[724] Mic. iii. 11.

[725] Jer. vii. 4, 8-15.

[726] Jer. x.x.xi. 31, 32.

[727] Jer. xxii. 15, 16.

NOTE TO CHAPTER x.x.xI.

"Jehovah is our Lawgiver."--ISA. x.x.xiii. 22.

What was the Book of the Law which Hilkiah found in the Temple?

The great majority of eminent modern critics have now come to the conclusion that it was the kernel of the Book of Deuteronomy. Nor is this in any sense a mere modern notion. It occurs as far back as St.

Jerome (_Adv. Jovin._, i. 5) and St. Chrysostom (_Hom. in Matt._, ix., p. 135, B. See W. Rob. Smith, p. 258).

It is no part of my immediate duty to argue this question, but I may state that the arguments for this conclusion are partly historical, partly literary, and partly depend on internal evidence.

I. As regards the _literary_ argument, it is maintained that--

1. The full, rounded, rhetorical style of Deuteronomy, so widely different from the extreme dryness of other parts of the Torah, could not have been as yet developed in the days of Moses, and required the slow training of centuries for its perfection. It is a new phenomenon, and differs widely from earlier prophetic writings, such as those of Amos and Hosea.

2. The style and language of the Deuteronomist are so marked, that they can scarcely escape an intelligent reader of the English Version.

Riehm enumerates sixty-four characteristic words or phrases. Their significance lies in the fact that they express obvious ideas, and are not names for special objects, which force a writer to use peculiar words. The style closely resembles in many phrases and particulars the style of Jeremiah, and of him alone among the prophets. "Even supposing that no historic text," it has been said, "taught us that the articles of Smalkald were the work of Luther, we should still have the right to affirm that these articles closely resemble the ideas of Luther, and could hardly have been published without his cognisance."

II. As regards _historical_ evidence, we observe that--

1. No author earlier than Josiah shows any acquaintance with Deuteronomy: after that date, proofs of such knowledge abound.

2. The Book of Deuteronomy insisted with reiterated emphasis on the centralisation of worship. All its ordinances are framed with a view to promote this end. But we have seen that there is not a trace of any belief that local shrines were prohibited earlier than the reign of Hezekiah, who certainly would have defended his boldness by appeal to a written law if he had known of such as existing.

III. As regards _internal_ evidence, we see that--

1. Many pa.s.sages and injunctions of the Book of Deuteronomy differ entirely from those found in the old Book of the Covenant which forms the most ancient nucleus of Exodus (Exod. xx. 22-xxiii. 33).

2. Even the most conservative English critics--even those who, with any pretence to competent knowledge, argue against the more advanced conclusions of the Higher Criticism--cannot help admitting that at least three codes, which in many, and in some fundamental, respects differ widely from each other, and which make no reference to each other, are found in our present Pentateuch--viz., that of the Book of the Covenant, that of the Deuteronomist (D.), and that of the Priestly writer (P.).

All three may contain elements as old as the days of Moses; but most critics (with scarcely an exception in Germany) now believe that the Deuteronomic Code, in its present form, is not earlier than the date of Josiah's reformation (_circ._ B.C. 621); and the Priestly Codex (whatever older doc.u.ments may exist in it) not older, in its present form, than about the time of Ezra (B.C. 444). Dillmann, Kittel, and in his later days Delitzsch, have been of necessity compelled to give up the views that, in their present form, D. and P. are as ancient as the days of Moses. The last German critic who held that Moses wrote our present Pentateuch was Keil (_d._ 1888). Canon Cheyne argues for the late date of this misnamed "Deuteronomy," on the grounds that the authors (1) used doc.u.ments manifestly later than Moses; (2) alluded to events which only occurred long after Moses; and (3) expressed ideas which, in the age of Moses, are not psychologically possible.

The Book of Deuteronomy consists mainly of an historical introduction, probably added later (i. 1-5); Moses' _first_ discourse (i. 6-iv. 40); Moses' _second_ discourse (iv. 44-xxvi.); a section marked specially by blessings and curses (xxvii.-xxix.); a _third_ discourse of Moses (xxix. 2-x.x.x. 20); his farewell (x.x.xi. 1-13); his song (x.x.xi.

14-x.x.xii. 47); conclusion, narrating his blessing and death (x.x.xii.

48-x.x.xiv. 12).

I have no s.p.a.ce here to enter fully into the arguments which seem decisive as to the date of the main part of Deuteronomy. Those who desire to see them must study Colenso, _The Pentateuch_, pt. iii.; Reuss, _Hist. Sainte et la Loi_, i. 154-211; W. Robertson Smith, _Old Test. in the Jewish Church_, lect. xvi.; Kuenen, _The Hexateuch_, E.

T., 1886; Kittel, _Gesch. d. Hebraer_, pp. 43-59; Cheyne, _Jeremiah_, pp. 48-86; S. R. Driver, _s.v._ "Deuteronomy" (Smith's _Dict. of the Bible_, new ed.); W. Aldis Wright, _The Doc.u.ments of the Hexateuch_, pp. lvii.-lxxix. The name "Deuteronomy" (or "second law") arises from the mistaken rendering of the LXX. and Vulgate in Deut. xvii. 18.

