1 For further information as to the commencement of this aqueduct, see the masterly dissertation of Dr. Herm. Zschokkc, "Die versiegelte Quelle Salomo's," in the Tiibingcr Thcol Quarlalschr. 18G7, H. 3, S. 426 ff.
2 C. Schick, Reiseindas Philistcrland (in " Ausland" 1867, Nr. 7, S. 162), identifies Gath with the present Tel Safieh, "an isolated conical hill in the plain, like a sentinel of a watchtower or fortress, and on that account there was so much struggling for its possession." On the other hand, Konr. Furrer, land of the Philistines, was at a later time very important, and is not represented by the ruin Marash, twenty-four minutes to the south of Beit-Jibrin (Eleutheropolis); see on Josh. xv. 44, and Tobl. dritte Wand. S. 129, 142 f. Ziph is probably the Ziph mentioned in Josh. xv. 55, in the hill country of Judah, of which ruins yet remain on the hill Ziph, about an hour and a quarter south-east of Hebron; see on Josh. xv. 55. C. v. Raumer thinks, on the contrary, Pal. S. 222, Anm. 249, that our Ziph, as it is mentioned along with Mareshah and other cities of the lowland, cannot be identified with either of the Ziphs mentioned in Josh. xv. 24 and 55, but is probably Achzib in the lowland mentioned along with Mareshah, Josh. xv. 44; but this is very improbable. — Ver. 9. Adoraim (ABcopatfi in Joseph. Antt. viii. 10. 1), met with in 1 Mace. xiii. 20 as an Idumean city, "AScopa, and so also frequently in Josephus, was taken by Hyrcanus, and rebuilt by Gabinius (Jos. Antt. xiii. 15. 4, and xiv. 5. 3) under the name Acopa, and often spoken of along with Marissa (s. Reland, Palcest. p. 547). Robinson (Pal. sub voce) has identified it with the present Dura, a village about 7J miles to the westward of Hebron. Lachish, situated in the lowland of Judah, as we learn from Josh. xv. 39, is probably the present Urn Lakis, on the road from Gaza to Beit-Jibrin and Hebron, to the left hand, seven hours to the west of Beit- Jibrin, on a circular height covered with ancient walls and marble fragments, and overgrown with thistles and bushes; see on Josh. x. 3, and Pressel in Herz.'s Realenc. viii. S. 157 f. Azekah, situated in the neighbourhood of Shoco (ver. 7), and, according to 1 Sam. xvii. 1, in an oblique direction near Ephes- Dammim, i.e. Damum, one hour east to the south of Beit-Nettif,1 has not been re-discovered; see on Josh. x. 10. — Ver. 10. Zorah, Samson's birthplace, is represented by the ruin Sura, at the south-west end of the ridge, which encloses the Wady es Surar on the north; see on Josh. xv. 33. To the north of that again lay Ajalon, now the village Jalo, on the verge of the plain Merj ibn Omeir, four leagues to the west of Gibeon; see on
Wanderungcn durch Palcistlna, Zurich 18G5, thinks, S. 133, that he has found the true situation of Gath in the Wady el Gat, northward of the ruins of Askalon.
1 Compare the interesting note of Brcytcnbach (ReyLh. des Jieil. Landes, i. 134) in Tobler, dritte Wand. S. 463: " Thence (from Azekah) three miles is the city Zochot-Jude, not far from Nobah, where David slew Goliath."
Josh. x. 12 and xix. 42. Finally, Hebron, the ancient city of the patriarchs, now called el Khalil (The friend of God, i.e. Abraham); see on Gen. xxiii. 2. All these fenced cities lay in the tribal domain of Judah, with the exception of Zorah and Ajalon, which were assigned to the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 41 f.). These two were probably after wards, in the time of the judges, when a part of the Danites emigrated from Zorah and Eshtaol to the north of Palestine (Judg. xviii. 1), taken possession of by Benjamites, and were afterwards reckoned to the land of Benjamin, and are here named as cities which Rehoboam fortified in Benjamin. If we glance for a moment at the geographical position of the whole fifteen cities, we see that they lay partly to the south of Jerusalem, on the road which went by Hebron to Beershe ba and Egypt, partly on the western slopes of the hill country of Judah, on the road by Beit-Jibrin to Gaza, while only a \few lay to the north of this road towards the Philistine plain, and there were none to the north to defend the kingdom against invasions from that side. " Rehoboam seems, therefore, to have had much more apprehension of an attack from the south and west, i.e. from the Egyptians, than of a war with the northern kingdom " (Berth.). Hence we may conclude that Rehoboam fortified these" cities only after the inroad of the Egyptian king Shishak. — Ver. 11 f. "And he made strong the fortresses, and put captains, in them," etc.; i.e. he increased their strength by placing them in a thoroughly efficient condition to defend themselves against attacks, appointing commandants (DH\33)? provisioning them, and (ver. 12) laying up stores of all kinds of arms. In this way he made them exceedingly strong. The last clause, ver. 12, u And there were to him Judah and Benjamin," corresponds to the statement, x. 19, that Israel revolted from the house of David, and forms the conclusion of the account (vers. 1-1 7a) of that which Rehoboam did to establish his power and consolidate his kingdom. There follows hereupon, in
Vers. 13-17, the account of the internal spiritual strengthening of the kingdom of Judah by the migration of the priests and Invites, and many pious worshippers of Jahve out of all the tribes, to the kingdom of Judah. — Ver. 13. The priests and Levites in all Israel went over to him out of their whole domain.?V 3JM?i?> to present oneself before any one, to await his commands, cf. Zecli. vi. 5, Job i. 6, ii. 1; here in the signification to place oneself at another's disposal, i.e. to go over to one. The suffix in DXU refers to "all Israel." For — this was the motive of their migration, ver. 14 — the Levites (in the wider signification of the word, including the priests) forsook their territory and their possessions, i.e. the cities assigned to them, with the pasture lands for their cattle (Num. xxxv. 1-8), scil. in the domain of the ten tribes; " for Jeroboam and his sons had driven them out from the priesthood of Jahve." To prevent his subjects from visiting the temple at Jerusalem, which he feared might ultimately cause the people to return to the house of David, Jeroboam had erected his own places of worship for his kingdom in Bethel and Dan, where Jahve was worshipped in the ox images (the golden calves), and had appointed, not the Levites, but men from the body of the people, to be priests in these so-called sanctuaries (1 Kings xii. 2G-31), consecrated by himself. By these innovations not only the priests and Levites, who would not recognise this unlawful image-worship, were compelled to migrate to Judah and Jerusalem, but also the pious worshippers of the Lord, who would not renounce the temple worship which had been consecrated by God Himself. All Jeroboam's successors held firmly by this calfworship introduced by him, and consequently the driving out of the priests and Levites is here said to have been the act of Jeroboam and his sons. By his sons are meant Jeroboam's successors on the throne, without respect to the fact that of Jeroboam's own sons only Nadab reached the throne, and that his dynasty terminated with him; for in this matter all the kin^s of Israel walked in the footsteps of Jeroboam. — Ver. 15. And had ordained him priests for the high places. ^'^iW is a continuation of DlTJTn ^ ver. 14. rriDZi are the places of worship which were erected by Jeroboam for the image-worship, called in 1 Kings xii. 31 niE2 H^n; see on that passage. The gods worshipped in these houses in high places the author of the Chronicle calls D*"),,yB> from their nature, and DvJV from their form. The word D'HW is taken from Lev. xvii. 7, and signifies demons, so named from the Egyptian idolatry, in which the worship of goats, of Pan (Mendes), who was always represented in the form of a goat, occupied a prominent place; see on Lev. xvii. 7. For further details as to the DvJV, see on 1 Kinirs xii. 28. — Ver. 16. D^nn^, after them, i.e. following after the priests and Levites. With cm^lX D^nSn, who turned their hearts thereto, cf. 1 Chron. xxii. 19. They went to Jerusalem to sacrifice there; Le.} as we learn from the context, not merely to offer sacrifices, but also to remain in the kingdom of Judah. — Ver. 17. These immigrants — priests, Levites, and pious worshippers of Jahve — made the kingdom of Judah strong, by strengthening the religious foundation on which the kingdom was founded, and made Rehoboam strong three years, so that they (king and people) walked in the way of David and Solomon. The strengthening lasted only three years — only while the opposition to Jeroboam's action in the matter of religion was kept alive by the emigration of the pious people from the ten tribes. What occurred after these three years is narrated only in chap. xii. — Here there follows, in
Vers. 18-23, information as to Relioboarn s family relationships.— Yer. 18. Instead of fa we must read, with the Keri, many mss., LXX., and Vulg., na: Mahalath the daughter of Jerimoth, the son of David. Among the sons of David (1 Chron. hi. 1-8) no Jerimoth is found. If this name be not another form of DJWj 1 Chron. iii. 3, Jerimoth must have been a son of one of David's concubines. Before the name <n*3K, \ must have been dropped out, and is to be supplied; so that Mahalath's father and mother are both named: the daughter of Jerimoth the son of David, and Abihail the daughter of Eliab the son of Jesse, i.e. David's eldest brother (1 Chron. ii. 13; 1 Sam. xvii. 13). For Abihail cannot be held to be a second wife of Rehoboam, because ver. 19, u and she bore," and ver. 20, " and after her," show that in ver. 18 only one wife is named. She bare him three sons, whose names occur only here (ver. 19). — Ver. 20. Maachah the daughter, i.e. the granddaughter, of Absalom; for she cannot have been Absalom's daughter, because Absalom, according to 2 Sam. xiv. 27, had only one daughter, Tamar by name, who must have been fifty years old at Solomon's death. According to 2 Sam. xviii. 18, Absalom left no son; Maachah therefore can only be a daughter of Tamar, who, according to 2 Chron. xiii. 2, was married to Uriel of Gibeah: see on 1 Kings xv. 2. Abijah, the oldest son of Maachah, whom his father nominated his successor (ver. 22 and xii. 16), is called in the book of Kings constantly Abijam, the original form of the name, which was afterwards weakened into Abijah. — Ver. 21 f. Only these wives with their children are mentioned by name, though besides these Rehoboam had a number of wives, 18 wives and 60 (according to Josephus, 30) concubines, who bore him twenty-eight sons and sixty daughters. Rehoboam trod in his father's footsteps in this not quite praiseworthy point. The eldest son of Maachah he made head (^ v), i.e. prince, among his brethren; tovDri 7 V3, for to make him king, scil. was his intention. The infin. with? is here used in the swiftness of speech in loose connection to state with what further purpose he had appointed him T5J; cf. Ew. § 351, c, at the end. — Ver. 23. And he did wisely, and dispersed of all his sons in all the countries of Judah and Benjamin, i.e. dispersed all his sons so, that they were placed in all parts of Judah and Benjamin in the fenced cities, and he gave them victual in abundance, and he sought (for them) a multitude of wives.?W5*, to ask for, for the father brought about the marriage of his sons. He therefore took care that his sons, by being thus scattered in the fenced cities of the country as their governors, were separated from each other, but also that they received the necessary means for living in a way befitting their princely rank, in the shape of an abundant maintenance and a considerable number of wives. They were thus kept in a state of contentment, so that they might not make any attempt to gain the crown, which he had reserved for Abijah; and in this lay the wisdom of his conduct.
