« AnteriorContinuar »
SPECIAL AUTHORITIES FOR THIS PERIOD.
1. 1 Sam. ix. 1–2 Sam. iv. 12; ix. ; xvi. 1–14; xix. 16–30; xxi.
1–14; 1 Kings ii. 8, 9; 36—46; 1 Chron. viii. 33—40; ix. 35;
x. 14 (Hebrew and LXX.). 2. Jewish Traditions: in Josephus, Ant. vi. 4-vii. 2, $l; vii. 5, 85;
9, $3, 4; 11, $3; viii. 1, $5: in Otho's Lexicon Rabbinico philo
logicum, “Saul:' and in the notes of Meyer to the Seder Olam. 3. Mussulman Traditions: in the Koran (ii. 247—252); and in D'Her
belot's Bibliothéque Orientale, “Thalout ben Kissaï.'
(Zacher, 1 Chr. viii.)
(1 Chr. ix. 33.)
David = Michal = Phaltiel.
N.B.There is a contradiction between
THE HOUSE OF SAUL.
SAMUEL is the chief figure of the transitional period which opens the history of the Monarchy. But there is another, on whom the character of the epoch is impressed still more strongly-who belongs to this period especially, and could belong to no other.
Saul is the first King of Israel. In him that new and strange idea became impersonated. In him we feel that we have made a marked advance in the history—from the patriarchal and nomadic state, which concerns us mainly by its contrast with our own, to that fixed and settled state which has more or less pervaded the whole condition of the Church ever since.
But, although in outward form Saul belonged to the new epoch, although even in spirit he from time to time threw himself into it, yet on the whole he is a product of the earlier condition. Whilst Samuel's existence comprehends and overlaps both periods in the calmness of a higher elevation, the career of Saul derives its peculiar interest from the fact that it is the eddy in which both streams converge. In that vortex he struggles—the centre of events
I See Lecture XVIII.
The family of Saul.
and persons greater than himself; and in that struggle he is borne down, and lost. It is this pathetic interest which has more than once suggested the story of Saul as a subject for the modern drama, and which it is now proposed to draw out of the well-known incidents of his life. He is, we may say, the first character of the Jewish history which we are able to trace out in any minuteness of detail. He is the first in regard to whom we can make out that whole connection of a large family, father, uncle, cousin, sons, grandsons, which, as a modern historian well observes, is so important in making us feel that we have acquired a real acquaintance with any personage of past times.
From the household of Abiel of the tribe of Benjamin two sons were born, related to each other, either as cousins, or as uncle and nephew. The elder was Abner, the younger was Saul.
It is uncertain in what precise spot of the territory of that fierce tribe the original seat of the family lay. It may have been the conical eminence amongst its central hills, known from its subsequent connection with him as Gibeah-of-Saul. It was more probably the village of Zelah, on its extreme southern frontier, in which was the ancestral burial-place.3 Although the family itself was of small importance, Kish, the son or grandson of Abiel, was regarded as a powerful and wealthy chief; and it is in connection with the determination to recover his lost property that his son Saul first appears before us.
A drove of asses, still the cherished animal of the Israelite chiefs,“ had gone astray on the mountains. In search of them—by pathways of which every stage is mentioned, as if to mark the importance of the journey, but which have not yet been identified-Saul wandered at his father's
· Palgrave's Normandy.
* See Lecture IV.
5 See Sinai and Palestine, ch. IV., note 1.