Psalms, i. sec. 1, p. 611) by counting the tribe of Manasseh

as two.

(6) That the two kingdoms subsequently, perhaps under Uzziah, were upon more friendly terms, and even concluded a "league of brotherhood," is a notion invented in explanation of Zech. ix. 13, xi. 14 (see e.g. Bleek in the theol. Studien und Kritiken, 1852, pp. 268 and 292), and without foundation in the historical narratives.

(7) This subject will be more particularly treated hereafter. The restoration, however, of the tribes as such being predicted, their continuance is evidently presupposed. This is also actually guaranteed even to the centuries next following; comp. with respect to the tribes of the northern kingdom, 1 Chron. v. 26; Josephus, Ant. xi. 5. 2.

THIRD DIVISION.

THE KINGDOM OF THE TEN TRIBES.

§ 171.

Preliminary Remarks.

The history of the northern kingdom, called, as the basis of the nation, the kingdom of Israel, or, after its chief tribe, that of Ephraim, comes chiefly under the consideration of biblical theology, as exhibiting, in the conflict waged against the apostate realm by the prophetic order, the powerful agency of the latter, and as manifesting, in the whole course of the events which befell it, the serious nature of Divine retribution. Nine dynasties, including nineteen kings (not reckoning Tibni, 1 Kings xvi. 22), succeeded each other in the two centuries and a half during which the kingdom existed (from 975 to 720 B.C.), and only two, those of Omri and Jehu, possessed the throne for any length of time. The history is full of conspiracies, regi

cides, and civil wars; it is a continuous testimony to the fact that, when once the divinely appointed path is forsaken, sin is ever producing fresh sin, and that the punishment of one crime is inflicted by another.

The history may be fitly divided into two distinct periods. The extirpation of Omri's dynasty by Jehu, after his elevation to the throne by Elisha, forms the chief turning-point. Under Jehu's dynasty, the kingdom, which was hastening to its destruction, took a fresh flight, but only to succumb the more speedily to its final doom.

FIRST PERIOD.

FROM JEROBOAM I. TO THE OVERTHROW OF THE DYNASTY

OF OMRI (ACCORDING TO THE USUAL CHRONOLOGY, 975-884 B.C.).

§ 172.

Jeroboam I. to Omri.

Jeroboam at first took up his abode at Shechem, the chief town of Ephraim (1). Subsequently, however, he dwelt at Tirzah, xiv. 17, which continued to be the capital under his immediate successors, xv. 21 (2). The first measure taken by Jeroboam was to make the political separation of the tribes a religious schism, by completing the breach with the theocratic institutions, the connection of his people with the worship at Jerusalem seeming to him politically dangerous. In his innovations, however, Jeroboam followed tradition. He erected two separate sanctuaries, one in the south at Bethel, a place consecrated by ancient memories. This was the "king's chapel," as it is called Amos vii. 13, a designation on which is very characteristically impressed the fact, that in the kingdom of the ten tribes the politico-ecclesiastical had taken the place of the theocratic principle. The other sanctuary was erected in the

north at Dan, where image-worship had already existed in the time of the Judges (Judg. xviii.). In causing Jehovah to be worshipped at these places under the symbol of a calf, Jeroboam was also returning to the image-worship instituted by Aaron in the wilderness, as is shown by the words of 1 Kings xii. 28, which are borrowed from Ex. xxxii. 4. Since, however, the Holy One of Israel was thus degraded to a power of nature, this image-worship was nothing else than idolatry, and was treated as such by the prophets. A similar worship must subsequently have existed in Gilgal, which is named along with Bethel, Amos iv. 4 (comp. also v. 5; Hos. iv. 15, ix. 15, xii. 12) (3). One main obstacle to the new worship was formed by the Levites dwelling among the ten tribes. Jeroboam therefore, as we learn from 2 Chron. xi. 13 sqq. (comp. xiii. 9), drove from his realm the Levites and priests; and these, together with other subjects of the northern kingdom who refused to take part in this apostasy from the legitimate worship, departed in great numbers to the kingdom of Judah. On this account, Jeroboam, according to 1 Kings xii. 31 and xiii. 33, "made priests out of the whole people (of the lowest of the people, A. V.) who were not of the sons of Levi; whosoever would, he consecrated him," etc., comp. 2 Chron. xiii. 9 (4). The moral disorder to which this priesthood of the northern kingdom fell a prey is shown Hos. iv. 6 sqq., vi. 9. Of the religious ceremonies introduced by Jeroboam, we are only told, 1 Kings xii. 32, that he instituted a feast corresponding to the Feast of Tabernacles, transferring it from the 15th of the seventh, to the 15th of the eighth month, perhaps with regard to the later harvest of the northern districts. It is, however, evident, from several allusions in the prophets Amos and Hosea, that many Mosaic forms of worship were practised in the sanctuaries of the northern kingdom. For though the date of these prophets is more than a century later, it is certain that such forms of Jehovistic worship as existed in their days in the kingdom of the ten tribes could not have been introduced subsequently to

