HISTORY OF THE HEBREW MONARCHY.

A Insronr of any chronological division of the Jewish people from the Exodus until the Babylonish Captivity, would not seem so laborious as most other historical undertakings, since the original materials would ap- pear chiefly limited to the Bible and Josephus. History, however, as opposed to compilation, cannot be written so easily; for authorities must be learned to be read with understanding. A knowledge of primeval ages, so far as it can be disentangled from tradition and fable, with the in- ference to bevieduced from ancient monuments, is requisite to realize as it were the life of those ancient times. The institutions, manners, and customs of the Jewish people, as developed by learned commentators, be- sides an acquaintance with the present manners of Eastern countries, are necessary in order truly to feel the meaning of the text. A critical know- ledge of Hebrew is perhaps more necessary than of the language of any other people, from the controversies as to whether the nominal authors of certain books composed the whole or only part, and whether in the matter- of-fact record the historian speaks from original knowledge or is a com- piler from documents that have perished. To pronounce an original judg- ment on these points from philological evidence, may require the labour of a life; but there must be Hebrew to judge of the Hebraises judgment. The author of the work before us seems rather an able and a well-read man than a philosophic scholar of the class alluded to ; better versed in the text of Scripture, and the critical conclusions deduced from it by philological studies, than in the cognate branches of learning which illus- trate that text. If not a deep Biblical student, he is more familiar with the Old Testament than a mere reader for a purpose would be likely to become ; yet he exhibits a Rationalistic freedom of criticism and inter- pretation that scarcely indicate the divine of any Trinitarian church. Possibly the author is an Unitarian teacher, or a theological student of the German school which claims to decide what parts of Scripture are inspired and what the intellectual productions of men who may have been occasionally inspired. This view would explain the religious feeling he sometimes exhibits, with the Rationalistic criticism to which he subjects his text, and the latitude he allows himself in his comments upon sacred characters; as, for example, in this judgment upon the conduct of Jere- miah during the war that ended in the Captivity. "In the retrospect of these affairs, it is impossible to overlook the tendency of men to judge of actions by their event, without asking whether the event could have been foreseen. The resistance of Hezekizth to the Assyrians is admired; that of Jehoiakim to the Chaldees is condemned, although it was called for not only by general principles of patriotism, but by his special obligations to the Egyptians, at least in the opening of his reign. An unsuccessful king, whether an Ahaz or a Zedekiah, meets with little sympathy. Over the fall even of a Josiah men moralize and wonder; as if to suffer and to perish were not often the peculiar part of goodness and of heroism. Yet, perhaps, there were few materials for heroism now left in Jerusalem. It was a people divided against itself, and threatened by a superior adversary; in which case nothing is harder than to know whether to advise submission or resistance. The brave and the hopeful will main- tain that by spirited counsels the nation may be roused and united: the cautious, the feeble, and the desponding, will treat such a course as madness. How far the weakness of Judah was now caused by this division of opinion, is not distinctly recorded; and perhaps even the contemporaries did not know. But the general facts justify the belief, that if Jeremiah had felt the national independence of Je- rusalem to be as dear as Isaiah felt it—if he had taught that life was not worth preserving at the expense of enslaving the people of Jehovah to the heathen—if, in short, those who with him abetted Babylon had bravely opposed it—the fate of Jerusalem would have been at worst not more painful, and certainly more glorious.

"If we judge of Jeremiah's position by the common laws of prudence and mo- rality, we shall find that there were two ways of promoting his country's welfare: one, by trying to persuade the princes and the king to yield at once to Babylon; the other, by Inciting the people to resist manfully when the rulers obstinately chose that course. The third method, which Jeremiah followed, of urging indi- viduals to flee for their lives, because defeat was certain, was not the part of pru- dence and patriotism, but was the highest imprudence. It was the most obvious way of distracting the nation, paralyzing its rulers, and insuring the public ruin. It is requisite to insist on this, because writers who do not venture to say that Jeremiah was freed from the observance of common obligations, are fond of extol- ling him as a model of patriotism and of practical wisdom.

