and for the people of the LORD, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword.

Thus did David, and those that were with him, weep and fast until the evening, because the " mighty were fallen," and because "the weapons of war" had perished. When a father or mother" falls on the ground," the children have stated periods when they weep and fast in memory of their dead. On the day of the full moon, those who have lost their mothers fast until the sun come to the meridian, and in the evening they take milk and fruit. For a father, the sons fast on the new moon in the same way as for the mother.-ROBERTS.

Ver. 18. (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)

These words have been generally understood of Jonathan teaching the children of Judah the use of the bow. But a better interpretation of the passage, probably is, that the bow is the name of the lamentation which David uttered over Jonathan; and that it is so denominated, because he met his death from the bow. The following extract, describing a funeral procession of women, to commemorate the death of a merchant, named Mahomet, at Cosire, where he was murdered by two Arabs, who attacked him

with swords, will illustrate this representation. Speaking of the murder of Mahomet, Mr. Irwin, ( Travels, p. 254,) says, "The tragedy which was lately acted near Cosire, gave birth to a mournful procession of females, which passed through the different streets of Ginnah, and uttered dismal cries for the death of Mahomet. In the centre was a female of his family, who carried a naked sword in her hand, to intimate the weapon by which the deceased fell. At sundry places the procession stopped, and danced round the sword to the music of timbrels and tabours. They paused a long time before our house, and some of the women made threatening signs to one of our servants, which agrees with the caution we received to keep within doors. It would be dangerous enough to face this frantic company, whose constant clamour and extravagant gestures gave them all the appearance of the female bacchanals of Thrace, recorded of old." From this custom of carrying in the funeral procession the weapon by which the deceased met death, it seems likely that the lamentations of David over Jonathan might have been called The Bow, and sung by the men of Judah in funeral procession.-BURDER.

Ver. 21. Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, neither let there be rain upon you, nor fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away.

The want of rain in the East is partly compensated by the copious dews which fall in the night, to restore and refresh the face of nature. The sacred writers were too much alive to the beauties of nature, too keen and accurate observers of the works and operations of their God, not to avail themselves of this part of the divine arrangements to give us a visible and lively conception of the purity and influence of his blessing. In the sublime benediction which the dying patriarch pronounced on the future inheritance of Joseph, the dew occupies a prominent place, clearly indicating its incalculable value in the mind of an Oriental: "And of Joseph he said, blessed of the Lord be his land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath." When the holy Psalmist many ages afterward poured out the sorrows of his heart over the fallen house of Saul, he deprived the spot where the king and his sons fell, of the dew, the rain, and the fields of offerings, as the greatest curse which his lacerated feelings could devise: "Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, neither let there be rain upon you, nor fields of offerings; for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away." So silent, irresistible, and swift, is the descent of the dew on every field and on every blade of grass, that Hushai, David's friend, selects it as the most appropriate phenomenon in nature to symbolize the sudden onset of an enemy; "We will light upon him as the dew falleth on the ground."

When the chosen people were scattered among the rivers of Babylon, they resembled a field burnt up by the scorching sun; but the favour and blessing of heaven are promised to restore them to the high estate from which they had fallen. "For thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead." Although they were dried and withered as the grass, yet he promises to revive, refresh, and strengthen them by the power of his spirit and the riches of his grace. The dewdrops of the morning are not more pure and insinuating, more lovely and ornamental, when they descend on the tender grass, than the doctrines of inspiration in the heart and conduct of a genuine Christian. This idea is beautifully expressed by Moses in his dying song; "My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass." The mucompared to the dew which moistens the hill of Hermon and tual regard which ought to animate the people of God is clothes it with verdure. The drops of dew are countless and brilliant, glittering over all the field, cheering the heart of the husbandman, and stimulating his exertions; not less abundant, illustrious, and encouraging, were the first converts to the Christian faith, after the ascension of Christ. That splendid manifestation of almighty grace was celebrated many ages before in the songs of Zion: "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth." But it too frequently happens that the glory of the church, as well as the attainments of her children, suffers a mournful decline, and passes rapidly away: and what emblem more appropriate can be chosen to indicate such a change than the sudden evaporation of the dews, by the kindling rays of a vertical sun? "O Ephraim, what shall I do unto thee? O Judah, what shall I do unto thee? for your goodness is as a morning cloud, and as the early dew it goeth away."