Chap. xii. Rehoboarns defection from the Lord, and his humiliation by the Egyptian king Shishak. — Yer. 1. The infinitive r^3, u at the time of the establishing," with an indefinite subject, may be expressed in English by the passive: when Rehoboam's royal power was established. The words refer back to xi. 17. topOS, "when he had become strong" (njjtn is a nomen verbale: the becoming strong; cf. xxvi. 16, Dan. xi. 2), he forsook the Lord, and all Israel with him. The inhabitants of the kingdom of Judah are here called Israel, to hint at the contrast between the actual conduct of the people in their defection from the Lord, and the destiny of Israel, the people of God. The forsaking of the law of Jahve is in substance the fall into idolatry, as we find it stated more definitely in 1 Kings xiv. 22 ff. — Ver. 2. In punishment of this defection ('^ EW *3, because they had acted faithlessly to Jahve), Shishak, the king of Egypt, marched with a great host against Jerusalem. This hostile invasion is also briefly narrated in 1 Kings xiv. 25-28. Shishak (Sisak) is, as we have remarked on 1 Kings xiv., Sesonchis or Sechonchosis, the first king of the 22d dynasty, who has celebrated his victory in a relief at Karnak. In this sculpture the names of the cities captured are recorded on shields, and a considerable number have been deciphered with some certainty, and by them our account is completely confirmed. According to ver. 3, Shishak' s host consisted of 1200 chariots, 60,000 horsemen — numbers which, of course, are founded only upon a rough estimate— and an innumerable multitude of footmen, among whom were &^?? Libyans, probably the Libyaegyptii of the ancients (see on Gen. x. 13); B^3p? according to the LXX. and Vulg. Troglodytes, probably the Ethiopian Troglodytes, who dwelt in the mountains on the west coast of the Arabian Gulf; and Cushites, i.e. Ethiopians. The Libyans and Cushites are mentioned in Nahum iii. 9 also as auxiliaries of the Egyptians. — Ver. 4. After the capture of the fenced cities of Judah, he marched against Jerusalem. — Ver. 5. Then the prophet Shemaiah announced to the king and the princes, who had retired to Jerusalem before Shishak, that the Lord had given them into the power of Shishak because they had forsaken Him. T3 2W, forsaken and given over into the hand of Shishak. When the king and the priests immediately humbled themselves before God, acknowledging the righteousness of the Lord, the prophet announced to them further that the Lord would not destroy them since they had humbled themselves, but would give them deliverance in a little space. B?fc?2l, according to a little, i.e. in a short time. •"IB'93 is accusative after WJ1« My anger shall not pour itself out upon Jerusalem. The pouring out of anger is the designation of an exterminating judgment; cf. xxxiv. 25. — Ver. 8. But Q3 after a negative clause) they shall be his servants, sc. for a short time (see ver. 7), " that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries" (cf. 1 Chron. xxix. 30); i.e. that they may learn to know by experience the difference between the rule of God and that of the heathen kings, and that God's rule was not so oppressive as that of the rulers of the world.
With ver. 9 the account of the war is taken up again and continued by the repetition of the words, u Then marched Shishak... against Jerusalem'' (ver. 4). Shishak plundered the treasures of the temple and the palace; he had consequently captured Jerusalem. The golden shields also which had been placed in the house of the forest of Lebanon, i.e. the palace built by Solomon in Jerusalem, which Solomon had caused to be made (cf. ix. 16), Shishak took away, and in their place Rehoboam caused brazen shields to be prepared; see on 1 Kings xiv. 26-28. — In ver. 12 the author of the Chronicle concludes the account of this event with the didactic remark, tl Because he
(Kehoboam) humbled himself, the anger of Jahve was turned away from him." WWv &OV, and it was not to extermination utterly (n?D7, properly to destruction, i.e. completely; cf. Ezek. xiii. 13). And also in Judah were good things. This is the other motive which caused the Lord to turn away His wrath. Good things are proofs of piety and fear of God, cf. xix. 3. — Ver. 13 f. The length of Rehoboam's reign, his mother, and the judgment about him. Cf. 1 Kings xiv. 21 and 22a. P^HTI^ here, as in xiii. 21, can, in its connection with what precedes, be only understood to mean that Rehoboam, after his humiliation at the hands of Shishak, by which his kingdom was utterly weakened and almost destroyed, again gained strength and power. Cf. also i. 1, where PHW is used of Solomon in the beginning of his reign, after he overcame Adonijah, the pretender to the crown, and his party. — As to the a^e of Rehoboam, etc., see on 1 Kings xiv. 21. jnn b>jm ver. 14, is defined by the addition, "for he prepared not his heart to seek the Lord." For the expression cf. xix. 3, xxx. 19, Ezra vii. 10. — Vers. 15 and 16. Close of his reign. On the authorities, see the Introduction, p. 34; and in reference to the other statements, the commentary on 1 Kings xiv. 29-31. nioripDj wars, i.e. a state of hostility, was between Rehoboam and Jeroboam all days, can only be understood of the hostile attitude of the two rulers to each other, like nonpD in Kings; for we have no narrative of wars between them after Rehoboam had abandoned, at the instance of the prophet, his proposed war with the Israelites at the commencement of his reign.
In the book of Kings it is merely remarked in general, that the hostile relationship between Jeroboam and Rehoboam continued during his whole life, and that between Abijah and Jeroboam there was war (vers. 6 and 7); but not one of his enterprises is recounted, and only his attitude towards the Lord is exactly characterized. In our chapter, on the contrary, we have a vivid and circumstantial narrative of the commencement, course, and results of a great war against Jeroboam, in which Abijah, with the help of the Lord, inflicted a crushing defeat on the great army of the Israelites, and conquered several cities.
Vers. 1 and 2. The commencement and duration of the reign, as in 1 Kings xv. 1, 2. Abijah's mother is here (ver. 2)
called Michaiah instead of Maachah, as in xi'. 20 and 1 Kings xv. 2, but it can hardly be a second name which Maachah had received for some unknown reason; probably IIT^D is a mere orthographical error for royo. She is here called, not the daughter = granddaughter of Abishalom, but after her father, the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah; see on xi. 20.1
Vers. 26-21. The War between Abijah and Jeroboam. — nrvn nDnpp) war arose, broke out. — Ver. 3. Abijah began the war with an army of 400,000 valiant warriors. *firn \th&7 chosen men. 'o rix 1DfcJ? to bind on war, i.e. to open the war. Jeroboam
1 Against this Bertheau remarks, after the example of Thenius: " When we consider that the wife of Abijah and mother of Asa was also called Maachah, 1 Kings xv. 13, 2 Chron. xv. 1G, and that in 1 Kings xv. 2 this Maachah is again called the daughter of Abishalom, and that this latter statement is not met with in the Chronicle, we are led to conjecture that Maachah, the mother of Abijah, the daughter of Abishalom, has been confounded with Maachah the mother of Asa, the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah, and that in our passage Asa's mother is erroneously named instead of the mother of Abijah." This conjecture is a strange fabric of perverted facts and inconsequential reasoning. In 1 Kings xv. 2 Abijam's mother is called Maachah the daughter of Abishalom, exactly as in 2 Chron. xi. 20 and 21; and in 1 Kings xv. 13, in perfect agreement with 2 Chron. xv. 16, it is stated that Asa removed Maachah from the dignity of Gebira because she had made herself a statue of Asherah. This Maachah, deposed by Asa, is called in 1 Kings xv. 10 the daughter of Abishalom, and only this latter remark is omitted from the Chronicle. How from these statements we must conclude that the mother of Abijah, Maachah the daughter of Abishalom, has been confounded with Maachah the mother of Asa, the daughter of Uriel, we cannot see. The author of the book of Kings knows only one Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom, whom in xv. 2 he calls mother, i.e. PlTHa, i.e. Sul- tana Walide of Abijah, and in xv. 10 makes to stand in the same relationship of mother to Asa. From this, however, the only natural and logically sound conclusion which can be drawn is that Abijam's mother, Kehoboam's wife, occupied the position of queen-mother, not merely during the three years' reign of Abijam, but also during the first years of the reign of his son Asa, as his grandmother, until Asa had deprived her of this dignity because of her idolatry. It is nowhere said in Scripture that this woman was Abijam's wife, but that is a conclusion drawn by Thenius and Bertheau only from her being called iftN, his (Asa's) mother, as if DX could denote merely the actual mother, and not the grandmother. Finally, the omission in the Chronicle of the statement in 1 Kings xv. 10, " The name of his mother was Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom," does not favour in the very least the conjecture that Asa's mother has been confounded with the mother of Abijah; for it is easily explained by the fact that at the accession of Asa no change was made in reference to the dignity of queen-mother, Abijah's mother still holding that position even under Asa.
prepared for the war with 800,000 warriors. The number of Jeroboam's warriors is exactly that which Joab returned as the result, as to Israel, of the numbering of the people commanded by David, while that of Abijah's army is less by 100,000 men than Joab numbered in Judah (2 Sam. xxiv. 9). — Ver. 4 ff. When the two armies lay over against each other, ready for the combat, Abijah addressed the enemy, King Jeroboam and all Israel, in a speech from Mount Zemaraim. The mountain Op_»¥ is met with only here; but a city of this name is mentioned in Josh, xviii. 22, whence we would incline to the conclusion that the mountain near or upon which this city lay was intended. But if this city was situated to the east, not only of Bethel, but also of Jerusalem, on the road to Jericho (see on Josh, xviii. 22), as we may conclude from its enumeration between Beth-Arabah and Bethel in Josh. loc. cit., it will not suit our passage, at least if Zemaraim be really represented by the ruin el Sumra to the east of Khan Hadur on the way from Jerusalem to Jericho. Robinson (Plnjs. Geog. S. 38) conjectures Mount Zemaraim to the east of Bethel, near the border of the two kingdoms, to which Mount Ephraim also extends. Abijah represented first of all (vers. 5-7) to Jeroboam and the Israelites that their kingdom was the result of a revolt against Jahve, who had given the kingship over Israel to David and his sons for ever. — Ver. 5. u Is it not to you to know % " i.e. can it be unknown to you? rro rp"]2i? accus. of nearer definition: after the fashion of a covenant of salt, i.e. of an irrevocable covenant; cf. on Lev. ii. 13 and Num. xviii. 19. " And Jeroboam, the servant of Solomon the son of David (cf. 1 Kings xi. 11), rebelled against his lord," with the help of frivolous, worthless men (0*1??. as in Judg. ix. 4, xi. 3;?#v3 *J2 as in 1 Kings xxi. 10, 13, — not recurring elsewhere in the Chronicle), who gathered around him, and rose against Rehoboam with power, by p3^nn? to show oneself powerful, to show power against any one. Against this rising Rehoboam showed himself not strong enough, because he was an inexperienced man and soft of heart. 1J0 denotes not " a boy," for Rehoboam was fortyone years old when he entered upon his reign, but " an inexperienced young man," as in 1 Chron. xxix. 1. 22? r\i_y soft of heart, i.e. faint-hearted, inclined to give way, without energy to make a stand against those rising insolently against him. N^. 'a? P$nnn? and showed himself not strong before them, proved to be too weak in opposition to them. This representation does not conform to the state of the case as narrated in chap. x. Keho boam did not appear soft-hearted and compliant in the negotia tion with the rebellious tribes at Sichem; on the contrary, Ik was hard and defiant, and showed himself youthfully inconsiderate only in throwing to the winds the wise advice of the older men and in pursuance of the rash counsel of the young men who hac grown up with him, brought about the rupture by his domineering manner. But Abijah wishes to justify his father as much a: possible in his speech, and shifts all the guilt of the rebellion o: the ten tribes from the house of David on to Jeroboam and hii worthless following. — Vers. 8 and 9. Abijah then points out t< his opponents the vanity of their trust in the great multitude oj their warriors and their gods, while yet they had driven out the priests of Jahve. " And nowT ye say," scil. in your heart, i.e. yoi think to show yourself strong before the kingdom of Jahve ir the hands of the sons of David, i.e. against the kingdom of Jahve ruled over by the sons of David, by raising a great army ir order to make war upon and to destroy this kingdom. 2"J jion Dn*o and truly ye are a great multitude, and with you are the goldei calves, which Jeroboam hath made to you for gods; but trus not unto them, for Jahve, the true God, have ye not for yoi as a helper. — Ver. 9. " Yea, ye have cast out the priests oi Jahve, the sons of Aaron, and made you priests after the manne] of the nations of the lands. Every one who has come, to fil his hand with a young bullock and he has become i priest to the no-god." VlJ N?p, to fill his hand, denotes, in the language of the law, to invest one with the priesthood, and connected with JWlv it signifies to provide oneself with that whicl is to be offered to Jahve. To fill his hand with a young bullock etc., therefore denotes to come with sacrificial beasts, to cause oneself to be consecrated priest. The animals mentioned also a young bullock and seven rams, point to the consecration to the priesthood. In Ex. xxix. a young bullock as a sin-offering, 2 ram as a burnt-offering, and a ram as a consecratory-offering, arc prescribed for this purpose. These sacrifices were to be repeatec during seven days, so that in all seven rams were required foi consecratory-sacrifices. Abijah mentions only one young bullocl? along with these, because it wras not of any importance for him to enumerate perfectly the sacrifices which were necessary. Bui by offering these sacrifices no one becomes a priest of Jahve, and consequently the priests of Jeroboam also are only priests foi
Not-Elohim, i.e. only for the golden calves made Elohim by- Jeroboam, to whom the attributes of the Godhead did not belong. — Vers. 10 and 11. While, therefore, the Israelites have no-gods in their golden calves, Judah has Jahve for its God, whom it worships in His temple in the manner prescribed by Moses. u But in Jahve is our God, and we have not forsaken Him," in so far, viz., as they observed the legal Jahve-worship. So Abijah himself explains his words, " as priests serve Him the sons of Aaron (who were chosen by Jahve), and the Levites are rDK?D3, in service," i.e. performing the service prescribed to them. As essential parts of that service of God, the offering of the daily burnt-offering and the daily incense-offering (Ex. xxix. 38 ff., xxx. 7), the laying out of the shew-bread (Ex. xxv. 30; Lev. xxiv. 5 ff.), the lighting of the lamps of the golden candlesticks (Ex. xxv. 37, xxvii. 20 f.), are mentioned. In this respect they keep the mrr» rrjDBte (cf. Lev. viii. 35).— Ver. 12. Abijah draws from all this the conclusion: u Behold, with us at our head are (not the two calves of gold, but) God (tftlTttn with the article, the true God) and His priests, and the alarm-trumpets to sound against you." He mentions the trumpets as being the divinely appointed pledges that God would remember them in war, and would deliver them from their enemies, Num. x. 9. Then he closes with a warning to the Israelites not to strive with Jahve, the God of their fathers.