Jeroboam, but must have been handed down from ancient times in this kingdom. From Hos. ii. 13, compared with ix. 5 (v. 7), Amos v. 21, viii. 5, 10, we see that the celebration of the Sabbaths, new moons, and festivals still continued; from iv. 5, v. 22, that the different kinds of Mosaic sacrifices were in use; from Hos. iv. 7 sqq., that the priests partook of the sin-offerings; while Amos iv. 4 contains an allusion to the tenth of the third year (5).

Jeroboam had, as has been said, got rid of the priests and Levites; but the opposition of the prophets, those watchmen of the theocracy, was only the more powerful. Individual prophets, indeed, when they found that Jehovism continued to be the state religion, and that the newly introduced image-worship maintained several of the ancient legal forms, may have been satisfied, or, like the old prophet of whom we read 1 Kings xiii. 11 sqq. (6), have been silent from fear. But after the arrival of the prophet from Judah, who, according to ch. xiii., prophesied against the worship at Bethel, and warned Jeroboam in vain, Ahijah, the same prophet who had foretold his elevation, and who still dwelt at Shiloh, pronounced the curse of God against him, on account of this very image-worship, and predicted the approaching extirpation of his house, 1 Kings xiv. 7 sqq. Nadab the son of Jeroboam was slain, after a reign of two years, by Baasha; but as, according to the now usual expression, he walked in the ways of Jeroboam, his son Elah, in conformity with the curse pronounced against his house by the prophet Jehu, xvi. 1 sqq., fell a victim to a conspiracy set on foot by Zimri; and this was, as we are expressly told ver. 7, designed also as a punishment for the slaughter of the house of Jeroboam by Baasha. For it is the doctrine of prophetism, that even a deed accomplished in conformity with the Divine counsel, if not performed for the sake of God and with full submission to His will, falls back upon its author, and is condemned in him. Zimri, the assassin of Elah, having, after a reign of seven days, perished in the flames of his palace, a

division of the kingdom seemed imminent, one part of the people adhering to Tibni, the other to Omri. The latter, however, succeeded in getting the upper hand, and the dynasty raised to the throne in him (929 B.C.) possessed it for more than forty years.

(1) Shechem, as we saw § 163, was already in the time of the Judges a royal city (Judg. ix. 6 sqq.). It is not said in the passage quoted, that Jeroboam transferred his residence. thence to Peniel in the trans-Jordanic region, as Thenius supposes, but only that he fortified the last-named town.

(2) The situation of the town of Tirzah, which must certainly be sought farther to the north, has not as yet been more clearly ascertained.

(3) In 2 Chron. xi. 15, the setting up of Seïrim (goats, A. V. devils) as well as calves as objects of worship, is ascribed to Jeroboam; and this must either be understood as a statement that this form of idolatry also existed at that time in the nation, or we have in this passage a rhetorical expression (so Hengstenberg, Beitr. ii. p. 165), signifying that this calf-worship was no better than Seïrim-worship.

(4) 2 Chron. xiii. 9: "Whosoever cometh to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, the same may be a priest of them that are no gods." The passage refers to some enactment akin to that of the Mosaic law concerning the priesthood.

(5) In Amos iv. 5 the exclusion of leaven is alluded to, and thank-offerings, free-will offerings, and, v. 22, burnt-offerings and meat-offerings are mentioned. On iv. 4 see § 136, note 3. What is said in the text is of the greatest importance with respect to the criticism of the Mosaic legislation. Undoubtedly none of these institutions would have been imported from the kingdom of Judah, unless the consecration of a high antiquity had rested upon them. And how much further would not Jeroboam have gone in separating his people from the religious institutions of Jerusalem, if these had been of as recent origin as the opinion of many moderns would make them?

(6) See the explanation of this narrative in Hengstenberg's Beitr. ii. p. 148 sq. As little can it be doubted that the calf