The shield was more highly valued by the ancients than all their other armour. It was their delight to adorn it with all kinds of figures, of birds and beasts, especially those of generous natures, as eagles and lions: they emblazoned upon its capacious circle the effigies of their gods, the forms of celestial bodies, and all the works of nature. They preserved it with the most jealous care; and to lose it in the day of battle was accounted one of the greatest calamities that could befall them, worse than defeat, or even than death itself; so great was their passion for what is termed military glory, and the estimation in which it was held, that they had a profound regard for all sorts of arms, the instruments by which they attained it; and to leave them in the hands of their enemies, to give them for a pledge, or dispose of them in a dishonourable way, was an indelible disgrace both in Greece and at Rome, for which they could hardly ever atone. But these sentiments were not confined to Greece and Rome; among no people were they carried higher than among the Jews. To cast away the shield in the day of battle, they counted a national disgrace, and a fit subject for public mourning. This affecting circumstance was not omitted in the beautiful elegy which David, a brave and experienced soldier, composed on the death of Saul and the loss of his army: "The shield of the mighty was vilely cast away." On that fatal day, when Saul and the flower of Israel perished on the mountains of Gilboa, many of the Jewish soldiers who had behaved with great bravery in former battles, forgetful of their own reputation and their country's honour, threw away their shields, and fled dishonourable conduct, with admirable and touching pathos: from the field. The sweet singer of Israel adverts to that "Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, neither let there be rain upon you, nor fields of offerings; for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, as though he had not been anointed with oil." The apostle has availed himself of this general feeling in his epistle to the Hebrews, to encourage them in the profession of the gospel, and in a courageous, firm, and constant adherence to the truth: "Cast not away therefore your confidence." Abide without wavering in the profession of the faith, and in the firm belief of the truth; and aim at the full assurance of the grace of faith, which, as a spiritual shield, should be sought with unwearied diligence, and retained with jealous care.-PAXTON.

Ver. 23. Saul and Jonathan were lovely and

pleasant in their lives, and in their death they were not divided: they were swifter than eagles, they were stronger than lions.

The military exercises of the Hebrews resembled those of other nations around them. Swiftness of foot was highly valued, as it gave the warrior a great advantage over his slower and more unwieldy antagonist. It is accordingly mentioned to the honour of Asahel, one of David's captains, that he was swifter of foot than a wild roe; and the sweet singer of Israel, in his poetical lamentation over those two great captains, Saul and Jonathan, takes particular notice of this warlike quality: "They were swifter than eagles, stronger than lions." Nor were the ancient Greeks less attentive to a qualification which the state of the military art in those days rendered so valuable. The footraces in the Olympic games were instituted by warlike chieftains, for the very purpose of inuring their subjects to the fatigues of war, and particularly of increasing their speed, which was regarded as an excellent qualification in a warrior, both because it served for a sudden attack and a nimble retreat. Homer, fully aware of its value in ancient warfare, says, that swiftness of foot is one of the most excellent endowments with which a man can be favoured. To invigorate the frame, on the strength and firmness of which the victory almost entirely depended in primitive times, the Hebrew captains are said to have exercised their soldiers in lifting great weights. After the defeat of Saul, which seems to have been chiefly effected by the skill and valour of the enemy's archers, David commanded his officers to instruct their troops in the use of the bow, which, though employed by the Hebrew warriors from the earliest times, appears to have been rather neglected till that terrible catastrophe taught them the necessity of forming a body of skilful archers, which might enable them to meet their enemies in the field on equal terms. The Hebrew youth were also taught to hurl the javelin, to handle the spear, and to use the sling, in which many of them greatly excelled.-PAXTON.

Ver. 26. I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.

