The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 249

had not" selected the capita.I of Ephraim to wishes were granted," points out how this be the scene" of his coronation (Rawl.) fact makes e.gainst the receivl)d text, lmt thnt he went thither because the northern e.ccording to which they had o.lreacly sum- t1ibes claimed this concession. They de- moned Jeroboam from Egypt.) It is clear manded apparently that he should meet from this and the passages cited e.bove the.t them to receive their homage in the terri- the Jewish people e.t this period of their tory of Ephraim. It was a recognition of history were e.ccustomed, not indeed to the importance of the tribe, and there they choose their king, but to confirm him in his could the better urge their demandsJ all office by puhlio aecle.me.tion.] . Israel [That is, not the twelve trites (Ewald), Ver. 2.-And it came to pass, when jero- but the ten, or their representatives. The boam the son of Nebat [see on eh. :xi. 26], nnme of Israel was already identified with who was yet 1n Egypt [The usuo.l, e.nd in- the ten, or rather eleven, tribes (see 2 Sam. deed the necessary, interpretation, if we ii. 9, 10, 17, 28). It is highly probable that retain our present Hebrew text, is tho.t these the comparative isolation of Judah from words refer, not o.s the context would lead the rest of the tribes (see Diet. Bib. vol. i. us to suppose, to the time indicated in vers. p. 1157) had led to this result. Indeed, this 1, 3, &c., but to the time of Solomon's fact -that the term " Israel " was used of death. But see below], heard of it [The the whole nation, exclusive of the tribe of words " of it," though not in the original, Judah-shows in a very significant way the a.re a fair and legitimate interpretation of alienation of J □ dah from the rest] were its meaning. Whether they e.re reto.ined come to Shechem to make him king. [It or not, the natural and gra=atical inter- would certain!, seem from these words as if pretation is that it was the visit to Shechem, the ten tribes he.d then no settled idea of re- just before mentioned, of which Jeroboam volting. Rimchi sees in the very selection of heard. But e.ccording to our received text, Shechem a proof that they were only "seek- Jeroboe.m was one of the deputation which ing an opportunity for transferring the met king Rehoboam o.t Shechem. It has government to Jeroboam." Similarly Keil. been found necesse.ry, consequently, to But the glories of Solomon's reign and the understand the words of the death of traditiom of the house of David would Solomon, which has been related in eh. surely make them hesitate, even if they :xi. 43. So the Vulgate, Audita morte ejus. had heard of the prophecy of Ahijah the Simile.rly the LXX. Cod. Vat. inserts the Shilonite (eh. :xi. 29), before they wantonly substance of this verse as part of eh. :xi. 43. broke away from Rehoboam. And the text (The Cod. Alex. follows the Hebrew.) But says expressly 1.hat they had assemb~ed to this interpretation is surely strained and "make him king," i.e., to accept him as unnatural] (for he was 11.ed from the pre- sucb, to anoint him (1 Chron. xii. 38 com- sence of king Solomon, and Jeroboam dwelt p3rul with 2 Sam. ii 4; v .. 3 shows that 1n Egypt;) [The parallel passage in 2 T~0;:1 is synonymous with 1?.'t7 ";J;:it;?, Keil), Chron. x. has here, "And Jeroboam re- turned from Egypt" ('llr.lt.:,' ,, ~~!l instead after the example of Saul (1 Sam. ii. 15), David (2 Sam. ii. 4; v. 3), and Solomon of 'llr.>:J ,,, :J~!)). And e.s some copies of the (eh. i 39; 1 Chron. nix. 22). No doubt, LXX. have ~ii1r!<1rpe,/,w'lepo/3oaµ I; Alyv1r- as the context shows, they intended to rov and the Vulgate has " Reversus est de stipule.te for an alleviation of burdens, &c., Aegyptc," Dathe, Biihr, al. would adopt this and their selection of Shechem as the place reading here. It is true it involves but a where they would render their allegiance slight change, e.nd it may simplify the con- was a " significant hint" (Ewald. " The struction. But no change is really required, very place puts Israel in mind of a, re- Biihr's objection, that in the text, o.s it bellion " Bp. Ho.ll) to Rehoboam. Their stands, we have an unmeaning repetition, putting forward Jeroboam as their spokes- "He was still in Egypt . . . and Jeroboam man-presuming for the present the.t the dwelt in Egypt," loses all its force if we rooeived text of ver. 3 is to be retained, as understand Jeroboo.m to have continued to which, however, see below-was a his residence in Egypt (as the LXX. says further hint, or rather a plain indication, he did) after hearing of Solomon's death, that they d 1d not mean to be trifled with. until summoned by the tribes to be their It is not a proof, however, e.s Keil main- leader. In any case the repetition accord& tains, that they had already determined to with Hebrew usage.] make the latter king, for thE:y distinctly Ver. 3.-That [Heb. and] they sent and so.id to Rehoboam (ver. 4), "Grant our called h1m. And Jeroboam and all the petition and we will serve thee." (Ewald, congregation of Israel ea.me [It ]111~ been who 29ys "they had the fullest intentions held that this verse is largely an interpola- of coufirming his power as king if their tion. The LXX. Cod. Vat. has iriw\1ly1 OH. XII, 1-24.] TRE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 251