Vers. 13-17. The war; Judah's victory, and the defeat of Jeroboam and the Israelites. — Ver. 13. Jeroboam caused the ambush (the troops appointed to be an ambush) to go round about, so as to come upon their rear (i.e. of the men of Judah); and so they (the main division of Jeroboam's troops) were before Judah, and the ambush in their rear (i.e. of the men of Judah); and the men of Judah, when they turned themselves (scil. to attack), saw war before and behind them, i.e. perceived that they were attacked in front and rear. In this dangerous position the men of Judah cried to the Lord, and the priests blew the trumpets (ver. 15); and as they raised this war-cry, God smote their enemies so that they took to flight. In yP*W and Vs"]?n the loud shout of the warriors and the clangour of the trumpets in the hands of the priests are comprehended; and JH? is neither to be taken to refer only to the war-cry raised by the warriors in making the attack, nor, with Bertheau, to be referred only to the blowing of the trumpets. — Ver. 16 f. So Abijah and his people inflicted a great blow (defeat) on the Israelites, so that 500,000 of them, i.e. more than the half of Jeroboam's whole army, fell.
Ver. 18 f. The results of this victory. The Israelites were bowed down, their power weakened; the men of Judah became strong, mighty, because they relied upon Jahve their God. Following up his victory, Abijah took from Jeroboam several cities with their surrounding domains: Bethel, the present Beitin, see on Josh. vii. 2; Jeshanah, occurring only here, and the position of which has not yet been ascertained; and Ephron (fflBJ, Keth.; the Keri, on the contrary, H*l??)- This city cannot well be identified with Mount Ephron, Josh. xv. 9; for that mountain was situated on the southern frontier of Benjamin, not far from Jerusalem, while the city Ephron is to be sought much farther north, in the neighbourhood of Bethel. C. v. Raumer and others identify Ephron or Ephrain both with Ophrah of Benjamin, which, it is conjectured, was situated near or in Tayibeh, to the east of Bethel, and with the 'Ecppaifa John xi. 54, whither Jesus withdrew into the wilderness, which, according to Josephus, Bell. Jud. iv. 9. 9, lay in the neighbourhood of Bethel. See on Josh, xviii. 23.1 — Ver. 20. Jeroboam could not afterwards gain power
1 The account of this war, which is peculiar to the Chronicle, and which de "Wette declared, on utterly insufficient grounds, to be an invention of the chronicler (cf. against him my apol. Vers, iiber die Chron. S. 444 if.), is thus regarded by Ewald (Gesch. Isr. iii. S. 4G6, der 2 Aufl.): " The chronicler must certainly have found among his ancient authorities an account of this conclusion of the war, and we cannot but believe that we have here, in so far, authentic tradition;" and only the details of the description are the results of free expansion by the chronicler, but in the speech vers. 4-13 every word and every thought is marked by the peculiar colouring of the Chronicle. But this last assertion is contradicted by Ewald's own remark, i. S. 203, that "in 2 Chron. xiii. 4-7, 19-21, an antiquated manner of speech and representation appears, while in the other verses, on the contrary, those usual with the chronicler are found," — in support of which he adduces the words $>pi?3 ">J3, ver. 7, and nplO IVlB, ver. 5. According to this view, Abijah's speech cannot have been freely draughted by the chronicler, but must have been derived, at least so far as the fundamental thoughts are concerned, from an ancient authority, doubtless the Midrash of the prophet Iddo, cited in ver. 22. But Ewald's further remark (iii. S. 46G), that the author of the Chronicle, because he regarded the heathenized Samaria of his time as the true representative of the old kingdom of the ten tribes, seized this opportunity to put into King Abijah's mouth a long denunciatory and didactic speech, addressed at the commencement of the battle to the enemy as rebels not merely against the house of David, but also against the true religion, is founded upon the Uiiscriptural idea that the calf- worship of the Israelites was merely a some-
(ni3 ivy, as in 1 Chron. xxix. 14): " And Jahve smote him, and he died." The meaning of this remark is not clear, since we know nothing further of the end of Jeroboam's life than that he died two years after Abijah. ^nB3»l can hardly refer to the unfortunate result of the war (ver. 15 ff.), for Jeroboam outlived the war by several years. We would be more inclined to understand it of the blow mentioned in 1 Kings xiv. 1—8, when God announced to him by Ahijah the extermination of his house, and took away his son Abijah, who was mourned by all Israel.
Vers. 21-23. Wives and children of Abijah. His death, — Ver. 21. While Jeroboam was not able to recover from the defeat lie had suffered, Abijah established himself in his kingdom (PjniV, cf. xii. 13), and took to himself fourteen wives. The taking of these wives is not to be regarded as later in time than his establishment of his rule after the victory over Jeroboam. Since Abijah reigned only three years, he must have already had the greater number of his wives and children when he ascended the throne, as we may gather also from chap. xi. 21-23. The i consec. with $J&\ serves only to connect logically the information as to his what sensuous form of the true Jahve-worship, and was fundamentally distinct from the heathen idolatry, and also from the idolatry of the later Samaritans. In the judgment of all the prophets, not only of Hosea and Amos, but also of the prophetic author of the book of Kings, the calf-worship was a defection from Jahve, the God of the fathers, — a forsaking of the commands of Jahve, and a serving of the Baals; cf. e.g. 1 Kings xiii., 2 Kings xvii. 7-23. What Abijah says of the calf-worship of the Israelites, and of Judah's attitude to Jahve and His worship in the temple, is founded on the truth, and is also reconcilable with the statement in 1 Kings xv. 3, that Abijah's heart was not wholly devoted to the Lord, like David's heart. Abijah had promoted the legal temple-worship even by consecratory gifts (1 Kings xv. 15), and could consequently quite well bring forward the worship of God in Judah as the true worship, in contrast to the Israelitic calfworship, for the discouragement of his enemies, and for the encouragement of his own army; and we may consequently regard the kernel, or the essential contents of the speech, as being historically well-founded. The account of the war, moreover, is also shown to be historical by the exact statement as to the conquered cities in ver. 19, which evidently has been derived from ancient authorities. Only in the statements about the number of warriors, and of the slain Israelites, the numbers are not to be estimated according to the literal value of the figures; for they are, as has been already hinted in the commentary, only an expression in figures of the opinion of contemporaries of the war, that both kings had made a levy of all the men in their respective kingdoms capable of bearing arms, and that.Jeroboam was defeated with such slaughter that he lost more than the half of his warriors.
wives and children with the preceding, as the great increase of his family was a sign of Abijah's increase in strength, while Jeroboam's dynasty was soon extirpated. — Yer. 22. As to the tjniD of the prophet Iddo, see the Introduction, p. 34. — Ver. 23. Under his son and successor Asa the land had a ten-years' rest. This is remarked here, because this rest was also a result of Abijah's great victory over Jeroboam.
In 1 Kings xv. 9-24 it is merely recorded of Asa, that he reigned forty-one years, did that which was right as David did, removed from the land all the idols which his fathers had made, and, although the high places were not removed, was devoted to the Lord during his whole life, and laid up in the temple treasury all that had been consecrated by his father and himself. Then it is related that when Baasha marched against him, and began to fortify Ramah, he induced the Syrian king Benhadad, by sending to him the treasures of the temple and of his palace, to break faith with Baasha, and to make an inroad upon and smite the northern portion of the land; that Baasha was thereby compelled to abandon the building of Ramah, and to fall back to Tirzah, and that thereupon Asa caused the fortifications of Ramah to be pulled down, and the cities Geba in Benjamin and Mizpah to be fortified with the materials; and, finally, it is recorded that Asa in his old age became diseased in his feet, and died. The Chronicle also characterizes Asa as a pious king, who did that which was right, and removed the high places and sunpillars in the land; but gives, as to other matters, a much more detailed account of his reign of forty-one years. It states that in the first years, as the land had rest, he built fortified cities in Judah, and had an army fit for war (xiv. 1-7); that thereupon he marched against the Cushite Zerah, who was then advancing upon Judah with an innumerable host, prayed for help to the Lord, who then smote the Cushites, so that they fled; and that Asa pursued them to Gerar, and returned with great booty (vers. 8-14). Then we learn that the prophet Azariah, the son of Oded, came to meet him, who, pointing to the victory which the Lord had granted them, called upon the king and the people to remain stedfast in their fidelity to the Lord; that Asa thereupon took courage, extirpated all the still remaining idolatrous abominations from the land, and in the fifteenth year of his reign held with the people a great sacrificial feast in Jerusalem, renewed the covenant with the Lord, crushed out all the remains of former idolatry, although the high places were not destroyed, and also deposited in the temple treasury all that had been consecrated by his father and himself (chap. xv.). Thereafter Baasha's inroad upon Judah and the alliance with Benhadad of Syria are narrated (xvi. 1-6), as in the book of Kings; but it is also added that the prophet Hanani censured his seeking help from the king of Syria, and was thereupon put into the prison-house by Asa (vers. 7-10); and then we have an account of the end of his reign, in which several additions to the account in 1 Kings are communicated (vers. 11-14).