CHAPTER x.x.xII

_THE DEATH OF JOSIAH_

B.C. 608

2 KINGS xxiii. 29, 30

"Howl, O fir tree; for the cedar is fallen."--ZECH. xi. 2.

Josiah survived by thirteen years the reformation and covenant which are the chief events of his reign. He lived in prosperity and peace.

He did justice and judgment; the poor and needy flourished under his royal protection; and it was well with him. It seemed as if the Deuteronomic blessings on faithfulness to its law were about to be abundantly fulfilled, when "the azure calm of heaven" was suddenly shattered, and "down came the thunderbolt." The great and victorious a.s.surbanipal of a.s.syria had died, and left his power to weaker successors. Meanwhile, Egypt was growing in power and splendour under Pharaoh Necho II. (B.C. 612-596), the sixth king of the twenty-fifth or Saitic dynasty. He nearly antic.i.p.ated M. de Lesseps in making the Suez Ca.n.a.l,[728] and perhaps actually antic.i.p.ated Vasco de Gama in rounding the Cabo Tormentoso, or Cape of Good Hope, in a three years'

voyage. He was fired by the ambitious dream of succeeding the a.s.syrians as the chief power in the world, or at any rate of seizing part of the dominions which they had conquered.[729] Accordingly, in B.C. 608, he went up against the King of a.s.syria to the river Euphrates. The Chronicler says that his destination was Carchemish, on the Euphrates, and some have conjectured that the vague phrase "against the King of a.s.syria" is incorrect, and that, as Josephus states, he was really marching against the Medes and Babylonians after the fall of Nineveh.[730]

With this expedition Josiah was not greatly concerned. He may have begun his reign as the va.s.sal of a.s.surbanipal; but if so, it is probable that he had long since ceased to pay tribute to a power which was tottering to its fall under the attacks of Scythians and Babylonians. He had availed himself of the disorganisation of the a.s.syrian power to re-establish some, at least, of the old authority of the House of David over the Northern Kingdom, and perhaps he only undertook the desperate expedient of withstanding the northward march of the Egyptian host under the notion that either on the march or on his return the Pharaoh intended to subjugate Palestine to Egypt.

Pharaoh Necho II., among his other achievements, had created a powerful fleet,[731] and it is nearly certain that he did not advance along the coast of Palestine, but made his way by sea to Acco or Dor.[732] Here he received the news that Josiah meant to block his path at Megiddo, on the plain of Jezreel. That plain has been the great and only possible battle-field of Palestine, from the revolt in which Barak destroyed the host of Jabin,[733] to that in which Tryphon met Jonathan the Maccabee,[734] and Kleber in 1799 defeated twenty-five thousand Turks with three thousand French.

The Chronicler here adds a very remarkable incident.[735] Necho, like Joash of Israel in former days, did not care to fight with the poor little King of Judah--or at any rate did not wish to do so at present, when he was on his way to the greater encounter. He therefore sent an emba.s.sy to Josiah, saying, "What have I to do with thee, King of Judah? I come not against thee this day, but against the house wherewith I have war.[736] For G.o.d [Elohim] commanded me [in a dream]

to make haste.[737] Forbear, then, from meddling with G.o.d, who is with me, that He destroy thee not."

The conjecture "in a dream" is not unlikely, nor is it in disaccord with other events in the annals of the Pharaohs and the Sargonidae of a.s.syria.[738] We may indeed be surprised that an Egyptian Pharaoh should profess to deliver to a Jewish king the messages of Elohim, though we have seen something like this in the case of the Rabshakeh.[739] The variation in 1 Esdras i. 26-28 is curious and interesting. We are there told that the message was sent to Josiah, not only by Pharaoh Necho, who had sent to say "The Lord is with me hastening me forward: depart from me, and be not against the Lord,"

but also by "the prophet Jeremy." Josephus frankly ascribes the error of Josiah to destiny, as though he had been infatuated by the dementation which the Greeks attributed to Ate.[740]

This, however, is not likely; for it is clear that Jeremiah, though not mentioned in the Book of Kings, must have had a strong influence over the mind of Josiah, whom he loved, whose views he shared, in whose religious revolution he had taken part. Further, we do not read of any warning recorded by the prophet himself; and had he uttered one, it would certainly have been mentioned, when he committed his prophecies to writing twenty-three years after their commencement. A warning of which the neglect had led to fatal issues would have been so decisive a confirmation of Jeremiah's prophetic insight that it could not have been pa.s.sed over in silence.

Indeed, Jeremiah may have shared the conviction which, founded on imperfect generalisation, perhaps dazzled the unfortunate king to his ruin. Josiah had accepted the Book of Deuteronomy with the whole strength of his belief, and the Book of Deuteronomy had proclaimed to Israel as the reward of faithfulness this promise: "And it shall come to pa.s.s that Jehovah, thy G.o.d, shall set thee on high above all the nations of the earth.... Jehovah shall cause thine enemies which rise up against thee to be smitten before thy face: they shall come out against thee one way, and flee before thee seven ways."[741] In the strength of that promise, Josiah was perhaps saying to himself, in the language of the Psalms, that Jehovah could not fail to save His anointed, and dash His enemies to pieces under His feet;[742] in the language, perhaps, of later days, that the sound of a shaken leaf should chase them, and they should flee when none pursued.[743]

Alas! such pa.s.sages do not apply invariably to our worldly fortunes!

