desert, or wilderness, to all places that were not cultivated, but which were chiefly appropriated to the feeding of cattle, and in many of them trees and shrubs grew wild. Some of them are mountainous and well watered, while others are sterile sandy plains, either destitute of water, or affording a very scanty supply from the few springs that are occasionally to be found in them; yet even these afford a grateful, though meagre pasturage to camels, goats, and sheep. In this latter description of deserts, it is that the weary traveller is mocked by the distant appearance of white vapours, which are not unlike those white mists we often see hovering over the surface of a river in a summer evening, after a hot day. When beheld at a distance, they resemble an expanded lake; but, upon a nearer approach, the thirsty traveller perceives the deception. To this phenomenon the prophet Isaiah alludes, (xxxv. 7,) where, predicting the blessings of the Redeemer's kingdom, he says, The glowing sand shall become a pool, and the thirsty soil bubbling springs.

ous.

The deserts of the Hebrews frequently derived their appellatious, from the places to which they were contiguThe most celebrated is the Great Desert, called the Wilderness, or Desert of Judah. (Psal. lxiii. title.) The desert of Judæa, in which John the Baptist abode till the day of his showing unto Israel, (Luke i. 80,) and where he first taught his countrymen, (Matt. iii. 1. Mark i. 4. John x. 39,) was a mountainous, wooded, and thinly inhabited tract of country, but abounding in pastures; it was situated adjacent to the Dead Sea, and the River Jordan. In the time of Joshua it had six cities, with their villages. (Josh. xv. 61, 62.)

This country also produced some Woods, or FORESTS mentioned in holy writ, such as those of Hareth in the tribe of Judah, to which David withdrew from Saul; (1 Sam. xxii. 5;) of Ephraim, where Absalom received the due reward of his unnatural rebellion (2 Sam. xviii. 6-9;) that of Lebanon, where Solomon erected a sumptuous palace (1 Kings vii. 2;) the forest of Bethel, supposed to have stood near the city of that name; (2 Kings ii. 24;) and the Forest of Oaks, on the hills of Bashan. (Zech. xi. 2.)

The FERTILITY of the soil of the Holy Land, so often mentioned in the sacred writings, (and especially in Deut. viii. 7—9, xi. 10-12. Gen. xxvi. 12. and Matt. xiii. 8,) is confirmed by the united testimonies of ancient writers, as well as by all modern travellers. We are assured that under a wise and beneficent government, the produce of the Holy Land, would exceed all calculation. Its perennial harvest; the salubrity of its air; its limpid springs; its rivers, lakes, and matchless plains; its hills and vales -all these, added to the serenity of its climate, prove this land to be indeed "a field which the Lord hath blessed:" (Gen. xxvii. 28:) "God hath given it of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine."

Such being the state of the Holy Land, at east of that part of it which is properly cultivated, we can readily account for the vast population it anciently supported. Its present forlorn condition is satisfactorily explained by the depredations and vicissitudes to which it has been exposed in every age and so far is this from contradicting the assertions of the sacred writings, that it confirms their authority; for, in the event of the Israelites proving unfaithful to their covenant engagements with Jehovah, all these judgments were predicted, and denounced against them; (Lev. xxvi. 32. Deut. xxix. 22. et seq.;) and the exact accomplishment of these prophecies affords a permanent comment on the declaration of the royal psalmist, that God "turneth a fruitful land into barrenness for the wickedness of them that dwell therein." (Psal. cvii. 34.)

182

BOOK II.-POLITICAL ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS.

CHAPTER I.

DIFFERENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT FROM THE PATRIARCHAL TIMES, TO THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY,

I. THE earliest FORM OF GOVERNMENT of which we read in Scripture, was the PATRIARCHAL; or that exercised by the heads of families over their households, without being responsible to any superior power. Such was that exercised by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The pa triarchal power, was a sovereign dominion, so that parents may be considered as the first kings, and children the first subjects: they had the power of life and death, of disinheriting their children, or of dismissing them from the paternal home without assigning any reason.