Than the love of women; or, as the word is frequently rendered, wives. This figure hath been censured, as not well chosen, and insinuations dropped highly to the dishonour of the two noble friends. But the expression gives no countenance to it. It appears to me, that there was somewhat in the conduct of Michal, David's wife, in too hastily consenting to be married to Phalti, that gave occasion to this comparison. It is certain from her behaviour to him, at the bringing the ark to Jerusalem, that she had not that high esteem and affection for him, that she ought to have had, as she took this opportunity so bitterly to reproach him. It is certain also, that her marriage to Phalti must have been preceded by a divorce from David; otherwise her second marriage would have been real adultery and her consenting to a divorce, though by her father's order, showed great want of affection and fidelity to David. On this supposition, no comparison could be better chosen, nor more tenderly and delicately expressed. The brother's love to him, as a friend, was more generous and constant than the sister's, though a wife. The compliment to Jonathan was very high, and just; and the concealing the sister's name, was truly polite.

He who can read this excellent composure without admiration and pleasure, must be totally destitute of all true taste. The lamentation over the slain heroes of Israel, in the beginning, and several times repeated; the manner in which he expresses his anguish, at the thought of the defeats being published in the cities of the Philistines, and the triumphs of the daughters of the uncircumcised upon account of it; his passionately wishing that neither dews nor rains might ever fall on the mountains of Gilboa, and the fields surrounding them, in which the slaughter of the Israelites happened; his recounting the past victories of Saul and Jonathan, who never drew a bow, or brandished a sword, but it proved fatal to their enemies, to heighten the glory of their character, and set forth in a more lively

manner the sad reverse of their condition; his comparing them, the one to an eagle for swiftness, the other to a lion for strength and valour; the honourable mention of their mutual affection while they lived, and dying bravely together in the field of battle; the exclamation to the daughters of Israel to mourn over Saul, and the reasons he gives for it; his celebrating the mutual tender friendship between himself and Jonathan: in a word, this elegy, in every part of it, both in sentiment and expression, hath all the charms with which the spirit of poetry can adorn it; shows the richness of David's genius, and will be a monument to his praise throughout all generations.—CHANDLER.

CHAPTER II.

Ver. 4. And the men of Judah came, and there they anointed David king over the house of Judah. And they told David, saying, That the men of Jabesh-gilead were they that buried Saul. 5. And David sent messengers unto the men of Jabesh-gilead, and said unto them, Blessed be ye of the LORD, that ye have showed this kindness unto your lord, even unto Saul, and have buried him. 6. And now the LORD show kindness and truth unto you and I also will requite you this kindness, because ye have done this thing. 7. Therefore now let

your hands be strengthened, and be ye valiant for your master Saul is dead, and also the house of Judah have anointed me king over them. 8. But Abner the son of Ner, captain of Saul's host, took Ishbosheth the son of Saul, and brought him over to Mahanaim: 9. And he made him king over Gilead, and over the Ashurites, and over Jezreel, and over Ephraim, and over Benjamin, and over all Israel. 10. Ishbosheth, Saul's son, was forty years old when he began to reign over Israel, and reigned two years. But the house of Judah followed David. 11. And the time that David was king in Hebron, over the house of Judah, was seven years and six months.

David was now thirty years old; had in many instances shown his courage, fortitude, moderation, and patience; had been inured by a long persecution, and series of disappointments and distresses, to submission to God, and trust in his power and goodness; and had experienced the care of the Almighty, in the protection afforded him, under the innumerable dangers to which the jealousy and enmity of Saul had exposed him. As he had under all his difficulties strengthened himself in God, left his fate to the divine disposal, and was determined never to hasten his accession to the throne by any acts of treason and violence; God now began to reward his singular virtue, and from a fugitive and exile he was made king over the most powerful of all the tribes, by their unsolicited and voluntary consent; as an earnest of what God had in further reserve for him, the kingdom over all his people. From hence it appears, how unreasonably it hath been alleged, that David had no pretension to the sovereignty, either by right of inheritance, which was claimed by Ishbosheth, a remaining son of Saul, nor by popular election, but by the clandestine appointment of an old Levite, which inspired him with hopes, of which by arms and intrigues he obtained the fruition. Mr. Bayle also censures the conduct of David in the measures he took to secure himself the crown. For he informs us, that David had gained the principal men of the tribe of Judah by presents; and that had not Abner prevented it, there is no doubt but he would have become king over all Israel, by the same method, viz. by gaining the principal persons by presents. It is acknowledged that David had no pretension to the sovereignty by right of inheritance; and in this respect Saul had no more right than David; nor Ishbosheth than either of them; the hereditary right, if any such there was, being vested in Mephibosheth,

