Greek philosophers were wont to do, and as Lucan describes Cato,

Intensos rigidam in frontem descendere canos

Passus erat, mœstamque genis increscere barbam.

Or it may denote his habit, which was made of skins, rough, and with their hair on, as the ancient heroes were clothed in the skins of lions, tigers, and bears as the Evangelists represent the Baptist in a raiment of camel's hair, Matt. iii. 4, as the apostle describes the prophets, wandering about in sheep skins and goat skins, Heb. xi. 37, and as Statius dresses up old Tiresius,

† 2 Kings i. 6.

-longævi vatis opacos

Tiresiæ vultus, vocemque et vellera nota
Induitur-

Theb. lib. 2. B.

It is commonly esteemed a cruel action of Elijah, when he called for fire from heaven, and consumed two captains and a hundred soldiers; and this for no other

may fall from heaven, and destroy both the soldiers and thyself." So he prayed, and a whirlwind of fire fell from heaven, and destroyed the captain and those that were with him. And when the king was informed of the destruction of these men, he was very angry, and sent another captain with the like number of armed men that were sent before. And when this captain also threatened the prophet, that, unless he came down of of his own accord, he would take and carry him away; upon his prayer against him the fire from heaven slew this captain as well as the other. And when upon inquiry, the king was informed of what happened to him, he sent out a third captain. But when this captain, who was a wise man, and of a mild disposition, came to the place where Elijah happened to be, he spake civilly to him; and said, he knew that it was without his own consent, and only in submission to the king's command, that he came to him; and that those that came before, did not come willingly, but on the same account, He therefore desired him to have pity on those armed men that were with him, and to come down and follow him to the king. So Elijah accepted of his discreet words and courteous behaviour, and came down and followed him. And when he came to the king he told him, "God hath said, since thou hast despised him as not being God, and so unable to foretell the truth about thy distemper, but hast sent to the god of Ekron to inquire of him; know this that thou shalt die."

crime than obeying the orders of their king, in attempting to seize him. And our Saviour notices it as an instance of greater severity than the spirit of the New Tes tament allows, Luke ix. 54. But we must consider, that it is not unlikely that these captains and soldiers believed they were sent to fetch the prophet, that he might be put to death, for foretelling the death of the king; and this, while they knew him to be the prophet of the true God, the supreme king of Israel, (for they were still under, the theocracy,) which was no less than impiety, rebellion, and treason, in the highest degree. Nor would the command of a subaltern, or inferior captain, contradicting the commands of the general, when the captain and the soldiers * both knew it to be so, as I suppose, justify or excuse such gross rebellion and disobedience in soldiers at this day. Accordingly when Saul commanded his guards to slay Ahimelech, and the priests at Nob, they knew it to be an unlawful command, and would not obey it, 1 Sam. xxii. 17. From which cases both officers and soldiers may learn, that the commands of their leaders or kings cannot justify or excuse them in doing what is wicked in the sight of God, or in fighting in an unjust cause, when they know it so to be. See the Notes on VII. 13, and VIII. 14.