" Nebuzaradan appears rightly to have understood the service which Jeremiah had rendered to his master's cause. Finding him at Ramah among the prisoners Who were chained for transportation to Babylon, he set him free, and offered to look after his interests if he chose voluntarily to accompany the rest. Under- standing that he preferred to stay behind, he requested him to go and dwell under the protection of Gedaliah, whom Nebuchadnezzar had made governor of Judzea; and so sent bun away with victuals and a reward."

A good deal of disquisition or exposition is occasionally introduced into the history ; but narrative is its main character. The first object of the author is to narrate events, reconciling discrepancies, contradictions, poetical exaggerations, or party distortions, as best he may. To some ex- tent Niebuhr may be considered his model : he treats the Jewish au- thorities a little after the manner in which the great historical critic !objected the materials for Roman history to his critical touchstone. This is legendary, but founded in truth ; that is a poetical panegyric ; this may have had some existence in reality, but it seems to have beer: heightened by the exaggerations of a triumphant party, flattering the successful at the expense of the unfortunate. The author of this History of the Hebrew Monarchy has not the positiveness of Niebuhr ; nor does he deal SO cavalierly with his authorities, rejecting and interpreting on his mere

ipse dixit. This may arise partly from the fact that his mind is less dogmatic than Niebahr's and more logical, partly from the respectful feel- ing with which Scripture is regarded in comparison with profane authors:

In another and a more important point of ilow, he differs from Niebuhr. One great feature of the History of Rome is the account of

ancient institutions, and to some degree of manners, which it contains. Greater means exist for such expositions in the case of the Hebrews, from the greater plenty of the records; which, if many of them belong to a later day than is commonly ascribed to them, contain descriptions of practices and opinions, as well as of manners or their germ, that had a national existence. The text, too, has been illustrated by all the learning of the learned world, and similar manners still exist in the unchangeable East ; whereas the Etruscan and old Roman opinions had vanished from the earth even before the age of Augustus. These advantages, we think,

are rather neglected in the volume before us. There is a good survey of

the geographical character of Judea, and the distribution of its tribes. Disquisitional accounts are also interspersed throughout the narrative ; but they are chiefly of a theological bearing, and refer to the religious feelings and practices of the Jews, or to points connected with what must be considered, till the close of the Old Testament, a theocratic government Hence, though the work is not rich in those expositions of manners and

customs which bring the national life of a people before us, and form the most instructive parts of history, there are frequently passages of con-

siderable interest connected with religion or theology. This is the case with the prophets, to whom the author attributes much that is dis- tinctive in the character of the Jews. The following sketch of them in the age of Samuel may be quoted as an example.

"The prophets must on no account be confounded with the priests.' • * • The character of the priest was essentially hereditary. His business was one of

routine,—to sacrifice, or to burn incense; to light lamps, to offer show-bread, or

perform some other of the ceremonies with which ancient religion abounded. It is a striking fact, that during all Samuel's administration no one ventured to re- move the ark from Khjathjearim; nor do the priests seem to have been concerned to take charge of it. But 'the men of Kirjathjearim sanctified Eleazar son of Abinadab to keep the ark of Jehovah'; and under the care of the same house it

is found in the beginning of David's reign at Jerusalem (2 Sam. vi. 3). This, however, is but one out of numerous proofs that the ceremonial system was one which very gradually grew up, and was as yet exceedingly immature.

"Except where lands had been attached to some sanctuary, the priest must have lived by the sacrifices and other offerings, and only in very rare cases exer- cised, or sought to exercise, any influence which can be called spiritual. But no

man became a prophet by birth; he needed some call for the office, with exercise and teaching t nor did the prophets often concern themselves with mere ceremo-

nies, although they occasionally introduced symbolic actions of their own, suited to impress the public senses. Their characteristic emblem was some musical in- strument, and their highest function to compose and sing solemn psalms of reli- gious worship or instruction. Unlike to the minstrel of the Greeks, who de- voted his powers to flatter chieftains and amuse the crowd—or to the later lyrists, who composed laudatory odes for pecuniary recompense—more like in some re- spects to a patriotic Tyrtleas, or to a Welsh bard—the Hebrew prophet differed essentially m this, that his first and great aim was to please and honour God, in faith that from obedience to Him the highest good of man would assuredly follow. In the extremely difficult problems presented by Hebrew criticism, it becomes a matter of great doubt how many of the psalms still extant may be confidently assigned to the :era now under consideration; but perhaps we cannot be wrong in