Saul's grandson, by his eldest son Jonathan. And, thus, I doubt not, Mephibosheth himself thought; at least Saul's family certainly did. For when David asked Ziba where Mephibosheth was, Ziba answered: "He abideth at Jerusalem; for he said, to-day shall the house of Israel restore me the kingdom of my father." Whether this charge was true or false, it is evident that Mephibosheth, or his family, thought the right of succession to the kingdom of Israel belonged to him, as it most unquestionably did, if the succession had been made hereditary in Saul's family. Besides, if Saul himself, as some affirm, had only the show of a popular election, he had no real popular election at all, and therefore no right to the crown, and therefore Ishbosheth could derive no right from him to succeed him. Ishbosheth further doth not appear to have had, either the show or reality of a popular election; no, nor the clandestine appointment of the old Levite, which both Saul and David had. He was the mere creature of Abner, the captain of Saul's host; who, ambitious of retaining the power in his own hand, took Ishbosheth, and, by military force, made him king over Israel; without, as far as appears, the choice or consent of the eleven tribes, and in direct opposition to the choice and consent of the tribe of Judah, the most considerable and powerful of all, and the inclination of the whole body of the people. Ishbosheth therefore was a usurper in every respect, in prejudice of the right heir; and David, and every man in Israel, had a natural right to oppose him, and prevent his establishment in the kingdom. Mr. Bayle says, that David did not pretend that Ishbosheth reigned by usurpation; for he allowed him to be a righteous man, and therefore a lawful king. But this reasoning will not hold good, if Mr. Bayle's own account of David be true. He allows David to have been one of the greatest men in the world, commends him for his conspicuous piety, and extols him as a son of holiness in the church. And yet he tells us, that David acted like an infidel, and most ambitious prince; and that his policy and prudence were such, as he can never persuade himself to think that the strict laws of equity, and the severe morals of a good servant of God can possibly approve; and that his actions were not those of a saint. I therefore say, that according to Mr. Bayle, a person may have a general character for a saint and a righteous man, and yet, in some particular actions, may act contrary to the character of both; and that therefore it doth not follow, that because David allowed Ishbosheth to be a righteous man, therefore he allowed him to be a lawful king. Ishbosheth was undoubtedly a righteous man, with respect to his murderers, whom he had never injured; and probably in his private character he might be a man of virtue. But at the same time David could not but know, that he reigned in every view by usurpation, and that consequently he was in this respect a very unrighteous man. The right of David to the crown was indisputable, and the highest by which any man could claim it. When Saul was made king, the crown was not made hereditary in his family, and the same power that made him king, be that what it will, declared, that his kingdom should not stand, or be perpetuated in his family, but be transferred to his neighbour. Upon the death of Saul therefore, the throne became vacant, and the peo le were at full liberty, under the direction of God, to choose whom they pleased. The tribe of Judah unanimously chose David for their king, and it is highly probable, that the whole body of the nation would have fallen in with him, had they not been prevented by the influence of Abner. This Abner himself more than intimates, when in order to bring over the eleven tribes to David, he puts them in remembrance, saying: "Ye fought for David in times past to be king over you," viz. even in Saul's time, who was abhorred and detested by many of the principal men for his tyranny. Nay, we are expressly informed, that the princes, and captains of hundreds and thousands, and great parties from the Benjamites, Gibeonites, Gadites, the tribe of Judah and Manasseh revolted to him, even before the battle in which Saul was slain, day by day, till it was a great host, like the host of God. These were voluntary in the offer of the crown to David, and no kind of bribes or force employed by him to bring them to submission. The whole nation was in motion, and nothing prevented their unanimously declaring for him, but the opposition of Abner in favour of Ishbosheth.

