the Philistini 3; ami no s er were these brought to a
close by the appointment of David to he king over the united tribes than the Philistines attempted to counter- balance the advantage by an attack on the person of the king; they tier, tore penetrated into the valley of Rephaira, south-west of Jerusalem, and even pushed tor- ward an advanced post as far as Bethlehem (1 Chron. xi. 16). 1 >a\ id i n ice attacked them al the former Bpot, and on eaeli occasion with signal success, in the first case capturing their images, in the second pursuing them •• from Geba until thou come to < lazer" I 2 Sam. v. 17 25; l Chron. xiv, 8 16). About seven year- after
the defeat al Rephaim, David, who had now , Boli-
dated his power, attacked them on their own soil, and took Gath, with its dependencies 1 1 Chron. wiii. I i, and thus (according to one interpretation of the obscure ex- pression " Metheg-ammah" in 2 Sam. \iii. Ii -he took
tie arm-bridle out of the hand of the Philis (Ber-
theau, Comm. on l Chron.), or (according to another) '• he took the bridle of the metropolis out ol the hand of the Philistines" (Gesenius, Thesaur. p. 113) mean- ing in either case that their ascendency was utterly broken. This indeed was the case; for the minor en- gagements in David's lifetime probably all took place within the borders of Philistia; I lob, which is given as
the scone of the second and third combats, being proba- blj identical with Gath, where the fourth took place (2 Sam. xxi, 15 22; comp. the Sept., some of the co
which read l',.V in-lead ol I ■
The whole of Philistia was included in Solomon's empire, the extent of which i- described a- being "from
the river unto the land of the Philistines, unto ihe hor- der o| Egypt" i 1 Kings iv, 21: 2 Chron. ix. 26 . and again, " from Tiphsah unto Gaza" il Kings iv, 24; A.V. "Azzah"). The several town- probably remained un- der their former governors, as in the case of Gath (1 Kings ii, 39), and the sovereignty of Solomon was ac- knowledged by the payment of tribute (iv, 21 i. There are indication-, however, that Id- hold on the Philis- tine country was by no means established; for we find him securing the passes thai led up from tic plain to the central district by the fortification of Gezer ami Betbhoron (ix, 17), m bile no mention is made either of Gaza or Asbdod, which fully commanded the coast- road. Indeed the expedition of Pharaoh against Gezer, which siood at ihe head of the Philistine plain, and which was quite independent of Solomon until tie- time
of his marriage with Pharaoh's daughter, would lead to
the inference that Egyptian influence was paramount in Philistia at this period (ver. 16).
Under the later Jewish kings these signs of aggres- sion on the part of the Philistines increase. The divi- sion of the empire at Solomon's death was favorable to the Philistine cause: Rehoboam secured himself against them by fortifying Gath and other cities bordering on the plain (2 < Ihron. xi,8) : the Israelitish monarchs were either not so prudent or not so powerful, for they al- lowed the Philistines to get hold of Gibbethon, com- manding one of the defiles leading up from the plain of Sharon to Samaria, the' recovery of which involved them in a protracted struggle in the reigns of Xadali and Zimri ( 1 Kings XV, 27 : xvi. 1 I. Judah meanwhile had lost the tribute; for it is recorded, as an occurrence that marked Jehoshaphat's success, that "somi of the Philistines brought presents" (2 Chron. xvii, ID. But this subjection was ol brief duration : in the reign of hi- son Jehoram they avenged themselves by invading Judah in conjunction with the Arabians, and sacking the royal palace (xxi, 16, 17). The increasing weak- ness of ihe Jewish monarchy under tie' attack- of I la- zael led to the recovery of Gath, which had been cap- tured by that monarch in his advance on Jerusalem from the western plain in the reign of Jehoash i 2 Kings
xii. 17). and was probably occupied by the Philistines after his depart urc as an advanced post against Judah: at all event- il was in their hands ill the time of Uzziah, who dismantled (2 Chron. xxvi. 6) and probably de- stroyed it ; for it is adduced by Amos :i- an example of divine vengeance i \mo- \i. 2), and then disappears from history. Uzziah at the same time dismantled Jabneh (Jamnia), in the northern part of the plain, and JLshdod, and further erected forts in different parts of the country to intimidate the inhabitants (2 Chron.
xxvi. (il. The prophecies of .loci and A - prove that
these measures were provoked by the :i:-n -ion- of the
Philistines, who appear to have formed leagues both with the Edomites and Phoenicians, ami had reduced many of the Jews to slavery (Joel iii, I 6; Amos i. 6 10). How far the means adopted by Uzziah were ef- fectual we are not informed: but we have reason to suppose that the Philistines were kept in subjection un- til the time of Ahaz, when, relying upon the difficulties produced bj the Sj rian invasions, they attacked ihe bor- der-cities in the Shephelah, and "the south" of.ludah (2 Chron. xviii. IS i.