The following is a statement of the sources of the royal mcome : 1. The royal demesnes, corn-fields, vine- yards, and olive-gardens. Some at least of these seem to have been taken from private individuals, but wheth- er as the punishment of rebellion, or on any other plau- sible pretext, is not specified (1 Sam. viii, 14 ; 1 Cliroii. xxvii, 26-28). 2. The produce of the royal flocks (1 Sam. xxi, 7; 2 Sam. xiii, 23; 2 Chron. xxvi, 10; 1 Chron. xxvii, 25). 3. A nominal tenth of the produce of corn-land and vineyards, and of sheep (1 Sam. viii, 15, 17). 4. A tribute from merchants who passed through the Hebrew territory (1 Kings x, 14). 5. Presents made by his subjects (1 Sam. x, 27; xvi, 20; 1 Kings x, 25; Psa. Ixxii, 10). There is, perhaps, no greater distinc- tion in the usages of Eastern and Western nations than in what relates to the giving and receiving of pres- ents. When made regularly, they do, in fact, amount to a regular tax. Thus, in the passage last referred to in the book of Kings, it is stated that they brought to Solomon '■ every man his present, vessels of silver and vessels of gold, and garments, and armor, and spices, horses and mules, a rate year by year." 6. In the time of Solomon, the king had trading vessels of his own at sea, which, starting from Eziongeber, brought back once in three years gold and silver, ivorj', apes, and jieacocks (1 Kings X, 22). It is probable that Solomon and some other kings may have derived some revenue from com^ mercial ventures (1 Kings ix, 28). 7. The spoils of war taken from conquered nations and the tribute paid by them (2 Sam. viii, 2, 7, 8, 10 ; 1 Kings iv, 21 ; 2 Chron. xxvii, 5). 8. Lastly, an undefined power of exacting compulsory labor, to which reference has already been made (1 Sam. viii, 12, 13, 16). As far as this power was exercised it was equivalent to so much income. There is nothing in 1 Sam. x, 25, or in 2 Sam. v, 3, to justify the statement that the Hebrews defined in express terms, or in any terms, bj^ a yiarticular agreement or covenant for that purpose, what services should be rendered to the king, or what he could legally require. See Solo.mon. 6. Usages. — A ruler in whom s(j much authority, human and divine, was embodied, was naturally distinguished by outward honors and luxuries. He had a court of Ori- ental magnificence. When the power of the kingdom was at its height, he sat on a throne of Ivor}-, covered with pure gold, at the feet of which were two figures of lions, with others on the steps approaching the throne. The king was dressed in royal robes (1 Kings xxii, 10; 2 Chron. xviii, 9) : his insignia were a crown or diadem of pure gold, or perhaps radiant with precious stones (2 Sam. i, 10; xii, 30; 2 Kings xi, 12; Psa. xxi, 3), and a royal sceptre (Ezek. xix, 11; Isa. xiv, 5; Psa. xlv, G; Amos i, 5, 8). Those who approached him did liim obei- sance, bowing down and touching the ground with their foreheads (1 Sam. xxiv, 8; 2 Sam. xix, 24); and this was done even by a king's wife, the mother of Sdlomou (1 Kings i, IC)). His officers and subjects called tliem- selves his servants or slaves, though they do not seem habitually to have given way to such extravagant salu- tations as in the Chalda-an and Persian courts (1 Sam. xvii, 32, 34, 36 ; xx, 8 ; 2 Sam. vi, 20 ; Dan. ii. 4). As in the East at present, a kiss was a sign of resjiect and homage (1 Sam. x, 1 ; perhaps Psa. ii, 12). He lived in a splendid jialace, with porches and columns (1 Kings vii,2-7). All his thinking-vessels were of gold (1 Kings X, 21).
KING
87
KING
At his f.ccGssion, in addition to the anointing men- tioned above, jubilant music formed a part of the popu- lar rejoicings (1 Kings i, 40) ; thank-offerings were made (1 Ivings i, 25) ; the new sovereign rode in solemn pro- cession on tlie royal mule of his predecessor (1 Kings i, 38), and took possession of the royal harem — an act which seems to have been scarcely less essential than other observances which appear to us to wear a higher character (1 Kings ii, 13, 22; 2 Sam. xvi, 22). A nu- merous harem, indeed, was among the most highly esti- mated of the royal luxuries (2 Sam. v, 13 ; 1 Kings xi, 1 ; XX, 3). It was under the supervision and control of eunuchs, and passed from one monarch to another as a part of the crown property (2 Sam. xii, 8). The law (Deut. xvii, 17), foreseeing evils such as that by which Solomon, in his later years, was turned away from his fidelity to God, hail strictly forbidden many wives; but Eastern passions and usages were too strong for a mere \\Titten prohibition, and a corrupted religion became a pander to royal lust, interpreting the divine command as sanctioning eighteen as the minimum of wives and concubines.
Deriving their power originally from the wishes of the people, and being one of the same race, the Hebrew kings were naturally less despotic than other Oriental sovereigns, mingled more with their subjects, and were by no means difficult of access (2 Sam. xix, 8 ; 1 Kings XX, 39; Jer. xxxviii, 7 ; 1 Kings iii, IG ; 2 Kings vi, 26; viii, 3). After death the monarchs were interred in the royal cemetery in Jerusalem : " So David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David" (1 Kings ii, 10 ; xi, 43 ; xiv, 31). But bad kings were excluded " from the sepulchres of the kings of Israel" (2 Chron. xxviii, 27). — Kitto; Smith.