But did not David gain in particular the tribe of Judah by bribes or presents? Mr. Bayle affirms he did: The

whole tribe of Judah, of which he had gained the principal men by presents, acknowledged him for king. The history only says, that he once made presents to such of the elders of Judah, as were his friends, consisting of part of the spoil he took from the Amalekites, after the recovery of the prey they had taken from Ziklag; and probably that very part which the Amalekites had taken from Judah, the south of which they had just invaded. But if these elders of Judah were his friends, before he sent them this present, then he did not gain them by sending them these presents, and their making him king was not because he made them a present, but from the greatness of their affection for him before. When Mr. Bayle adds, there is no doubt, had not Abner prevented it, but he would have been king of all Israel, by the same method of presents; I think there is great reason to doubt of it; for David doth not appear to have been in circumstances to give such presents; nor did they seem to desire or want them, being led by their own inclinations and sense of interest and duty at last to submit to him. David was certainly a man of a generous disposition, and liberal in his favours; and this temper I never so much as suspected to be criminal, unworthy a great and good prince, or a real saint; and if by a prudent liberality he could se cure his own rights, I think he acted much more like a saint, than if he had recovered them by force, without ever first attempting to do it by the gentler methods of liberality and goodness. The true reason of the tribe of Judah's falling in with him, and the readiness of the other tribes to acknowledge him as king, was his excellent character as a brave and generous soldier, under whom they themselves had formerly served; and especially his designation by God to the royal dignity, having been anointed king by Samuel, according to the express order of God. It was this latter consideration, that led him to ask the divine direction upon Saul's death, what measures he should take to secure his succession. The very question: "Shall I go up to any of the cities of Judah ?" would have been highly indecent, had he not had the divine promise and assistance to depend on. His claim, by virtue of Samuel's unction, was his only claim, was universally known to the people of Israel, and the avowed reason why they at last advanced him to the throne. It was known to Jonathan his friend. Saul himself was no stranger to it. I know, says he, that thou shalt be surely king, and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in thy hand. It was known even to private persons. Nabal's wife confesses this appointment of God. Abner terrified Ishbosheth by putting him in mind of it. "So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the Lord hath sworn to David, even so I do to him, to translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel." He declares the same in his message to the elders of Israel. The Lord hath spoken of David, saying, “By the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel out of the hands of the Philistines, and out of the hand of all their enemies." And when they came to make him king, this was the grand inducement to it. "In time past, when Saul was king over us, thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel, and the Lord said to thee: Thou shalt fecd my people Israel, and thou shalt be captain over Israel; and they anointed David king over Israel, according to the word of the Lord by Samuel." So that this was the foundation of his claim, was universally known, and justified his pretensions to, and contest for, the crown after the death of Saul.

To this contest David was forced, by Ishbosheth's usurpation, supported by the authority and influence of Abner, a near relation of Saul, and who had been his general. It lasted above seven years, and Mr. Bayle is extremely displeased with poor David, and censures him very severely on this account. He says, "That as Abner preserved by his fidelity eleven whole tribes for Ishbosheth, the same thing happened as would have happened between two infidel and most ambitious princes. David and Ishbosheth made incessant war on one another, to try which of the two could get the other's share, in order to enjoy the whole kingdom without division." But the real question, by which David's conduct is to be determined, is: Did the free election of the tribe of Judah, neither bought by bribes, nor forced by power, give David a right to be king over it; and did his appointment by God to succeed Saul, and rule over all Israel, give him a just claim to enjoy the whole kingdom, without division? I think in both cases he had an indisputable right, and consequent

ly he might, consistently even with the character of a saint, defend and maintain his right. Ishbosheth therefore, by keeping David out of part of the kingdom, and endeavouring by arms to dispossess him of the whole, might well enough deserve Mr. Bayle's character of an infidel and ambitious prince; and David, endeavouring only to secure what he had, and to recover what he was unjustly kept out of, may still pass for a very good believer, and doth not seem to have had any more ambition in him, than what was honourable and virtuous. If wars are in their nature unlawful, David's character as a saint will greatly suffer by his carrying on the war with Ishbosheth. But if wars are in any case lawful, it must be when waged for supporting those just and important rights, which cannot be secured without them. Such were certainly the rights of David, and therefore his maintaining the war against Ishbosheth, was both his interest and duty, and doth not in the least diminish the glory of this son of holiness in the church. The promise of God to David, that he should be king of Israel, was not a promise to make him so by extraordinary and miraculous methods, but in the use of all prudential and proper ones; and if he actually employed arms when necessary to vindicate his just claims, and prudence and policy to turn every event to his advantage, it only shows that he was born for empire, worthy of a kingdom, and a man after God's own heart; or fit for the purposes for which God raised him to the throne. And though these methods should have been, to all appearance, like those which wicked men, or infidel and most ambitious princes, make use of to obtain their ends, they may for all that be very just and honourable. For infidel and wicked princes may sometimes pursue lawful ends, and be forced to maintain their rights by policy and arms. And therefore unless the means which David used were base and criminal, or employed for wicked and unjustifiable purposes, they may be allowed to be, to external appearance, the same with what wicked, ambitious, infidel princes use, and yet be agreeable to the rules of justice and honour.-CHANDLER.