Chap. xiv. 1-7. — Asa's efforts for the abolition of idolatry and the establishment of the kingdom. — Vers. 1-4. The good and right in God's eyes which Asa did is further defined in vers. 2-4. He abolished all the objects of the idolatrous worship. The u altars of the strangers" are altars consecrated to foreign gods; from them the rti©3, higli places, are distinguished, — these latter being illegal places of sacrifice connected with the worship of Jahve (see on 1 Kings xv. 14). The ni35fD are the statues or monumental columns consecrated to Baal, and B^K the wooden idols, tree-trunks, or trees, which were consecrated to Astarte (see on 1 Kings xiv. 23 and Deut. xvi. 21). Asa at the same time commanded the people to worship Jahve, the God of the fathers, and to follow the law. — Ver. 4. He removed from all the cities of Judah the altars of the high places, and the Q^n, sun-pillars, pillars or statues consecrated -to Baal as sun-god, which were erected near or upon the altars of Baal (2 Chron. xxxiv. 4; see on Lev. xxvi. 30). In consequence of this the kingdom had rest WB7, before him, i.e. under his oversight (cf. Num. viii. 22). This ten-years' quiet (xiii. 23) which God granted him, Asa employed in building fortresses in Judah (ver. 5). u We will build these cities, and surround them with walls and towers, gates and bolts." It is not said what the cities were, but they were at any rate others than Geba and Mizpah, which he caused to be built after the war with Baasha (xvi. 6). u The land is still before us," i.e. open, free from enemies, so that we may freely move about, and build therein according to our pleasure. For the phraseology, cf. Gen. xiii. 9. The repetition of ttBhtt, ver. 6, is impassioned speech. u They built and had success;" they built with effect, without meeting with any hir drances. — Yer. 7. Asa had also a well-equipped, well-armed arm; The men of Judah were armed with a lanje shield and lane (cf. 1 Chron. xii. 24), the Benjamites with a small shield an bow (cf. 1 Chron. viii. 40). The numbers are great; of Juda 300,000, of Benjamin 280,000 men. Since in these numbei the whole population capable of bearing arms is included, 300,00 men does not appear too large for Judah, but 280,000 is a vei large number for Benjamin, and is founded probably on a overestimate.
Vers. 8-14. The victory over the Cushite Zerah. — Ver. { " And there went forth against them Zerah." DrvpK f0r DST, refers to Asa's warriors mentioned in ver. 7. The number c the men in Judah capable of bearing arms is mentioned onl to show that Asa set his hope of victory over the innumerab] host of the Cushites not on the strength of his army, but o the all-powerful help of the Lord (ver. 10). The Cushite rnj: usually identified with the second king of the 22d (Bubastitic dynasty, Osorchon I.; while Brugsch, hist, de VEg. i. p. 29£ on the contrary, has raised objections, and holds Zerah to be a Ethiopian and not an Egyptian prince, who in the reign c Takeloth I., about 944 B.C., probably marched through Egypt a a conqueror (cf. G. Rosch in Herz.'s Realenc. xviii. S. 460' The statement as to Zerah's army, that it numbered 1,000,00 warriors and 300 war-chariots, rests upon a rough estimate, i which 1000 times 1000 expresses the idea of the greatest pos sible number. The Cushites pressed forward to Mareshah, i.t Marissa, between Hebron and Ashdod (see on xi. 8). — Ver. S Thither Asa marched to meet them, and drew up his army i: battle array in the valley Zephathah, near Mareshah. Th valley Zephathah is not, as Robins., Pal. sub voce, thinks, to b identified with Tel es Safieh, but must lie nearer Mareshah, t the west or north-west of Marasch. — Ver. 10. Then he calle< upon the Lord his God for help, 'tfl IB? T^ we translate, wit] Berth., "None is with Thee (on TfV, cf. xx. G, Ps. lxxiii. 25) t help between a mighty one and a weak," i.e. no other than Thoi can help in an unequal battle, i.e. help the weaker side; whil the Vulg., on the contrary, after the analogy of 1 Sam. xiv. (3 translates, " non est apud te idla distantia, utrum in paucis auxili eris an inpluribus;" and the older commentators (Schmidt, Ramb. give the meaning thus: u perinde est tibi potentiori vel imbecillior opem fewer But in 1 Sam. xiv. 16 the wording is different, so that that passage cannot be a standard for us here. " In Thy name (i.e. trusting in Thy help) are we come against this multitude" (not "have we fallen upon this multitude"), 'til 1'SP h*, "Let not a mortal retain strength with Thee" (">¥}> = nb ^V, xiii. 20, 1 Chron. xxix. 14), i.e. let not weak men accomplish anything with Thee, show Thy power or omnipotence over weak men. — Ver. 11. God heard this prayer. Jahve drove the Cushites into flight before Asa, soil, by His mighty help. — Ver. 12. Asa, with his people, pursued to Gerar, the old ancient Philistine city, whose ruins Rowlands has discovered in the Khirbet el Gerar, in the Wady Jorf el Gerar (the torrent of Gerar), three leagues south-south-east of G aza (see on Gen. xx. 1). " And there fell of the Cushites, so that to them was not revival," i.e. so many that they could not make a stand and again collect themselves, ut eis vivifccatio i. e. copias restaurandi ratio non esset, as older commentators, in Annott. uberior. ad h. Z., have already rightly interpreted it. The words are expressions for complete defeat. Berth, translates incorrectly: "until to them was nothing living;" for fN? does not stand for ffcO *W, but? serves to subordinate the clause, " so that no one," where in the older language pN alone would have been sufficient, as in xx. 25, 1 Chron. xxii. 4, cf. Ew. § 315, c; and AMID denotes, not "a living thing," but only " preservation of life, vivification, revival, maintenance." For they were broken before Jahve and before His host. ^0*?, i.e. Asa's army is called Jahve's, because Jahve fought in and with it against the enemy. There is no reason to suppose, with some older commentators, that there is any reference to an angelic host or heavenly camp (Gen. xxxii. 2 f.). And they (Asa and his people) brought back very much booty. — Ver. 13. " They smote all the cities round about Gerar," which, as we must conclude from this, had made common cause with the Cushites, being inhabited by Philistines; for the fear of Jahve had fallen upon them, nirv ins here, and in xvii. 10, xx. 29, as in 1 Sam. xi. 7, the fear of the omnipotence displayed by Jahve in the annihilation of the innumerable hostile army. In these cities Judah found much booty. — Ver. 14. They also smote the tents of the herds of the wandering tribes of that district, and carried away many sheep and camels as booty.
Chap. xv. The prophet Azarialis exhortation to faithful cleaving to the Lord, and the solemn renewal of the covenant. —
Vers. 1-7. The prophet's speech. The prophet Azariah, the son of Oded, is mentioned only here. The conjecture of some of the older theologians, that Tlty was the same person as fa? (xii. 15, ix. 29), has no tenable foundation. Azariah went to meet the king and people returning from the war Q2JS? NV^ he went forth in the presence of Asa, i.e. coming before him; cf. xxviii. 9, 1 Chron. xii. 17, xiv. 8). " Jahve was with you (has given you the victory), because ye were with Him (held to Him)." Hence the general lesson is drawn: If ye seek Him, He will be found of you (cf. Jer. xxix. 13); and if ye forsake Him, He will forsake you (cf. xxiv. 20, xii. 5). To impress the people deeply with this truth, Azariah draws a powerful picture of the times when a people is forsaken by God, when peace and security in social intercourse disappear, and the terrors of civil war prevail. Opinions as to the reference intended in this portrayal of the dreadful results of defection from God have been from antiquity very much divided. Tremell. and Grot., following the Targ., take the words to refer to the condition of the kingdom of the ten tribes at that time; others think they refer to the past, either to the immediately preceding period of the kingdom of Judah, to the times of the defection under Rehoboam and Abijah, before Asa had suppressed idolatry (Syr., Arab., Raschi), or to the more distant past, the anarchic period of the judges, from Joshua's death, and that of the high priest Phinehas, until Eli and Samuel's reformation (so especially Vitringa, de synag, vet, p. 335 sqq.). Finally, still others (Luther, Clericus, Budd., etc.) interpret the words as prophetic, as descriptive of the future, and make them refer either to the unquiet times under the later idolatrous kings, to the times of the Assyrian or Chaldean exile (Kimchi), or to the condition of the Jews since the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans up till the present day. Of these three viewrs, the first, that which takes the reference to be to the present, i.e. the state of the kingdom of the ten tribes at that time, is decidedly erroneous; for during the first thirty years of the existence of that kingdom no such anarchic state of things existed as is portrayed in vers. 5 and 6, and still less could a return of the ten tribes to the Lord at that time be spoken of (ver. 4). It is more difficult to decide between the two other main views. The grounds which Vitr., Ramb., Berth, adduce in support of the reference to the times of the judges are not convincing; for the contents and form (ver. 4) do not prove that here something is asserted which has been confirmed by history, and still less is it manifest (ver. 5) that past times are pointed to. Whether the statement about the return to Jahve in the times of trouble (ver. 4) refers to the past or to the future, depends upon whether the past or future is spoken of in ver. 3. But the unquiet condition of things portrayed in ver. 5 corresponds partly to various times in the period of the judges; and if, with Vitr., we compare the general characteristics of the religious condition of the times of the judges (Judg. ii. 10 ff.), we might certainly say that Israel in those times was without '■rpK riEK, as it again and again forsook Jahve and served the Baals. And moreover, several examples of the oppression of Israel portrayed in vers. 5 and 6 may be adduced from the time of the judges. Yet the words in ver. 6, even when their rhetorical character is taken into account, are too strong for the anarchic state of things during the period of the judges, and the internal struggles of that time (Judg. xii. 1-6 and chap. xx. f.). And consequently, although Vitr. and Ramb. think that a reference to experiences already past, and oppressions already lived through, would have made a much deeper impression than pointing forward to future periods of oppression, yet Ramb. himself remarks, nihilominus tamen in sceculis Asce imperium antegressis vix ullum tempus post ingressum in terram Canaan et constitutam rempubl. Israel, posse ostendi, cui omnia criteria hujus orationis proplietico? omni ex parte et secundum omnia pondera verbis insita conveniant. But, without doubt, the omission of any definite statement of the time in ver. 3 is decisive against the exclusive reference of this speech to the past, and to the period of the judges. The verse contains no verb, so that the words may just as well refer to the past as to the future. The prophet has not stated the time definitely, because he was giving utterance to truths which have force at all times,1 and which Israel had had experience of already in the time of the judges, but would have much deeper experience of in the future.
We must take the words in this general sense, and supply neither a preterite nor a future in ver. 3, neither fuerant nor erunty but must express the first clause by the present in English:
1 As Ramb. therefore rightly remcirks, " Vatem videri consulto abstinuisse a dclerminatione temporis, ut vela sensui quam amplissime panderentur% verbaque omnibus lemporum periodis adplicari posse ut, in quibus criteria hie rccensita adparcaut.'11 u Many days are for Israel (i.e. Israel lives many days) without the true God, and without teaching priests, and without law." CBI D^BJ is not accus. of time (Berth.), but the subject of the sentence; and 'npx K?? is not subject — u during many days there wras to the people Israel no true God" (Berth.) — but predicate, while p expresses the condition into which anything comes, and tih forms part of the following noun: Days for Israel for having not a true God. N?p differs from N?3, "without," just as p differs from 3; the latter expressing the being in a condition, the former the coming into it. On DDK TOK, cf. Jer. x. 10. iTlto \r\h is not to be limited to the high priest, for it refers to the priests in general, whose office it was to teach the people law and justice (Lev. x. 10; Deut. xxxiii. 10). The accent is upon the predicates HEN and Fnto. Israel had indeed Elohim, but not the true God, and also priests, but not priests who attended to their office, who watched over the fulfilment of the law; and so they had no "T^, notwithstanding the book of the law composed by Moses. — Ver. 5. " And in these times is no peace to those going out or to those coming in." Free peaceful intercommunication is interfered with (cf. Judg. v. 6, vi. 2), but great terrors upon all inhabitants of the lands (niV"iNH are, according to the usage of the chronicler, the various districts of the land of Israel). — Ver. 6. "And one people is dashed in pieces by the other, and one city by the other; for God confounds them by all manner of adversity." Don denotes confusion, which God brings about in order to destroy His enemies (Ex. xiv. 24; Josh. x. 10; Judg. iv. 15). Days when they were without the true God, without teaching prophets, and without law, Israel had already experienced in the times of defection after Joshua (cf. Judg. ii. 11 ff.), but will experience them in the future still oftener and more enduringly under the idolatrous kings in the Assyrian and Babylonian exile, and still even now in its dispersion among all nations. That this saying refers to the future is also suggested by the fact that Iiosea (chap. iii. and iv.) utters, with a manifest reference to ver. 3 of our speech, a threat that the ten tribes will be brought into a similar condition (cf. Hos. ix. 3, 4); and even Moses proclaimed to the people that the punishment of defection from the Lord would be dispersion among the heathen, where Israel would be compelled to serve idols of wood and stone (Deut. iv. 27 ff., xxviii. 36, G4), i.e. would be without the true God. That Israel would, in such oppression, turn to its God, would seek Him, and that the Lord would be found of them, is a thought also expressed by Moses, the truth of which Israel had not only had repeated experience of during the time of the judges, but also would again often experience in the future (cf. Hos. iii. 5; Jer. xxxi. 1; Ezek. xxxvi. 24 ff.; Rom. xi. 25 ff.). fir "I2T3 refers back to Deut. iv. 30; the expression in ver. 46 is founded upon Deut. iv. 29 (cf. Isa. Iv. 6). — Of the oppression in the times of defection portrayed in ver. 5 f., Israel had also had in the time of the judges repeated experience (cf. Judg. v. 6), most of all under the Midianite yoke (Judg. vi. 2); but such times often returned, as the employment of the very words of the first hemistich of ver. 5 in Zech. viii. 10, in reference to the events of the postexilic time, shows; and not only the prophet Amos (iii. 9) sees nisn ntonpj great confusions, where all is in an indistinguishable whirl in the Samaria of his time, but they repeated themselves at all times when the defection prevailed, and godlessness degenerated into revolution and civil war. Azariah portrays the terrors of such times in strong colours (ver. 6): u Dashed to pieces is people by people, and city by city." The war of the tribes of Israel against Benjamin (Judg. xx. f.), and the struggle of the Gileadites under Jephthah with Ephraim (Judg. xii. 4 ff.), were civil wars; but they were only mild preludes of the helium omnium contra omnes depicted by Azariah, which only commenced with the dissolution of both kingdoms, and was announced by the later prophets as the beginning of the judgment upon rebellious Israel (e.g. Isa. ix. 17-20), and upon all peoples and kingdoms hostile to God (Zech. xiv. 13; Matt. xxiv. 7). With D"»r6K »3 DDDH cf. nfi '" noinD, Zech. xiv. 13. To this portrayal of the dread results of defection from the Lord, Azariah adds (ver. 7) the exhortation, u Be ye strong (vigorous), and show yourselves not slack, languid" (cf. Zeph. iii. 16; Neh. vi. 9); i.e., in this connection, proceed courageously and vigorously to keep yourselves true to the Lord, to exterminate all idolatry; then you shall obtain a great reward: cf. on these words, Jer. xxxi. 16.