II. On the departure of the Israelites from the land of their oppressors, under the guidance of Moses, Jehovah was pleased to institute a new form of government, which has been rightly termed a THEOCRACY; the supreme legislative power being exclusively vested in GoD, or his ORACLE, who alone could enact, or repeal laws. Hence the judges, and afterwards the kings, were merely temporal viceroys, or the first magistrates in the state: their office was, to command the army in war, to summon and preside in the senate, or council of princes and elders, and in the general assembly of the congregation of Israel, and to propose public matters to the deliberation of the former, and to the ratification of the latter. During the life of Moses, the chief magistracy was lodged in him. but, his strength being inadequate to determine all matters of controversy between so numerous a nation, a council of seventy princes, or elders was instituted, at his request, to assist him with their advice, and to lighten the burden of government. (Exod. xviii. 13-26.)

III. On the death of Moses, the command of the children of Israel was confided to Joshua, who had been his minister, (Exod. xxiv. 13. Josh. i. 1,) and under whom the land of Canaan was subdued, and divided agreeably to the divine injunctions: but, his office ceasing with his life, the government of Israel was committed to certain supreme magistrates, termed JUDGES. Their dignity was for life; but their office was not hereditary, neither was their succession constant. Their authority was not inferior to that of kings: it extended to peace and war. They decided causes without appeal; but they had no power to enact new laws, or to impose new burdens upon the people. They were protectors of the laws, defenders of religion, and avengers of crimes, particularly of idolatry, which was high treason against Jehovah, their Sovereign.

IV. At length, the Israelites, weary of having God for their sovereign, desired a king to be set over them. (1 Sam. viii. 5.) Such a change in their government was foreseen by Moses, who accordingly prescribed certain laws for the direction of their future sovereigns, which are related in Deut. xvii. 14-20.

Though the authority of the kings was in some respects limited, by stipulation, yet they exercised very ample powers. They had the right of making peace, or war, and of life and death; and they administered justice, either in person, or by their judges. And though they exercised great power in reforming ecclesiastical abuses, yet this power was enjoyed by them, not as absolute sovereigns, in their own right. They were merely the viceroys of Jehovah, who was the sole legislator of Israel: and, therefore, as the kings could neither enact a new law, nor repeal an old one, the government continued to be a theocracy, as well under their permanent administration, as we have seen that it was under the occasional administration of the judges. They were inaugurated to their high office with great pomp, and were arrayed-in royal apparel, with a crown and sceptre. The majesty of royalty was studiously maintained. It was accounted the highest possible honour to be admitted into the royal presence, and above all to sit down in his presence. The knowledge of this circumstance illustrates several passa

ges of Scripture, particularly Luke i. 19. Matt. v. 8, xviii. 10, xx. 20-23. After the establishment of royalty among the Jews, it appears to have been a maxim in their law, that the king's person was inviolable, even though he might be tyrannical and unjust; (1 Sam. xxiv. 5-8;) a maxim which is necessary not only to the security of the king, but also to the welfare of the subject. On this principle, the Amalekite, who told David the improbable and untrue story of his having put the mortally wounded Saul to death, that he might not fall into the hands of the Philistines, was, merely on this, his own statement, ordered by David to be instantly despatched, because he had laid his hand on the Lord's Anointed. (2 Sam. i. 14.)

The eastern monarchs were never approached but with presents of some kind or other, according to the ability of the individuals, who accompanied them with expressions of the profoundest reverence, prostrating themselves to the ground; and the same practice continues to this day. Thus Jacob instructed his sons to carry a present to Joseph, when they went to buy food of him, as governor of Egypt. (Gen. xliii. 11. 26.) In like manner, the magi, who came from the east to adore Jesus Christ, as king of the Jews, brought him presents of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. (Matt. ii. 11.) Allusions to this practice occur in Gen. xxxii. 13. 1 Kings x. 2. 10. 25. 2 Kings v. 5; see also 1 Sam. ix. 7, and 2 Kings viii. 8. The prostrations were made, with every demonstration of reverence, to the ground. See an instance in 1 Sam.

xxiv. 8.

Further, whenever the oriental sovereigns go abroad, they are uniformly attended by a numerous and splendid retinue the Hebrew kings, and their sons, either rode on asses, or mules, (2 Sam. xiii. 29. 1 Kings i. 33. 38,) or in chariots, (1 Kings i. 5. 2 Kings ix. 21, x. 15,) preceded or accompanied by their royal guards, (who, in 2 Sam. viii. 18, and xv. 18, are termed Cherethites and Pelethites;) as the oriental sovereigns are to this day. And whenever the Asiatic monarchs entered upon an expedition, or took a journey through desert and untravelled countries, they sent harbingers before them, to prepare all things for their passage, and pioneers to open the passes, level the ways, and remove all impediments. To this