Ver. 5. And David sent messengers unto the men of Jabesh-gilead, and said unto them, Blessed be ye of the LORD, that ye have showed this kindness unto your lord, even unto Saul, and have buried him.

The bodies of Saul and his sons were BURNT by the men of Jabesh-gilead. Two of the thirty-two charities of the Hindoos are, to burn the bodies of those whose relations cannot do it, and to pay for the beating of the tom-toms to the place of burning. It is therefore considered a work of great merit to perform the funeral rites for a respectable stranger, or for those whose relations are not able to meet the expenses. Hence may be seen the funerals of those who have lived in poverty, or who have seen better days, conducted with great pomp, because the reward is great to him who advances the money, and because he receives great praise from the people.-ROBERTS.

Ver. 9. And Joab said to Amasa, Art thou in health, my brother? And Joab took Amasa by the beard with the right hand to kiss him.

Dr. Shaw takes no notice of their taking hold of the beard in order to kiss, but Thevenot does, saying, that among the Turks it is a great affront to take one by the beard, unless it be to kiss him, in which case they often do it. Whether he means by kissing him, kissing his beard, or not, I do not know; but Joab's taking Amasa by the beard to kiss him, 2 Sam. xx. 9, seems to be designed to express his taking his beard to kiss it; at least this is agreeable to the customs of those that now live in that country; for D'Arvieux, describing the assembling together of several of the petty Arab princes at an entertainment, tells us, that "All the emirs came just together a little time after, accompanied by their friends and attendants, and after the usual civilities, caresses, kissings of the beard, and of the hand, which every one gave and received according to his hand and dignity, they sat down upon mats." He elsewhere speaks of the women's kissing their husbands' beards, and children those of their fathers, and friends reciprocally saluting one another in this manner; but the

doing it by their emirs more exactly answers this history of Joab and Amasa, and in this stooping posture he could much better see to direct the blow, than if he had only held his beard, and raised himself to kiss his face.-HARMER. Ver. 18. And there were three sons of Zeruiah there, Joab, and Abishai, and Asahel: and Asahel was as light of foot as a wild roe.

and

The name of the antelope in the Hebrew scripture, is (tsebi;) and in the version of the Seventy Aopkas, (dorcas.) In our version, the original term is translated roe and roebuck; but Dr. Shaw, and others, have proved by several conclusive arguments, that it is not the roe, but the antelope, which the sacred writers intend. The former is extremely rare in the oriental_regions, while the latter is common in every part of the Levant. But is it to be supposed, that the sacred writers would borrow their figures from creatures which are either not known at all in Palestine and the surrounding countries, or but rarely seen; while they had not even a name for an animal, which, in large herds of several thousands, fed in their fields, and around their dwellings? Such a supposition would contradict some of the strongest laws which regulate the operations of the human mind, and is therefore quite inadmissible. It is equally absurd to suppose that the Jewish legislator, when he regulated by fixed laws the food of his people, would mention a creature which they probably had never seen, of which perhaps they had not even heard, which was not to be found in the deserts over which they had to travel, nor in the country they were to possess; while he omitted one of daily occurrence, which was found everywhere, in the wilderness and in the cultivated field, on the mountains and in the plains; whose flesh was greatly esteemed, and, by consequence, could not fail to become an important article of subsistence. These considerations are of themselves sufficient to establish the superior claims of the antelope to a place in the sacred volume. The arguments which have been drawn from the etymological meaning of the Hebrew terms 2, and the authority of the Septuagint, although of inferior importance, are not destitute of weight. The first of these names suggests the idea of a very gregarious animal; but this is not the character of the roes, for, instead of associating in herds, they live in separate families; while the antelopes are commonly found in very large herds, sometimes to the number of two or three thousand together. The second term, 2, primarily signifies beauty; and when put for the concrete, as in this instance, by a very common figure of speech in Hebrew, has the force of a superlative, and signifies a thing or animal of uncommon beauty. Thus the land of Canaan is, in the prophet, styled s p¬, the land of beauty; or, as it is rendered by our translators, the glory of all lands. The tsebi, therefore, is an animal that excels in beauty; which exactly corresponds with all the accounts that natural historians have given us of the antelope. Both the roe and the antelope, it must be admitted, are, in the general opinion of mankind, very beautiful animals; but the preference is commonly given to the latter. Buffon says, the figure of the small antelopes is elegant, and their members are finely proportioned to their size; and make prodigious bounds. The Septuagint uniformly translate the terms, 3 and 23, by dopac; and the correctness of their translation is attested by Luke, for be mentions "a certain disciple" who resided "at Joppa, named Tabitha, which, by interpretation, is called Dorcas." The name Tabitha is formed by a slight alteration from the Chaldee noun (Tabia,) and this from the Hebrew term (tsebi.) The Hebrew term signifies, as has been already observed, a creature of surpassing beauty; Dorcas, its divinely attested equivalent, limiting somewhat the general signification, denotes a creature remarkable for the fineness of its eyes; and from this last circumstance, it is conjectured that Tabitha received her name. But while the eyes of the roe have attracted no particular attention, so far as the writer has observed, the antelope has been celebrated for the fineness of its eyes in all the countries of the East. Their beauty, according to Dr. Shaw, is proverbial there to this day; and it is still the greatest compliment which, in these countries, can be paid to a fine woman, to say, "You have the eyes of an antelope." From Bochart, and other authors, we learn that it was equally