Vers. 8-18. Completion of the reform in worship, and the renewal of the covenant. — Ver. 8. The speech and prophecy of the prophet strengthened the king to carry out the work he had begun, viz. the extirpation of idolatry from the whole land. In ver. 8 the words fc^aan Try are surprising, not only because the prophet is called in ver. 1, not Oded, but Azariah the son of Oded, but also on account of the preceding nx^n 'm the absolute state, which cannot stand, without more ado, for the stat. constr. nw33 (cf. ix. 29). The view of Cler. and Ew., that by an orthographical error »? W^W has been dropped out, does not remove the difficulty, for it leaves the stat, ahsol. HKQ5fl unexplained. This is also the case with the attempt to explain the name Oded in ver. 8 by transposing the wTords Azariah ben Oded, ver. 1, so as to obtain Oded ben Azariah (Movers); and there seems to be no other solution of the difficulty than to strike out the words Oded the prophet from the text as a gloss which has crept into it (Berth.), or to suppose that there is a considerable hiatus in the text caused by the dropping out of the words fa VJHR "iT\ "rate.1 PJWiri corresponds to fylft. Asa complied with the exhortation, and removed ("*?J!5, as in 1 Kings xv. 12) all abominations (idols) from the whole land, and from the cities which he had taken from Mount Ephraim: these are the cities which Asa's father Abijah had conquered, xiii. 19. u And he renewed the altar before the porch," i.e. the altar of burnt-offering, which might stand in need of repairs sixty years after the building of the temple. The Vulg. is incorrect in translating dedicavit, and Berth, in supposing that the renovation refers only to a purification of it from defilement by idolatry. K^n is everywhere to renew, repair, restaurare; cf. xxiv. 4. — But in order to give internal stability to the reform he had begun, Asa prepared a great sacrificial festival, to which he invited the people out of all the kingdom, and induced them to renew the covenant with the Lord. Ver. 9. He gathered together the whole of Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers out of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon, who dwelt among them. Strangers, i.e. Israelites from the ten tribes, had come over as early as Rehoboam's reign to the kingdom of Judah (xi. 16); these immigrations increased under Asa when it was seen that Jahve was with him, and had given him a great victory over the Cushites. It is surprising that Simeon should be mentioned among the tribes from which Israelites went over to the kingdom of Judah, since Simeon had received his heritage in the southern district of the tribal domain of Judah, so that at the division of the kingdom it could not well separate itself from
1 C. P. Caspari, der Syriscli-cphraimitisclic Kricy, Christian. 1849, S. 51, explains the absol. riN^n by an ellipse, as in Isa. iii. 14, viii. 11, " the prophecy (that) of Oded," but answers the question why Oded is used in ver. 8 instead of Azarjahu ben Oded by various conjectures, none of which can be looked upon as probable.
Judah, and join with the tribes who had revolted from the house of David. The grouping together of Simeon, Ephraim, and Manasseh, both in our verse and in xxxiv. 6, can consequently scarcely be otherwise explained than by the supposition, either that a part of the Simeonites had in course of time emigrated from the cities assigned to them under Joshua into districts in the northern kingdom (Berth.), or that the Simeonites, though politically united with Judah, yet in religious matters were not so, but abstained from taking part in the Jahve-worship in Jerusalem, and had set up in Beersheba a worship of their own similar to that in Bethel and Dan. In such a case, the more earnest and thoughtful people from Simeon, as well as from Ephraim and Manasseh, may have gone to Jerusalem to the sacrificial festival prepared by Asa. In favour of this last supposition we may adduce the fact that the prophet Amos, chap. v. 5, iv. 4, viii. 14, mentions Beersheba, along with Bethel and Gilgal, as a place to which pilgrimages were made by the idolatrous Israelites. — Ver. 10 f. At this festival, which was held on the third month of the fifteenth year of Asa's reign, they offered of the booty, i.e. of the cattle captured in the war against the Cushites (xiv. 14), 700 oxen and 7000 sheep. ^?n Sv#n"|D defines the ^naw more closely: they sacrificed, viz. from the booty they offered. From this it seems to follow that the sacrificial festival was held soon after the return from the war against the Cushites. The attack of the Cushite Zerah upon Judah can only have occurred in the eleventh year of Asa, according to xiii. 23; but it is not stated how long the war lasted, nor when Asa returned to Jerusalem (xiv. 14) after conquering the enemy and plundering the towns of the south land. But Asa may quite well have remained longer in the south after the Cushites had been driven back, in order again firmly to establish his rule there; and on his return to Jerusalem, in consequence of the exhortation of the prophet Azariah, may have straightway determined to hold a sacrificial festival at which the whole people should renew the covenant with the Lord, and have set apart and reserved a portion of the captured cattle for this purpose. — Ver. 12. And they entered into the covenant, i.e. they renewed the covenant, bound themselves by a promise on oath (njp2K*? ver. 14) to hold the covenant, viz. to worship Jahve the God of the fathers with their whole heart and soul; cf. Deut. iv. 29. With nnaa Kte, cf. Jer. xxxiv. 10.— Ver, 13 f. To attest the sincerity of their return to the Lord, they determined at the same time to punish defection from Jalive on the part of any one, without respect to age or sex, with death, according to the command in Deut. xvii. 2-6. TtffVO chl so, not to worship Jahve, is substantially the same as to serve other gods, Deut. xvii. 3. This they swore aloud and solemnly, njftTfl33 with joyful shouting and the sound of trumpets and horns. — Ver. 15. This return to the Lord brought joy to all Judah, i.e. to the whole kingdom, because they had sworn with all their heart, and sought the Lord Djfcrrt^j with perfect willingness and alacrity. Therefore Jalive was found of them, and gave them rest round about. — In vers. 16-18, in conclusion, everything which still remained to be said of Asa's efforts to promote the Jahve-worship is gathered up. Even the queen-mother Maachah was deposed by him from the dignity of ruler because she had made herself an image of Asherah; yet he did not succeed in wholly removing the altars on the high places from the land, etc. These statements are also to be found in 1 Kings xv. 13-16, and are commented upon at that place. Only in the Chronicle we have NDK BN instead of ittK (Kings), because there Maachah had just been named (ver. 10); and to the statement as to the abolition of idolatry, pT, crushed, is added, and in ver. 17 ^tt^n?; while, on the other hand, after ata", W &y is omitted, as not being necessary to the expression of the meaning.
Ver. 19 is different from 1 Kings xv. 16. In the latter passage it is said: war was between Asa and Baasha the king of Israel CITO11."^, i.e. so long as both reigned contemporaneously; while in the Chronicle it is said: war was not until the thirty- fifth year of Asa's reign. This discrepancy is partly got rid of by taking nrjnpp in the book of Kings to denote the latent hostility or inimical attitude of the two kingdoms towards each other, and in the Chronicle to denote a war openly declared. The date, until the thirty-fifth year, causes a greater difficulty; but this has been explained in chap. xvi. 1 by the supposition that in the thirty-sixth year of Asa's reign war broke out between Asa and Baasha, when the meaning of our 16th verse would be: It did not come to war with Baasha until the thirty-sixth year of Asa's rule. For further remarks on this, see on xvi. 1.
Chap. xvi. War with Baasha, and the weakness of Asa's faith. TJie end of his reign. — Vers. 1-6. Baasha's invasion of Judah, and Asa's prayer for help to the king of Syria. The statement, " In the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Asa, Baasha the king of Israel came up against Judah," is inaccurate, or rather cannot possibly be correct; for, according to 1 Kings xvi. 8, 10, Baasha died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa's reign, and his successor Elah was murdered by Zimri in the second year of his reign, i.e. in the twenty-seventh year of Asa. The older commentators, for the most part, accepted the conjecture that the thirty-fifth year (in xv. 19) is to be reckoned from the commencement of the kingdom of Judah; and consequently, since Asa became king in the twentieth year of the kingdom of Judah, that Baasha' s invasion occurred in the sixteenth year of his reign, and that the land had enjoyed peace till his fifteenth year; cf. Ramb. ad h. L; des Vignoles, Chronol. i. p. 299. This is in substance correct; but the statement, " in the thirty-sixth year of Asa's kingship," cannot be reconciled with it. For even if we suppose that the author of the Chronicle derived his information from an authority which reckoned from the rise of the kingdom of Judah, yet it could not have been said on that authority, ND? Tfi7?iy}, This only the author of the Chronicle can have written; but then he cannot also have taken over the statement, u in the thirty-sixth year," unaltered from his authority into his book. There remains therefore no alternative but to regard the text as erroneous, — the letters? (30) and * (10), which are somewhat similar in the ancient Hebrew characters, having been interchanged by a copyist; and hence the numbers 35 and 36 have arisen out of the original 15 and 16. By this alteration all difficulties are removed, and all the statements of the Chronicle as to Asa's reiim are harmonized. During the first ten years there was peace (xiii. 23); thereafter, in the eleventh year, the inroad of the Cushites; and after the victory over them there wras the continuation of the Cultus reform, and rest until the fifteenth year, in which the renewal of the covenant took place (xv. 19, cf. with ver. 10); and in the sixteenth year the war with Baasha arose.1 The account of this war in vers. 1-6 agrees with that in 1 Kings xv. 17-22 almost literally, and has been commented upon in the remarks on 1 Kings xv. In ver. 2 the author of the Chronicle has mentioned only the main things. Abel-Maim, i.e. Abel in the Water (ver. 4), is only another name for Abel-Beth- Maachah (Kings); see on 2 Sam. xx. 14. In the same verse
1 Movers, S. 255 fT., and Then, on 1 Kings xv., launch out into arbitrary hypotheses, founded in both cases upon the erroneous presumption that the author of the Chronicle copied our canonical books of Kings — they being his authority — partly misunderstanding and partly altering them.
