The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 02 : $b Israel, India, Persia, Phoenicia, Minor Nations of Western Asia
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 02 : $b Israel, India, Persia, Phoenicia, Minor Nations of Western Asia
World history
But the literary basis of this last conception is not sufficiently
secure. It is just those portions of David’s last words which refer to
Joab and Shimei, which are indisputably old, while the whole passage
comes from our most authentic sources. Besides, as a matter of fact,
such a wish on David’s part does not in itself awaken such grave
doubts as might appear. Only we must guard against trying to measure
the distant past by our own moral feelings, and we must bear in mind
what David, following the cruel faith of his time, did to the house of
Saul, in order to blot out the stain of an ancient deed of blood which
still lay on it. Thus it cannot really appear strange that he should
have been tormented by an uneasy fear at the guilt and curse of a past,
which, one day, when he was gone, might strike his house as that guilt
of blood had chastised the house of Saul.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 960-950 B.C.]]
With Abiathar’s removal from the priesthood, an act of the highest
importance for the history of religion in Israel was accomplished. In
place of the house of Eli, which had already been severely threatened
in the time of Saul, but had finally recovered itself under David’s
favour, a new priesthood appeared on the scene. How significant the
change was is shown by the circumstance that a prophetic reference to
it is already made in the story of Eli. Eli derived his priesthood
and that of his family from Egypt and probably from the father of the
priesthood, Aaron. In what Zadok’s claim consisted we do not know. He
can hardly have been the first of an entirely new line, and thus not
even a Levite. Solomon would have guarded against putting in Abiathar’s
stead a priest of quite unpriestly blood. Henceforth the “Bene- (sons
of) Zadok” hold possession of the priesthood at Jerusalem. And after
the erection of the temple they succeeded in bringing this priesthood,
and with it their own house, to high prosperity and power.
Solomon’s task as king was clear. As David’s successor he was heir
to great wealth; he had only to preserve what David had created and
to confirm himself in its possession. Abroad he had to maintain the
extraordinary prestige which Israel had acquired; at home to make the
unity of the tribes, which David had completed, a permanent thing, and
to chain Israel to the house of the great king.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account