celebrated by the ancients for the acuteness of its vision; its eyes, they pretend, never become bleared; it sees in the dark; it sleeps with both eyes open, or, as others will have it, with one eye open and another shut. These circumstances appear to be much more applicable to the antelope, which is a quadruped well known, than to the roe, which is either not known at all, or very rare, in those parts of the world. The natives of Syria make a distinction between the antelopes of the mountain, and those of the plain. Dr. Russel, who gives us this information, says, ́“ the former is the most beautifully formed, its back and sides are of a dark brown colour, and it bounds with surprising agility; the latter is of a much lighter colour, its limbs are not so cleanly turned, and it is neither so strong, nor so active; both, however, are so fleet, that the greyhounds, though reckoned excellent, cannot, without the aid of the falcon, come up with them, except in soft deep ground." This is probably the reason, that the sacred writers frequently mention the "antelope upon the mountains," and not simply the antelope, when they allude to surpassing beauty of form, or amazing rapidity of motion. The swiftness of this beautiful creature, has been celebrated by writers of every age, in terms of high admiration. Its exquisite symmetry, its active form, and the delicate turn of its limbs, clearly show, that it is intended by its Maker to hold a distinguished place among the fleetest animals that scour the desert. Sir John Malcom says, it may be termed the fleetest of quadrupeds. It seems rather to vanish, than to run from the pursuer, and when closely pressed, bounds with so great agility, that it hardly seems to touch the ground in its career. Oppian calls it the swiftest species of goat; and according to Elian, it equals the whirlwind in speed. He outruns the antelope, said the Arabians, when they wished to pay the highest compliment to the youthful warrior. To this trait in its character, the sacred writers often allude. The surprising agility which Asahel, the brother of Joab, displayed in his pursuit of Abner, drew this eulogium from the sacred historian: "And Asahel was light of foot, as one of the antelopes that are in the field." Another allusion to the amazing speed of that animal, occurs in the description of the warlike qualifications which distinguished a troop of Gadites in the service of David: "They were men of might, men of war, fit for the battle, that could handle shield and buckler, whose faces were like the faces of lions, and were as swift as the roes (the antelopes) upon the mountains."-PAXTON. Ver. 28. So Joab blew a trumpet, and all the people stood still, and pursued after Israel no more, neither fought they any more.

See on 2 Sam. 18. 16.

CHAPTER III.

Ver. 12. And Abner sent messengers to David on his behalf, saying, Whose is the land? saying also, Make thy league with me, and, behold, my hand shall be with thee, to bring about all Israel unto thee.