OTM njj nfa3DB~?3 DfcO is surprising, " and all magazines (or stores) of the cities of Naphtali," instead of DJ?"^ ^ nh33"^3 nx "6fiSJ, "all Kinneroth, together with all the land of Naphtali" (Kings). Then, and Berth, think ny ffl33DD has arisen out of pK and ni"U3 by a misconception of the reading; while Gesen., Dietr. in Lex. sub voce nfa|3, conjecture that in 1 Kings xv. 20 rtopo should be read instead of nii33. Should the difference actually be the result only of a misconception, then the latter conjecture would have much more in its favour than the first. But it is a more probable solution of the difficulty that the text of the Chronicle is a translation of the unusual and, especially on account of the '3 H*"'??V7 scarcely intelligible nfa33~?3. Dh33 is the designation of the very fertile district on the west side of the Sea of Kinnereth, i.e. Gennesaret, after which a city also wTas called rnga (see on Josh. xix. 35), and which, on account of its fertility, might be called the granary of ther tribal domain of Naphtali. But the smiting of a district can only be a devastation of it, — a plundering and destruction of its produce, both in stores and elsewhere. With this idea the author of the Chronicle, instead of the district Kinnereth, the name of which had perhaps become obsolete in his time, speaks of the rtoDDj the magazines or stores, of the cities of Naphtali. In ver. 5, too, we cannot hold the addition ifi3N?p"TiK nstJ^J, a he caused his work to rest," as Berth, does, for an interpretation of the original reading, n^finn 3^*5 (Kings), it having become illegible: it is rather a free rendering of the thought that Baasha abandoned his attempt upon Judah. — Ver. 6. In regard to the building of Mizpah, it is casually remarked in Jer. xli. 9 that Asa had there built a cistern.
Vers. 7-10. The rebuke of the prophet Hanani, and Asa's crime. — Ver. 7. The prophet Hanani is met with only here. Jehu, the son of Hanani, who announced to Baasha the ruin of his house (1 Kings xvi. 1), and who reappears under Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xix. 2), was without doubt his son. Hanani said to King Asa, " Because thou hast relied on the king of Aram, and not upon Jahve thy God, therefore is the host of the king of Aram escaped out of thy hand.', Berth, has correctly given the meaning thus: "that Asa, if he had relied upon God, would have conquered not only the host of Baasha, but also the host of the king of Damascus, if he had, as was to be feared, in accordance with his league with Baasha (ver. 3), in common with Israel, made an attack upon the kingdom of Judah." To confirm this statement, the prophet points to the victory over the great army of the Cushites, which Asa had won by his trust in God the Lord. With the Cushites Hanani names also D^v, Libyans (cf. xii. 3), and besides ^.j tne war-chariots, also E^K^S, horsemen, in order to portray the enemy rhetorically, while in the historical narrative only the immense number of warriors and the multitude of the chariots is spoken of. — Ver. 9. " For Jahve, His eyes run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show Himself strong with those whose heart is devoted to Him;" i.e.y for Jahve, who looks forth over all the earth, uses every opportunity wonderfully to succour those who are piously devoted to Him. DJJ P.^1?? to help mightily, as in 1 Chron. xi. 10. IvK a?& Dnnp'Dy is a relative sentence without the relative IKW with DJP; cf. 1 Chron. xv. 12. " Thou hast done foolishly, therefore," scil. because thou hast set thy trust upon men instead of upon Jahve, " for from henceforth there shall be wars to thee " (thou shalt have war). In these words the prophet does not announce to Asa definite wars, but only expresses the general idea that Asa by his godless policy would bring only wars (rri?5n?D in indefinite universality), not peace, to the kingdom. History confirms the truth of this announcement, although we have no record of any other wars which broke out under Asa. — Ver. 10. This sharp speech so angered the king, that he caused the seer to be set in the stockhouse. naBiTBh rps, properly, house of stocks, roano, twisting, is an instrument of torture, a stock, by which the body was forced into an unnatural twisted position, the victim perhaps being bent double, with the hands and feet fastened together: cf. Jer. xx. 2, xxix. 26; and Acts xvi. 24, eftakev eh tt]v <j>v\aktjv koX tol>5 7roSa9 ^o-^aXlaaro avroov eh to %v\ov. u For in wrath against him (sell, he did it) because of this thing, and Asa crushed some of the people at this time." Clearly Hanani's speech, and still more Asa's harsh treatment of the seer, caused great discontent among the people, at least in the upper classes, so that the king felt himself compelled to use force against them. YT\9 to break or crush, is frequently used along with P'^'V (Deut. xxviii. 33; 1 Sam. xii. 3, etc.), and signifies to suppress with violence. Asa had indeed well deserved the censure, Thou hast dealt foolishly. His folly consisted in this, that in order to get help against Baasha's attack, he had had recourse to a means which must become dangerous to him and to his kingdom; for it was not difficult to foresee that the Syrian king Benhada< would turn the superiority to Israel which he had gained agains Judah itself. But in order to estimate rightly Asa's conducl we must consider that it was perhaps an easier thing, in huma; estimation, to conquer the innumerable multitudes of the Ethic pian hordes than the united forces of the kings of Israel an Syria; and that, notwithstanding the victory over the Ethiopian: yet Asa's army may have been very considerably weakened b that war. But these circumstances are not sufficient to justif Asa. Since he had so manifestly had the help of the Lord i the war against the Cushites, it was at bottom mainly weaknes of faith, or want of full trust in the omnipotence of the Lore which caused him to seek the help of the enemy of God's peopk the king of Syria, instead of that of the Almighty God, and t make flesh his arm; and for this he was justly censured by th prophet.
Vers. 11-14. The end of AscCs reign; cf. 1 Kings xv. 23, 24 — On ver. 11, cf. the Introduction. — Ver. 12. In the thirty-nint year of his reign Asa became diseased in his feet, and that in high degree. The words i vn nbyiy?"iy are a circumstantial clause to a high degree was his sickness. a And also in his sickness (a in the war against Baasha) he sought not Jahve, but turned t the physicians." STH is primarily construed with the accus., a usually in connection with iTIfP or DwKj to seek God, to com before Him with prayer and supplication; then with 3, as usuall of an oracle, or seeking help of idols (cf. 1 Sam. xxviii. 7; Kings i. 2 ff.; 1 Chron. x. 14), and so here of superstitious trus in the physicians. Consequently it is not the mere inquirin of the physicians which is here censured, but only the godles manner in which Asa trusted in the physicians. — Ver. 14. Th Chronicle gives a more exact account of Asa's burial tha: 1 Kings xv. 24. He was buried in the city of David; not in th general tomb of the kings, however, but in a tomb which he ha caused to be prepared for himself in that place. And they lai him upon the bed, which had been filled with spices (D*Dfc>3j se Ex. xxx. 23), and those of various kinds, mixed for an anointing mixture, prepared. E^T from ft, kind, species; EMft, et vari quidem. n^"ip in Piel only here, properly spiced, from HjTlj t spice, usually to compound an unguent of various spices. nPIITjC the compounding of ointment; so also 1 Chron. ix. 30, where i is usually translated by unguent. ■"'W?, work, manufacture, is shortened terminus technicus for HgVl riwyft^ manufacture of the ointment-compounder (cf. Ex. xxx. 25, 35), and the conjecture that Hgh has been dropped out of the text by mistake is unnecessary. " And they kindled for him a great, very great burning," cf. xxi. 19 and Jer. xxxiv. 5, whence we gather that the kindling of a burning, i.e. the burning of odorous spices, was customary at the burials of kings. Here it is only remarked that at Asa's funeral an extraordinary quantity of spices was burnt. A burning of the corpse, or of the bed or clothes of the dead, is not to be thought of here: the Israelites were in the habit of burying their dead, not of burning them. That occurred only in extraordinary circumstances, — as, for example, in the case of the bodies of Saul and his sons; see on 1 Sam. xxxi. 12. The kindling and burning of spices at the solemn funerals of persons of princely rank, on the other hand, occurred also among other nations, e.g. among the Romans; cf. Plinii hist. nat. xii. 18, and M. Geier, de luctu Hebr. c. 6.
Jehoshaphat laboured to strengthen the kingdom both within and without. Not only did he place soldiers in the fenced cities, and removed the high places and the Astartes, but sought also to diffuse the knowledge of the law among the people, and by building castles and the possession of a well-equipped army, firmly to establish his power (chap. xvii.). In the course of years he married into the family of Ahab king of Israel, and, while on a visit in Samaria, allowed himself to be persuaded by Ahab to enter upon a joint war against the Syrians at Hamoth in Gilead, in which he all but lost his life, while King Ahab was mortally wounded in the battle (chap, xviii.). Censured on his return to Jerusalem by the prophet Jehu for this alliance with the godless Ahab, he sought still more earnestly to lead back his people to Jahve, the God of their fathers, bestirring himself to bring the administration of justice into a form in accordance with the law of God, and establishing a supreme tribunal in Jerusalem (chap. xix.). Thereafter, when the Moabitcs and Ammonites, with the Edomites and other desert tribes, made an inroad into Judah, the Lord gave him a wonderful victory over these enemies. At a later time he yet again allied himself with the Israelitish kins Ahaziah for the restoration of the commerce with Ophir; but the ships built for this purpose were broken in the harbour, so that the voyage was abandoned (chap. xx.). Of all these enterprises of Jehoshaphat, none are mentioned in the book of Kings except the campaign entered upon with Ahab against Ramoth in Gilead, which is found in the history of Ahab, 1 Kings xxii. 2-35. Jehoshaphat's reign itself is only characterized generally, but in such a way as to agree with the account in the Chronicle; and, in conclusion, the alliance with Ahaz for the purpose of making the voyage to Ophir is shortly narrated in 1 Kings xxii. 41-57, but in a form which differs considerably from that in which it is communicated in the Chronicle.
Chap. xvii. Jehoshaphat 's efforts to strengthen the kingdom, internally and externally. — Yer. 1, or rather the first half of this verse, belongs properly to the preceding chapter, since, when the son immediately follows the father on the throne, the successor is mentioned immediately: cf. ix. 31, xii. 16, xxiv. 27, xxvii. 9, etc. Here, however, the account of the accession to the throne is combined with a general remark on the reign of the successor, and therefore it is placed at the commencement of the account of the reign; while in the case of Asa (chap. xiii. 23) both come in immediately at the conclusion of the reign of his predecessor. Asa had shown himself weak against Israel, as he had sought help against Baasha's attack from the Syrians (xvi. 1 ff.), but it was otherwise with Jehoshaphat. He indeed put the fenced cities of his kingdom in a thoroughly good condition for defence, to protect his kingdom against hostile attacks from without (ver. 2); but he walked at the same time in the ways of the Lord, so that the Lord made his kingdom strong and mighty (vers. 3-5). This general characterization of his reign is in ver. 6 illustrated by facts: first by the communication of what Jehoshaphat did for the inner spiritual strengthening of the kingdom, by raising the standard of religion and morals among the people (vers. G— 11), and then by what he did for the external increase of his power (vers. 12-19).
Vers. 2-5. He placed forces (^n) in all the fenced cities of Judali, and garrisons (E^s??, military posts; cf. 1 Chron. xi. 16) in the land of Judah, and in the cities of Ephraim, which his father Asa had taken; cf. xv. 8. God blessed these undertakings. Jahve was with him, because he walked in the ways of David his ancestor, the former ways, and sought not the Baals. The former ways of David are his ways in the earlier years of his reign, in contrast to the later years, in which his adultery with
Bathsheba (2 Sam. xi. ff.) and the sin of numbering the people (1 Chron. xxi.) fall. By?3n are all false gods, in contrast to Jahve, the one God of Israel; and here the word designates not only the Baal- worship properly so called, but also the worship of Jahve by means of images, by which Jahve is brought down to the level of the Baals; cf. Judg. ii. 11. The f before Bvya stands, according to the later usage, as a sign of the accusative. In the last clause of ver. 4, " and not after the doings of Israel" (of the ten tribes), SpJ, "he walked," is to be repeated. The doing of Israel is the worship of Jahve through the images of the golden calves, which the author of the Chronicle includes in the DvJJab vrn, — Ver. 5. Therefore Jahve established the kingdom in his hand, i.e. under his rule; cf. 2 Kings xiv. 5. All Judah brought him presents. nmD? often used of tribute of subject peoples, e.g. in ver. 11 of the Philistines, cannot here have that signification; nor can it denote the regular imposts of subjects, for these are not called nrjJO; but must denote voluntary gifts which his subjects brought him as a token of their reverence and love. The last clause, " and there was to him (he attained) riches and honour in abundance," which is repeated xviii. 1, recalls 1 Chron. xxix. 28, 2 Chron. i. 12, and signifies that Jehoshaphat, like his ancestors David and Solomon, was blessed for walking in the pious ways of these his forefathers.