G.o.d's promises are general. The individual must be considered apart from the universal in the region of spiritual and eternal blessings.

In the affairs of earth the wicked often seem to be in prosperity, while the righteous are overwhelmed by all G.o.d's waves and storms.

Further, Josiah evidently received a warning--a warning which professed to come, and really came, from G.o.d[744]--whether uttered by Pharaoh or by Jeremiah. And in this instance Josiah had sought war; he had not been forced into it. It was not for him to go out of his way to champion the cause either of cruel a.s.syria or vaunting Babylon.

The result was entire disenchantment. No more disheartening and disastrous calamity could have happened to the kingdom, which had just begun to struggle out of the slough of idolatry and humiliation.

Heedless of the message he had received, strong in mistaken hopes, Josiah opposed his poor, weak forces to the powerful host of renovated Egypt. The result was instantaneous ruin.[745] Judah was defeated and scattered without a blow,--Necho came, saw, conquered. Josiah, according to the present record of the Chronicles, like Ahab, "disguised himself"[746] and went into the battle; and as he drove from rank to rank an Egyptian archer drew a bow at a venture, and smote him while he was putting his forces in array. The arrow-point brought conviction too late. Josiah saw his error; he knew that his own death involved the rout of his army. He sounded a retreat, and said to his servants, "Bear me away to my travelling chariot, for I am sore wounded."[747] He died at Megiddo, where his ancestor Ahaziah had died before him from the arrow-wounds of Jehu's pursuers. His servants carried him in a chariot dead from Megiddo. The famous plain of Esdraelon had already witnessed two great victories--that of Barak over Sisera, and that of Gideon over the Midianites; and one deplorable defeat--that of Saul by the Philistines. It was now darkened by a catastrophe even more sad.[748]

When that chariot, accompanied by its wailing escort, entered the gates of Jerusalem, with the routed army of Judah behind it, the feeling of the people must have resembled that of the Athenians when the news reached them that Lysander had destroyed their whole fleet at aegospotami, and the long wail went thrilling up through that sleepless night from the Peiraeus all along the Makra Teiche to the Parthenon and the Acropolis. And there followed such a mourning as the land had never known before. It had begun at Megiddo and Hadadrimmon, leaving the sad memory of its hopeless intensity. It was renewed at Jerusalem when they buried the king in his own sepulchre. "The land mourned, every family apart; the family of the House of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the House of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; the family of the House of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart; all the families that remained, every family apart, and their wives apart."[749] "And all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah. And Jeremiah lamented for Josiah: and all the singing men and the singing women spake of Josiah in their lamentations unto this day, and they were made an inst.i.tution in Israel: and, behold, they are written in the Lamentations."[750]

Not even for heroic David, or royal Solomon, or pious Asa, or prosperous Jehoshaphat had there been so loud a dirge.

But, alas! there was cause for far deeper sorrow than the loss of a prince, however able, however beloved. The dead was dead. Natural sorrow for the bereavement of the people would soon be healed by time, but behind the pa.s.sing affliction lay a great fear and a great reaction.

A great fear,--for now a southern foe was added to the northern.

Jeremiah and other prophets had warned Israel of the peril from the North. When the Scythian wave "rolled sh.o.r.eward, struck and was dissipated," when the source of a.s.syrian terror seemed to be drying up, worldlings may have felt inclined to laugh at Jeremiah. But now it was evident that, sooner or later, the Chaldaeans would be as formidable as their predecessors, and out of the serpent's egg was breaking forth a c.o.c.katrice. The uncalled-for attempt of Josiah to bar the path of the new and mighty Pharaoh had also added Egypt to the list of formidable enemies. For the present the Pharaoh had pa.s.sed on to the Euphrates; but whether he returned victorious or defeated, his troops could not but be a source of danger to the little kingdom, which would henceforth be helpless between the overwhelming forces of its foes.

If such were the fears of the timid and the pessimistic, still deeper was the disheartenment of the faithful. Josiah had been the most obedient, the most religious, of all the kings of Judah from childhood upwards. Where, then, were Jehovah's old loving-kindnesses which He sware unto David in His truth? Had G.o.d forgotten to be gracious? Had He hidden away His mercy in displeasure? Where were the blessings of the newly discovered Book of the Law, if the curse fell on its most earnest votary? Where was Huldah's promise that he should be gathered to his fathers in peace, if he was carried back dead from the field of fruitless battle? There can be little doubt that the apparent blight which had fallen on unavailing righteousness hastened the reaction of the subsequent reigns. Many might be inclined to cry out with even Jeremiah in his moments of overwhelming despondency, "Ah, Lord G.o.d!