the name of prophets of the Lord." The prophets unan- imously gave a favorable response ; and among them, Zedekiah, the son of Chenaanah, made horns of iron as a symbol, and announced, from Jehovah, that with those horns Ahab would push the Syrians till he consumed them. For some reason which is unexplained, and can now only be conjectured, Jehoshaphat was dissatisfied with the answer, and asked if there was no other proph- et of Jehovah at Samaria? Ahab replied that there was yet one, Micaiah, the son of Imla; but, in words which obviously call to mind a passage in the Iliad (i, 106), he added, "I hate him, for he does not prophesy good concerning me, but evil." Micaiah was, neverthe- less, sent for; and after an attempt had in vain been made to tamper with him, he first expressed an ironical concurrence with the 400 prophets, and then openly fore- told the defeat of Ahab's army and the death of Ahab himself. In opposition to the other prophets, he said that he had seen Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him, on his right hand and on his left: that Jehovah said. Who shall persuade Ahab to go up and fall at Eamoth-Gilead ; that a spir- it (the Heb. has the art. the spirit, as if some special emissary of evil) came forth and said that he would do so ; and on being asked, Wherewith? he answered, that he would go forth and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets. Irritated by the account of this vision, Zedekiah struck Micaiah on the cheek, and Ahab ordered Micaiah to be taken to prison, and fed on bread and water, till his return to Samaria. Ahab then went up with his army to Ramoth-Gilead ; and in the battle which ensued, Benhadad, who could not have failed to become acquainted with Micaiah 's prophecy, uttered so publich', which had even led to an act of public per- sonal violence on the part of Zedekiah, gave special or- ders to direct the attack against Ahab, individually. Ahab, on the other hand, requested Jehoshaphat to wear his royal robes, which we know that the king of Judah had brought with him to Samaria (1 Kings xxii, 10); and then he put himself into disguise for the battle; hoping thus, probably, to baffle the designs of Benhadad and the prediction of Micaiah; but he was, nevertheless, struck and mortally wounded in the combat by a ran- dom arrow. We hear nothing further of the prophet. Josephus dwells emphatically on the death of Ahab, as showing the utility of prophecy, and the impossibility of escaping destiny, even when it is revealed beforehand {Ant. viii, 15, 6). He says that it steals on human souls, flattering them with cheerful hopes, till it leads them round to the point whence it will gain the mastery over them. This was a theme familiar to the Greeks in many tragic tales, and Josephus uses words in unison with their ideas. (See Euripides, Hippohjt. 1256, and compare Herodot. vii, 17 ; viii, 77 ; i, 91). From his in- terest in the story, Josephus relates several details not contained in the Bible, some of which are probable, while others are very unlikely; but for none of which does he give any authority. Thus, he says, Micaiah was al- ready in prison when sent for to prophesy before Ahab and Jehoshaphat, and that it was Micaiah ivho had pre- dicted death by a lion to the son of a prophet, under the circumstances mentioned inl Kings xx,35, 36; and had rebuked Ahab after his brilliant victory over the Syr- ians for not putting Benhadad to death. There is no doubt that these facts would be not only consistent with the narrative in the Bible, but would throw additional light upon it ; for the rebuke of Ahab in his hour of triumph, on account of his forbearance, was calculated to excite in him the intensest feeling of displeasure and mortification ; and it would at once explain Ahab's ha- tred of Micaiah, if Micaiah was the prophet by whom the rebuke was given. Nor is it luilikely that Ahab, in his resentment, might have caused Micaiah to be thrown into prison, just as the princes of Judah, about 300 years later, maltreated Jeremiah in the same way (Jer. xxxvii, 15). But some other statements of Jose- phus cannot so readily be regarded as probable. Thus
MICE
218
MICHAEL
he relates that, when Ahab disguised himself, he gave his own royal robes to be worn by Jehoshaphat in the battle of Kamoth-Gilead, an act which woidd have been so unreasonable and cowardly in Ahab, and would have shown such singular complaisance in Jehoshaphat, that, although supported by the translation in the Septua- gint, it cannot be received as true. The fact that some of the Syrian captains mistook Jehoshaphat for Ahab is fully explained by Jehoshaphat's being the onlj- per- | son in the army of Israel who wore royal robes. Again, Josephus informs us that Zedekiah alleged, as a reason for disregarding Jlicaiah's prediction, that it was direct- ly at variance with the prophecy of Elijah, that dogs should lick tlie blood of Ahab, where dogs had licked the blood of Naboth, in the city of Samaria: inasmuch as Kamoth-Gilead, where, according to Micaiah, Ahab was to meet his doom, was distant from Samaria a jour- ney of three days. It is unlikeU^, however, that Zede- kiah would have founded an argument on Elijah's in- sulting prophecy, even to the meekest of kings who might have been the subject of it; but that, in order to prove himself in the right as against Micaiah, he should have ventured on such an allusion to a person of Ahab's character, is absolutely incredible. See Ahab.