Vers. 6-9. This blessing encouraged Jehoshaphat to extirpate from the land all idolatrous worship, and to teach the people the law of the Lord. 2? ^22, usually sensu malo, to be haughty, proud, cf. e.g. xxvi. 16, xxxii. 25; here sensu bono, of rising courage to advance in ways pleasing to God: and he removed the high places also, etc. 1)V points back to ver. 3: not only did he himself keep far from the Baals, but he removed, besides, all memorials of the Baal-worship from Judah. On nion and &*!?'£, see on xiv. 2. — Ver. 7 ff. In the third year of his reign he sent five princes, i.e. laymen of high position, with nine Levites and two priests, into the cities of Judah, with the book of the law, to teach the law everywhere to the people. ^n~|a is nom. prop., like nDn'13, 1 Kings iv. 10, "^iJJ"!?, 1 Kings iv. 9, and is not to be translated as an adjective, as in LXX. and Syr., partly on account of the (? prcvf., and still more on account of the singular, for the plural <n ^3 must be used when it is in apposition to *?K9. Nothing further is known of the men named; the designation of them as D"1"^ suggests the idea that they were heads of families or fathers'-houses. i"1^"1^ sto, too (ver. 8), is one name. The " book of the law of Jahve " is the Pentateuch, not merely a collection of Mosaic laws, since in Jehoshaphat's time the Mosaic book of the law (the Pentateuch) had been long in existence, nw v-iyn 220 signifies to go through the cities of Juclah in different directions; DJJ21 IB?, to teach among the people (not the people). The mission of these men is called by the older theologians a solemn ecclesiarum visitatio, quam Josapliat laudabili exemplo per universum vegnum sitam instituit, and they differ in opinion only as to the part played by the princes in it. Vitringa, de synacjoga vet. p. 389, in agreement with Rashi, thinks that only the Levites and priests were deputed ut docerent; the princes, ut auctoritate imperioque suo populum erudiendum in officio continerent eumque de seria regis voluntate certiorem facerent; while others, e.g. Buddasus, refer to ver. 9, ubi principes pariter ac Levitce populum docuisse dicuntur, or believe with Grotius, docere et explicare legem non tantum sacerdolum erat et Levitaruniy sed omnium eruditorum. Both views contain elements of truth, and do not mutually exclude each other, but may be harmonized. We can hardly confine "1ft? to religious teaching. The Mosaic law contains a number of merely civil precepts, as to which laymen learned in the law might impart instruction; and consequently the teaching probably consisted not merely in making the people acquainted with the contents of the law, but at the same time of direction and guidance in keeping the law, and generally in restoring and confirming the authority of the law among the people. In connection with this there were many abuses and illegalities which had to be broken down and removed; so that in this respect the task of the commission sent round the country by Jehoshaphat may be compared to a church inspection, if only we understand thereby not an inspection of churches in the Christian sense of the words, but an inspection of the religious and moral life of the communities of Israel under the old covenant.
Vers. 10 and 11. This attempt of Jehoshaphat brought him this blessing, that the terror of Jahve fell upon all the surrounding kingdoms; and not only did none of the neighbouring peoples venture to make war upon him, but also various tribes did homage to him by presents. Eamb. has already so understood the connection of these verses (erat hoc prcumium pietatls Josaphatij quod vicini satisque potentes kostes non auderent adcersus ipsum hiscere); while Berth, fails to apprehend it, saying that Jehoshaphat had time to care for the instruction of his people, because at that time the neighbouring peoples did not venture to undertake war against Judah. The words " terror of Jahve," cf. xiv. 13, xx. 29, and " all the kingdoms of the lands," cf. xii. 8, 1 Chron. xxix. 30, are expressions peculiar to the author of the Chronicle, which show that by these remarks he is preparing the way for a transition to a more detailed portrayal of Jehoshaphat's political power. D^wpsrjD is subject, \0 partitive: some of the Philistines brought him presents (for nrUD see on ver. 5), " and silver a burden," i.e. in great quantity. KfrD does not signify tribute, vectigal argento (Vulg.), for the word has not that signification, but denotes burden, that which can be carried, as in Kfro fw, xx. 25. — DW?}? or B^IV, xxvi. 7, and more usually D^IV, xxi. 16, xxii. 1, are Arabian nomadic tribes (Bedawin), perhaps those whom Asa, after his victory over the Cushite Zerah, had brought under the kingdom of Judah, xiv. 14. These paid their tribute in small cattle, rams, and he-goats. (B^n, Gen. xxx. 35, xxxii. 15, Prov. xxx. 31.)
Vers. 12-19. Description of JehoshapliaCs power. — Ver. 12. And Jehoshaphat became ever greater, sc. in power. The partic. T);in expresses the continuous advance in greatness, cf. Ew. § 280, b, as the infin. absol. does elsewhere, e.g. Gen. viii. 3. ■"1?y}?? "W as in xvi. 12. — He built castles in Judah. HlWa^ only here and in xxvii. 4, from nwa^ derivative formed from HT3 by the Syriac termination N}~9fem. of \—: castle, fortress. On ni:3DD "ny cf. viii. 4.— -Ver. 13. "tfl nan na^DI is rightly translated by Luther, " und hatte viel Vorraths" (and had much store). nDK7D denotes here, as in Ex. xxii. 7—10, property, that which has been gained by work or business. The signification, much work, opera magna (Vulg., Cler., etc.), as also Bertheau's translation, " the works for equipping and provisioning the fortresses," correspond neither to the context nor to the parallel (synonymous) second member of the verse. The work and trouble necessary to equip the cities of Judah does not correspond to u the valiant warriors in Jerusalem;" the only parallel is the goods and property which were in these cities, the provision of victuals and war material there stored up. — Vers. 14-19. The men fit for war passed in review according to their fathers'-houses. The male population of Judah fell into three divisions, that of Benjamin into two. The prince Adnah held the first place among the generals, with 300,000 men of
Judah. iT?V, at his hand, i.e. with and under him, Jehohanan had the command of 280,000 men, and Amasiah over 200,000. "ifrn is a contraction for D^JN "fl?. For what special reason it is so honourably recorded of Amasiah that he had willingly offered himself to the Lord (cf. for MTUl, Judg. v. 9) has not been communicated.— Ver. 17 f. The Benjamites fell into two detachments: archers with shields (cf. 1 Chron. viii. 40) 200,000 men, under the chief command of Eliada, and " equipped of the army," i.e. not heavy armed (Berth.), but provided with the usual weapons, sword, spear, and shield (cf. 1 Chron. xii. 24), 180,000 under the command of Jehozabad. According to this statement, Judah had 780,000 warriors capable of bearing arms. These numbers are clearly too large, and bear no proportion to tli^ result of the numbering of the people capable of bearing arms under David, when there were in Judah only 500,000 or 470,000 men (cf. 1 Chron. xxi. 5 with 2 Sam. xxiv. 5); yet the sums of the single divisions appear duly proportioned, — a fact which renders it more difficult to believe that these exaggerated numbers are the result of orthographical errors. — Ver. 19. These were serving the king, n?K refers not to the above-mentioned men capable of bearing arms, for TVjg is not used of service in war, but to the commanders whom he had placed in the fortified cities of all Judah, " in which probably bodies of the above-mentioned troops lay as garrisons" (Berth.).
Chap, xviii. Jehoshaphat? s marriage alliance with Ahab, and his campaign with Ahab against the Syrians at Ramoth in Gilead. — Ver. 1. Jehoshaphat came into connection by marriage with Ahab through his son Joram taking Athaliah, a daughter of Ahab, to wife (xxi. 6); an event which did not take place on the visit made by Jehoshaphat to Ahab in his palace at Samaria, and recorded in ver. 2, but which had preceded that by about nine years. That visit falls in the beginning of the year in which Ahab was mortally wounded at Ramoth, and died, i.e. the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat's reign. But at that time Ahaziah, the son of Joram and Athaliah, was already from eight to nine years old, since thirteen years later he became king at the age of twenty-two; 2 Kings viii. 26, cf. with the chronol. table to 1 Kings xii. The marriage connection is mentioned in order to account for Jehoshaphat's visit to Samaria (ver. 2), and liis alliance with Ahab in the war against the Syrians; but it is also introduced by a reference to Jehoshaphat's riches and his royal splendour, repeated from chap. xvii. 5. In the opinion of many commentators, this is stated to account for Ahab's willingness to connect his family by marriage with that of Jehoshaphat. This opinion might be tenable were it Ahab's entering upon a marriage connection with Jehoshaphat which is spoken of; but for Jehoshaphat, of whom it is related that he entered into a marriage connection with Ahab, his own great wealth could not be a motive for his action in that matter. If we consider, first, that this marriage connection was very hurtful to the kingdom of Judah and the royal house of David, since Athaliah not only introduced the Phoenician idolatry into the kingdom, but also at the death of Ahaziah extirpated all the royal seed of the house of David, only the infant Joash of all the royal children being saved by the princess, a sister of Ahaziah, who was married to the high priest Jehoiada (xxii. 10—12); and, second, that Jehoshaphat was sharply censured by the prophet for his alliance with the criminal Ahab (xix. 2 ff.), and had, moreover, all but forfeited his life in the war (xviii. 34 f.), — we see that the author of the Chronicle can only have regarded the marriage connection between Jehoshaphat and Ahab as a mistake. By introducing this account of it by a second reference to Jehoshaphat's riches and power, he must therefore have intended to hint that Jehoshaphat had no need to enter into this relationship with the idolatrous house of Ahab, but had acted very inconsiderately in doing so. Schmidt has correctly stated the contents of the verse thus: Josapliatus cetera dives et gloriosus infelicem adfinitatem cum Achabo, rege Israelis, contrahit. With which side the proposals for thus connecting the two royal houses originated we are not anywhere informed. Even if the conjecture of Ramb., that Ahab proposed it to Jehoshaphat, be not well founded, yet so much is beyond doubt, namely, that Ahab not only desired the alliance, but also promoted it by every means in his power, since it must have been of great importance to him to gain in Jehoshaphat a strong ally against the hostile pressure of the Syrians. Jehoshaphat probably entered upon the alliance bono animo ct spe JirmandcB inter duo rcgna pads (Ramb.), without much thought of the dangers which a connection of this sort with the idolatrous Ahab and with Jezebel might bring upon his kingdom.
