Abbildungen der Seite

I see no sufficient reason to suppose that Shiloh was at this time a town. It was the name of the place where the tabernacle was erected. By the mention of the daughters of Shiloh, Judges xxi, 21, it should seem that it was the name of a district, rather than a town. And the situation of the spot, where the tabernacle stood, is described, Judges xxi, 19, by its bearings with respect to other towns, as if there were no town upon the spot itself. If there was no town there, Shechem might be of all the neighbouring towns the most convenient at this time for a general assembly of the people, and the site of the tabernacle might be much nearer to this antient town of Shechem, than the town of Shiloh was to the Shechem of St Jerome's time.

Bethel was another of the three towns mentioned Judges xxi, 19, so near to Shiloh, that it is sometimes mentioned as the place of the ark, when the ark was unquestionably at Shiloh. And persons going to consult the divine oracle at Shiloh are said to go up for that purpose to Bethel. See Judges xx, 18, 26, 27.

Mizpeh of Benjamin was another town, though not one of the three mentioned in Judges xxi, 19, so near to Shiloh, that the people are said to be assembled at Mizpeh before Jehovah (Judges xx, 1, and xxi, 5), when the tabernacle and the ark were certainly at Shiloh. And a religious ceremony per. formed before Jehovah, that is, at the tabernacle at Shiloh, is said to have passed at Mizpeh, where the people were at the time assembled, Judges xi, 11. Bethel, however, was so much nearer to Shiloh, than Mizpeh, that persons going from Mizpeh to consult the divine oracle at Shiloh, are said to go up for that purpose to Bethel, See Judges xx.

It is remarkable that at the time the ark was at Shiloh, though we read that individuals went up thither to worship or consult the oracle, yet we never read of any public assembly of the people at that place, but either at Shechem or Mizpeh; except indeed the stated feast mentioned in Judges xxi, 19.

Verse 4. _“ Egypt.” The LXX add, -savèyeνοντο εκει εις έθνος μεγα και πολυ και κραταιον, και έκακοσαν αυτους οι Αίγυπτιοι. ,

Verse 13. —" for which ye did not labour ;” rather, with Queen Elizabeth's translators, “ wherein ye did not labour;" i. e. which ye had not tilled.

Verse 20. “ If forsake-then he will turn”. rather, “ For ye will forsake-and he will turn."

If ye

[ocr errors]

Verse 32. -- of Gaash.” The LXX add, --1044 έπει έθηκαν μετ' αυτου εις το μονημείον, εν ώ έθαψαν αυτον έπει, τας μαχαιρας τας πετρινας, εν ας περιετεμεν τους υιους Ισραηλ, έν Γαλγαλοις, ότε έζηγαγεν αυτους εξ Αίγυπτου, καθασυνεταξεν Κυριος και εκει εισιν εως της σημερον ημερας.

Verse 33. —“ Ephraim.” The LXX add, -'Ev εκεινη τη ημερα λαβοντες οι υιοι Ισραηλ την κιβωτον της διαθηκης του Θεου, περιεφερον εν εαυτοις. και Φινεες ιερατευσεν αντι Ελεάζας του πατρος αυτου έως απεθανε, και κατωρυχθη εν Γαβααρ τη εαυτου. Οι δε υιοι Ισραηλ απηλθοσαν εκαστος εις τον τοπον εαυτων, και εις την εαυτων πολιν. Και εσεβοντο οι υιοι Ισραηλ την Ασταρτην, και την Ασταρωθ, και τους θεους των εθνων των κυκλω αυτων και παρεδωκεν αυτους Κυριος εις χειρας Εγλωμ τω βασιλει Μωαβ, και κατεκυριευσεν αυτων έτη δεκαοκτω.

Houbigant esteems this addition, as well as what we find subjoined to the 4th and to the 32d verse, an original part of the sacred text, which was extant in the copies used by these translators. But this last addition is, in my judgment, entirely discredited by the very first

part of it, about the removal of the ark from place to place; which is false. For the ark was never moved from Shiloh, till the time of Eli, when it was carried to the camp at Ebenezer, in hopes that its presence might secure the victory to the Israelites over the Philistims. 1 Sam. iv, 3, 4, and 7. Again, in the latter part, the mention of Astarte and Astaroth as different divinities betrays both the ignorance and the late age of the interpolator,


CHAP. I, 10—15. The capture of Jerusalem, though it took place in the life-time of Joshua, and is related in its proper place in the tenth chapter of the book of Joshua, is very properly mentioned in the '8th verse of this chapter, to explain how it came to pass that the victorious Israelites should


the captive king Adonibezek to that place. The expulsion of the three sons of Anak from Hebron by Caleb, is mentioned for a particular reason in the 20th verse. But no reason can be assigned for the mention of it here in the 10th verse, or for the repetition in the five following of Othniel's expedition against Kiriathsepher, and his marriage with Achsah. I much suspect that these six verses are an interpolation, and should be expunged.

Verse 20. The sacred writer having said in the preceding verse that Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, finds it necessary to the

« ZurückWeiter »