accepting the ninetieth psalm in the Psalter (the heading of which arbitrarily as- signs it to Moses) as a specimen of composition full as old as Samuel. It gives us a good sample of the depth and purity of religious feeling at work among the prophets, which imparts to their psalms a majesty peculiar to themselves, and no small portion of poetical beauty.

"Nevertheless, the Hebrew prophets were not free from various tinges of fana- ticism which generated also affectation. That they often worked themselves into a religious frenzy, (as in the wild Asiatic ceremonies which the Greeks called or- gies,) may be inferred from the same verb in Hebrew meaning to prophesy' and to be mad.' The extravagance ascribed to Saul, that in prophesying he stripped off his clothes before Samuel, and lay down naked all day and all night, whatever doubt may rest on the narrative from its being a duplicate of a similar story, must have been borrowed from the manners of the age, and is mentioned without surprise or censure. Even later prophets are recorded to have walked naked and barefoot, or to have lain upon one side sometimes for years, like the religious madmen of the East; and some proceedings yet more ambiguous are as- cribed to them. The habit of wearing a single coarse garment originally perhaps arose from real indigence; but it gradually grew into an affectation, like the aus- tere dress of monks and friars; and in the later times of the monarchy, men who

are stigmatized as 'false prophets' are accused of assuming, for unworthy ends, the sanctified exterior of poverty. In fact, even concerning those who are re- garded as true prophets, we hear occasionally of fanatical acts, which are not without analogy to the practice of the priests of Baal, who cut themselves with knives to assist in prophesying. For instance, (1 Kings xx. 35, &c.) a prophet orders a man to wound him, and pronounces a solemn curse on him because he refuses; and having induced another to obey, goes thus wounded to address the King of Israel. It might even seem (from Zech. xiii. 4-6) that wounds inflicted on the hands were, equally with the rough garment, an ordinary emblem of the prophet. "So strong was the tendency of the vulgar to seek to prophets rather for a knowledge of the future than tar religious instruction, that it was scarcely pos- sible to get rid of divination in all its forms; which nevertheless the prophets en- deavoured to reduce to those few which had most moral dignity. Against the various modes of enchantment and necromancy, to which the neighbouring reli- gions were addicted, they protested vehemently, as against a concealed idolatry. To consult the spirit of a dead man, or to watch the night of birds, was at best to seek to the creature instead of the Creator; and led to an indiscriminate adop-

tion of other foreign superstitions. Bat they did not treat with the same seve- rity all desire to penetrate into the secrets of futurity, provided that the Being consulted was none but Jehovah himself. We hear of four principal modes in which Jehovah was supposed to give responses (1 Sam. x. 20; xxviii. 6)—by dreams, by 1.Trim, by lot, and by prophecy. * * • In the times preceding Samuel, the prophetical spint had put forth so little influence on the nation, that

the prevailing tendency with 'he ignorant was to view Samuel himself as only a seer; and whatever degree of 'informal weight we attach to the events connected

with Saurs looking after the a5s43 of Kish, it is clear that the story could not have originated if it had not beeni familiar belief that the seers were useful per- sons to consult on such affairs. Fron this time forth, however, they were gra-