Vers. 2-34. The campaign undertaken along witli Ahab against the Syrians at Ramoth in Gilead, with its origin, course, and results for Ahab, is narrated in 1 Kings xxii. (in the history of
Ahab) in agreement with our narrative, only the introduction to the war being different here. In 1 Kings xxii. 1-3 it is remarked, in connection with the preceding wars of Ahab with the Syrians, that after there had been no war for three years between Aram and Israel, in the third year Jehoshaphat king of Judah came up to the king of Israel; and the latter, when he and his servants had determined to snatch away from the Syrians the city Ramoth in Gilead, which belonged to Israel, called upon Jehoshaphat to march with him to the war against Ramoth. In the Chronicle the more exact statement, " in the third year/' which is intelligible only in connection with the earlier history of Ahab, is exchanged for the indefinite D^t? Y\>b^ u at the end of years;" and mention is made of the festal entertainment which Ahab bestowed upon his guest and his train QW ""IPK DXfn), to show the pains which Ahab took to induce King Jehoshaphat to take part in the proposed campaign. He killed sheep and oxen for him in abundance, *niW1? and enticed, seduced him to go up with him to Ramoth. n^DH^ to incite, entice to anything (Judg. i. 14), frequently to evil; cf. Deut. xiii. 7, etc. TO, to advance upon a land or a city in a warlike sense. The account which follows of the preparations for the campaign by inquiring of prophets, and of the war itself, vers. 4—34, is in almost verbal agreement with 1 Kings xxii. 5-35. Referring to 1 Kings xxii. for the commentary on the substance of the narrative, we will here only group together briefly the divergences. Instead of 400 men who were prophets, ver. 5, in 1 Kings xxii. 6 we have about 400 men. It is a statement in round numbers, founded not upon exact enumeration, but upon an approximate estimate. Instead of ^jnK Di<... 7]7jn, ver. 5, in Kings, ver. 6, we have THflK DK... *^n, both verbs being in the same number; and so too in ver. 14, where in Kings, ver. 15, both verbs stand in the plural, notwithstanding that the answer which follows, npyrn TVVy is addressed to Ahab alone, not to both the kings, while in the Chronicle the answer is given in the plural to both the kings, in^pvrn w. In ver. 7«, u he prophesies me nothing good, but all his days (i.e. so long as he has been a prophet) evil," the meaning is intensified by the ^"TD, which is not found in 1 Kings ver. 8. In ver. 9, the B^n, which is introduced before the pja, " and sitting upon the threshing-floor," is due to difference of style, for it is quite superfluous for the signification. In ver. 14, the ambiguous words of Micah, u and Jahve will give into the hand of the king" (Kings, ver. 15), are given in a more definite form: "and they (the enemy) shall be given into your hand." In ver. 19, in the first n33 "lDfc JIT, the ">£K after the preceding TON'*! is not only superfluous, but improper, and has probably come into the text by a copyist's error. We should therefore read only nb3. fit, corresponding to the H33 nt of Kings, ver. 20: u Then spake one after this manner, and the other spake after another manner." In ver. 23, the indefinite npK 0f Kings, ver. 24, is elucidated by TO* '! % "is that the manner" (cf. 1 Kings xiii. 12; 2 Kings iii. 8), and the verb. ^V follows without the relative pronoun, as in the passages cited. In ver. 30, only 2D~)n *]K> of the king are mentioned, without any statement of the number, which is given in Kings, ver. 31, with a backward reference to the former war (1 Kings xx. 24). In ver. 31, after the words, " and Jehoshaphat cried out," the higher cause of Jehoshaphat's rescue is pointed out in the words, " and Jahve helped him, and God drove them from him," which are not found in Kings, ver. 32; but by this religious reflection the actual course of the event is in no way altered. Bertheau's remark, therefore, that " the words disturb the clear connection of the events," is quite unwarrantable. Finally, in ver. 34, *1W£ rvn? he was holding his position, i.e. he held himself standing upright, the Hiph. is more expressive than the Hoph. "W^ (Kings, ver. 35), since it expresses more definitely the fact that he held himself upright by his own strength. With Ahab's death, which took place in the evening at the time of the going down of the sun, the author of the Chronicle concludes his account of this war, and proceeds in chap. xix. to narrate the further course of Jehoshaphat's reign. In 1 Kings xxii. 36-39, the return of the defeated army, and the details as to Ahab's death and burial, are recorded; but these did not fit into the plan of the Chronicle.
Chap. xix. The prophet Jehus declaration as to Jehoshaphat's alliance with Ahab9 and Jehoshaphat's further efforts to promote the fear of God and the administration of justice in Judah. — Vers. 1-3. Jehu's declaration. Jehoshaphat returned from the war in which Ahab had lost his life, Ew3, i.e. safe, uninjured, to his house in Jerusalem; so that the promise of Micah in xviii. 166 was fulfilled also as regards him. But on his return, the seer Jehu, the son of Hanani, who had been thrown into the stocks by Asa (xvi. 7 ff.), met him with the reproving word, " Should one help the wicked, and lovest thou the haters of Jahve!" (the inf. with?, as in 1 Chron. v. 1, ix. 25, etc.). Of these sins Jehoshaphat had been guilty. " And therefore is anger from Jahve upon thee" (/V *)¥£ as in 1 Chron. xxvii. 24). Jehoshaphat had already had experience of this wrath, when in the battle of Ramoth the enemy pressed upon him (xviii. 31), and was at a later time to have still further experience of it, partly during his own life, when the enemy invaded his land (chap, xx.), and when he attempted to re-establish the sea trade with Ophir (xx. 35 ff.), partly after his death in his family (chap, xxi. and xxii.). "But," continues Jehu, to console him, "yet there are good things found in thee (cf. xii. 12), for thou hast destroyed the Asheroth..." Tvnm = D^WK, xvii. 6. On these last words, comp. xii. 14 and xvii. 4.
Vers. 4-11. — Jehosliaphat 's further arrangements for the revival of the Jahve-ivorship, and the establishment of a proper administration of justice. — The first two clauses in ver. 4 are logically connected thus: When Jehoshaphat (after his return from the war) sat (dwelt) in Jerusalem, he again went forth (fcWJ 1W are to be taken together) among the people, from Beersheba, the southern frontier (see 1 Chron. xxi. 2), to Mount Ephraim, the northern frontier of the kingdom of Judah, and brought them back to Jahve, the God of the fathers. The "again" (?&l) can refer only to the former provision for the instruction of the people, recorded in chap. xvii. 7 ff.; all that was effected by the commission which Jehoshaphat had sent throughout the land being regarded as his work. The instruction of the people in the law was intended to lead them back to the Lord. Jehoshaphat now again took up his work of reformation, in order to complete the work he had begun, by ordering and improving the administration of justice. — Ver. 5 ff. He set judges in the land, in all the fenced cities of Judah; they, as larger cities, being centres of communication for their respective neighbourhoods, and so best suited to be the seats of judges. Tjn TJPj in reference to every city, as the law (Deut. xvi. 18) prescribed. He laid it upon the consciences of these judges to administer justice conscientiously. " Not for men are ye to judge, but for Jahve;" i.e. not on the appointment and according to the will of men, but in the name and according to the will of the Lord (cf. Prov. xvi. 11). In the last clause of ver. 6, Jahve is to be supplied from the preceding context: " and Jahve is with you in judgment," i.e. in giving your decisions (cf. the conclusion of ver. 11); whence this clause, of course, only serves to strengthen the foregoing, only contains the thoughts already expressed in the law, that judgment belongs to God (cf. Deut. i. 17 with Ex. xxi. 6, xxii. 7 f.). Therefore the fear of the Lord should keep the judges from unrighteousness, so that they should neither allow themselves to be influenced by respect of persons, nor to be bribed by gifts, against which Deut. xvi. 19 and i. 17 also warns. ^W FIDS? is rightly paraphrased by the Vulgate, cum diligentia cuncta facite. The clause, " With God there is no respect of persons," etc., recalls Deut. x. 17. — Vers. 8-11. Besides this, Jehoshaphat established at Jerusalem a supreme tribunal for the decision of difficult cases, which the judges of the individual cities could not decide. Ver. 8. " Moreover, in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set certain of the Levites, and of the priests, and of the chiefs of the fathers'-houses of Israel, for the judgment of the Lord, and for controversies (2^?)." From this clause Berth, correctly draws the conclusion, that as in Jerusalem, so also in the fenced cities (ver. 5), it was Levites, priests, and heads of the fathers'-houses who were made judges. This conclusion is not inconsistent with the fact that David appointed 6000 of the Levites to be shoterim and judges; for it does not follow from that that none but Levites were appointed judges, but only that the Levites were to perform an essential part in the administration of the law. The foundation of the judicial body in Israel was the appointment of judges chosen from the elders of the people (Ex. xviii. 21 ff.; Deut. i. 15 ff.) by Moses, at Jethro's instigation, and under the divine sanction. David had no intention, by his appointment of some thousands of Levites to be officials (writers) and judges, to set aside the Mosaic arrangement; on the contrary, he thereby gave it the expansion which the advanced development of the kingdom required. For the simple relationships of the Mosaic time, the appointment of elders to be judges might have been sufficient; but when in the course of time, especially after the introduction of the kingship, the social and political relations became more complicated, it is probable that the need of appointing men with special skill in law, to co-operate with the judges chosen from among the elders, in order that justice might be administered in a right way, and in a manner corresponding to the law, made itself increasingly felt; that consequently David had felt himself called upon to appoint a greater number of Levites to this office, and that from that time forward the courts in the larger cities were composed of Levites and elders. The supreme court which Jehoshaphat set up in Jerusalem was established on a similar basis. For HOT* BB&kj> we have in ver. 11 WTW fc£, i.e. for all matters connected with religion and the worship; and instead of y~pT we have ^?^ i?7] «OT, for every matter of the king, i.e. for all civil causes. The last clause, ver. 8, Dfen"1 totrjv cannot signify that the men called to this supreme tribunal went to Jerusalem to dwell there thenceforth (Ramb., etc.), or that the suitors went thither; for 3^ does not denote to betake oneself to a place, but to return, which cannot be said of the persons above named, since it is not said that they had left Jerusalem. With Kimchi and others, we must refer the words to the previous statement in ver. 4, 'W DJ^ nv*i? and understand them as a supplementary statement, that Jehoshaphat and those who had gone forth with him among the people returned to Jerusalem, which would have come in more fittingly at the close of ver. 7, and is to be rendered: " when they had returned to Jerusalem." The bringing in of this remark at so late a stage of the narrative, only after the establishment of the supreme tribunal has been mentioned, is explained by supposing that the historian was induced by the essential connection between the institution of the supreme court and the arrangement of the judicatories in the provincial cities, to leave out of consideration the order of time in describing the arrangements made by Jehoshaphat. — Ver. 9 f. To the members of the superior tribunal also, Jehoshaphat gave orders to exercise their office in the fear of the Lord, with fidelity and with upright heart (a?W 3373, corde s. animo integro, cf. xv. 17, xvi. 9). rOTH nb, thus shall ye do; what they are to do being stated only in ver. 10. The 1 before ^vto is explicative, namely, and is omitted by the LXX. and Vulg. as superfluous. " Every cause wdiich comes to you from your brethren who dwell in their cities" (and bring causes before the superior court in the following cases): between blood and blood (P? with? following, as in Gen. i. 6, etc.), i.e. in criminal cases of murder and manslaughter, and between law and between command, statutes, and judgments, i.e. in cases where the matter concerns the interpretation and application of the law, and its individual commands, statutes, and judgments, to particular crimes; wherever, in short, there is any doubt by what particular provision of the law the case in hand should be decided. With Ernnrrn the apodosis commences, but it is an anacolouthon. Instead of " ye shall give them instruction therein," we have, " ye shall teach them (those who bring the cause before you), that they incur not guilt, and an anger (i.e. God's anger and punishment) come upon you and your brethren" (cf. ver. 2). "WWj properly to illuminate, metaphorically to teach, with the additional idea of exhortation or warning. The word is taken from Ex. xviii. 20, and there is construed c. accus. pers. et rei. This construction is here also the underlying one, since the object which precedes in the absolute is to be taken as accus.: thus, and as regards every cause, ye shall teach them concerning it. After the enumeration of the matters falling within the jurisdiction of this court, pi'BW nb is repeated, and this precept is then pressed home upon the judges by the words, "that ye incur not guilt." Thereafter (in ver. 11) Jehoshaphat nominates the spiritual and civil presidents of this tribunal: for spiritual causes the high priest Amariah, who is not the same as the Amariah mentioned after Zadok as the fifth high priest (1 Chron. v. 37) (see p. 116 and 120); in civil causes Zebadiah the son of Ishmael, the prince of the house of Judah, i.e. tribal prince of Judah. These shall be CD vV over you, i.e. presidents of the judges; and D'HDBP, writers, shall the Levites be B^.E?, before you, i.e. as your assistants and servants. Jehoshaphat concludes the nomination of the judicial staff with the encouraging words, " Be strong (courageous) and do," i.e. go to work with good heart, " and the Lord be with the good," i.e. with him who discharges the duties of his office well.