Though Abner, with the eleven tribes, asserted Ishbosheth's cause for several years, yet he saw that his interest greatly declined, and that he should not long be able to support him, as his forces were worsted in every rencounter; while David prospered in all his affairs, his party was continually increasing, and every thing seemed to conspire to crown his wishes, and soon put him in possession of the kingdom over all Israel. This was the opportunity that Abner had waited for, to bring about that revolution in favour of David, which he had continually in his view, and was determined to effect, upon the first occasion that presented itself. He soon found one, that he immediately closed with. Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rispah, and Ishbosheth, having found out that Abner had been too intimate with her, took an opportunity to reproach him on that affair, and with an air of displeasure said to him: Why hast thou gone in unto my father's concubine? Abner, enraged to be thus called to an account, said to Ishbosheth with indignation: "What, am I to be used in so contemptuous and disagreeable a manner, as though I were as insignificant as a dog's head, and thus haughtily

questioned, as though I had been guilty of a heinous crime, concerning this woman, which you reprove me for having been too free with! What, this to me, who, in opposition to the tribe of Judah, have advanced you to the throne, have been so firm and faithful a friend to the house of Saul thy father, his brethren, and adherents, and have not delivered thee, as I could easily have done, into the hands of David! Too long have I already resisted the appointment of God, and may I fall under his heaviest curse, except I perform to David, what the Lord hath sworn to David; even to translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to establish his throne over all Israel and Judah, from Dan even to Beershebah!" This threatening so terrified the unhappy prince, that he could not answer him a word, as he knew he was absolutely in Abner's power, and had too much reason to fear that he would put his threatening too soon in execution. He did it without delay, and sent private messengers to David to offer him his service, and say to him: "To whom doth the government over the country of Israel belong? Even to thyself. Enter therefore into an agreement with me, and I will lend thee my assistance, to bring over all the tribes of Israel to thy interest?" David, in return to his message, sent him word, he was willing to enter into a treaty; but would have no interview with him, but upon condition that he should bring Michal, Saul's daughter, with him, when he admitted him to an audience. He sent at the same time messengers to Ishbosheth, to demand that Michal, his wife, whom he purchased for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines; i. e. at the hazard of his life, should be immediately delivered to him; who had by force been taken from him, and married to Phaltiel, the son of Laish. Here David also falls under censure, as manifesting, in this instance, a too sensual disposition; and Mr. Bayle speaks of this affair in such a manner, as shows that he greatly disapproved it. For he says that Michal, Saul's daughter, was David's first wife, that she was taken from him during his disgrace, that he successively married several others, and yet demanded the first again; adding, to enhance David's offence, that to restore her to him, they were obliged to force her from a husband, who loved her greatly, and followed her as far as he could, weeping like a child. I confess I cannot help smiling at this last observation, nor perceive that it is to the purpose; for I can never imagine, that because one man loves another man's wife very dearly, that therefore the husband has no right to reclaim her; or should relinquish her, because the man cries like a child at parting with her. I think David was most certainly in the right to demand her; for whatever may be said as to his other wives, he had certainly the strongest claim to this; for he had purchased her for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines. And supposing there was nothing of a sensual disposition that influenced David in this instance, there might be other very substantial reasons to induce him to insist upon her being sent to him. He purchased her at the hazard of his life, and she was a living proof of his daughter, and he did not probably choose to lose the honmilitary valour and ability. She was his predecessor's our and advantage of the alliance. It might conciliate some of Saul's family and tribe to his interest, when they saw one of his daughters owned and treated as David's wife, and that he did not pursue his resentment to Saul, to the injury or disgrace of any of the branches of his family. There was also a real generosity in the thing, both to her and Saul; in that he received her after she had been another man's; remembering probably how once he owed his life to her affection, and knowing that she was partly separated from him by her father's authority: whereas many princes, for much less provocations of a wife's father, would have turned off their consorts in revenge of them, and even put them to death for having been married to another. In consequence of this demand made to Abner and Ishbosheth, she was immediately put into Abner's hands: who, to prepare things for an accommodation with David, went and assembled all the elders of Israel, and said to them: "You have formerly oftentimes expressed your desire, that David might be king over you. You have now an opportunity to gratify your own inclinations in this respect; and what should engage you to advance him to the throne is, that God himself hath pointed out to you the man, as he hath declared: By the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel out of the hand of