dually to assume a higher national importance. Their advice was asked on topics of great public moment; nor did they reuse it: but their mode of seeking for at divine reply was not ceremonial or superstiticus, however tinged with a high en- thnsiasm. The prophet either played on the lyre himself or (oftener perhaps) called for a minstrel to do so, and wept himself in pious meditation on the sub- ject of inquiry; until, gaining an insight into its moral bearings, and kindled. by the melody, he delivered a response in high-wrought and generally-poetical strain." In a narrative history, where events are recorded in the order of their occurrence, and from authorities that seem to have exaggerated facts, criticism is continually occupied on particular points, and does not acquire that large character which belongs to it when engaged in develop- ing some leading idea. One leading idea, indeed, is present to the au- thor's mind, though not presented so continuously in his work. That idea is, that the early religious feeling of the Jews was of a more genial and liberal character than the formalism of its later day. This genial feeling, which did not avoid mere symbols of the Deity, any more than large sections of Christians avoid the Cross, gave facilities to slide into idolatry, that were grievously encouraged by the polygamy of some of the kings, yielding to the superstitions of foreign women : hence the con- tinual denunciations of the prophets, growing more severe as the evil in- creased. With the Captivity, however, arose a new frame of mind ; and henceforth the Jews became the most formal and the most intolerant of religionists ; the restoration in fact consisting of the sterner Israelites, the more lax and unscrupulous not caring to go back. When Cyrus the Great, thus becoming master of Babylon, resolved to re- establish Jerusalem, only a small fraction of the exiles were willing to return. The dangers of the enterprise were great; and none but the most zealous, and especially those who were most attached to local religion and external worship, were likely to encounter them. Undoubtedly, few Jews of that age (if of any age) could make light of externals without losing religion altogether; yet a supersti- tions over estimate of these things animates men to pilgrimage more suefully than a purely spiritual impulse; and on the whole we cannot doubt that those who returned to Jerusalem were chiefly persons over whose minds sacerdotal prin- ciples had a commanding influence. Accordingly, from this time forth the nation wore a new character. They reverenced ordinances more than they had before despised them. Idolatry, and even the making or possessing of graven images at all, became their peculiar horror. For the Levitical priesthood they held a profound reverence. Though previously they neglected the sabbath and sabbatical year, now they observed both; although no miraculous abundance was granted on the sixth year, such as the Pentateuch promised, to supply the lost harvest of the seventh. The lawyers, or expositors of the law, became the most important pro- fession; and rabbinism took firm root, even before prophecy was extinct. "it is not intended here to pursue the later fortunes of the Jewish nation. We have seen its monarchy rise and fall. In its progress, the prophetical and the sa- cerdotal elements were developed side by side. The former flourished in its native soil for a brief period, but was transplanted over all the world, to impart a lasting glory to Jewish monotheism. The latter, while in union with and subservient to the fiee spirit of prophecy, had struck its roots into the national heart and grown up as a constitutional pillar to the monarchy: but when unchecked by prophet or by king, and invested with the supreme temporal and spiritual control of the re- stored nation, it dwindled to a mere scrubby plant, whose fruit was dry and thorny learning, or apples of Sodom which are as ashes in the mouth. Such was the nnexpansive and literal materialism of , the later rabbi, out of which has pro- ceeded nearly all that is unamiable in the Jewish character: but the Roman writers, who saw this side only of the nation, little knew how high a value the re- trospect of the world's history would set on the agency of this scattered and de- spised people. For if Greece was born to teach art and philosophy, and Rome to diffuse the processes of law and government, surely Judaea has been the wellspring of religious wisdom to a world besotted by frivolous or impure fancies. To these three nations it has been given to cultivate and develop principles characteristic of themselves: to the Greeks, beauty and science; to the Romans, jurisprudence and municipal rule; but to the Jews, the holiness of God and His sympathy with his chosen servants. That this was the true calling of the nation, the prophets were inwardly conscious at an early period. They discerned that Jerusalem was as a centre of bright light to a dark world; and, while groaning over the mon- strous fictions which imposed on the nations under the name of religion, they an- nounced that out of Zion should go forth the law and the word of Jehovah. When they did not see, yet they believed, that the proud and despiteful heathen should at length gladly learn of their wisdom, and rejoice to honour them."

From the narrative plan of this work, there is something perhaps of narrowness in parts, owing to the narrow or obscure character of the events, or the necessity of throwing doubt upon the greatness of some of the exploits ; questioning being always unfavourable to a striking con- tinuous narrative. To those who may not object to the Rationalistic freedom with which the Scripture text is treated, this History of the Hebrew Monarchy, however, may be recommended as a philosophical account of its subject, with the moral predominating over the historical ; written in a clear, close, and vigorous style.