The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 256

hie kingdom is divided ; the holy people are ranged under hostile banners, and the way ie opened for the schism in the Church. We talk sometimes of men who dance on the edge of a volcano, and we have read of Nero fiddling while Rome waEI burning, but it may be questioned whether history affords a more pitiable instance of folly and infatuation than this. And it was such infatuation that we can hardly resist the conclusion that it was, somehow, retribuHve and judicial. "Who would not hu.ve iooked any whither for the co.use of this evil, rather than to heaven? Yet the holy God challenges it to Himself" (Bp. Hall). "The co.use was from the Lord." It ie well that we should understand, however, that this gross infatuation was only one out of many factors which produced the disruption. The division of the kingdom-the first act in the long drama of retribution for the ein of Solomon-was to a large extent the natural result of the rule and policy of Solomon. No doubt of all the causes of revolt the prophecy of Ahijah was the most influential. It was that " beginning" which, ae Aristotle sagely remarks, is often the larger half. Possibly but for that, Israel's "winter of discontent" would have been "made glorious by the summer sun" of the accession of a young prince. Probably but for that, Jeroboam would never have" lifted up his hand against the king.'' But we must not shut our eyes to the fact that the people had had a. "heavy yoke" to bear. Rehoboam himself confessed to this (ver. 14). It is idle to say that their demands betray a foregone conclusion to revolt. The contrary is distinctly implied in verses 4, 7, Nor is it the fact that the rebellion was wholly due to the jealousy of Ephraim, for that proud tribe had readily acquiesced in the supremacy of Judah during the reign of David. Indeed, the rebellion is almost inexplicable, except on the supposition that the people had suffered real hardships, and carried heavy burdens during Solomon's reign. Men do not soon forget the glories of such an empire as his, and do not wantonly tear it asunder, and reduce it to impotence, unless they have had substantial grievances. But in this case, so many were their grounds of disaffection that, remembering that Jeroboam, who no doubt appeared to them in the light of a champion and tribune of the people, was in reserve, should they need his services, it only needed the infatuation of Rehoboe.m to kindle the smouldering embers of discontent into a flame. And r,hen we see in this inconceivable infatuation the immediate cauee of the disrupt1on, we must still remember how it wae that Rehoboam came to be capable of' such egregious folly. Axe we to suppose that he was expressly blinded for the occasion? Is it implied that, like Saul, an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him, or U1at, like Ahab, he was the victim of heaven-sent delusions ? Is it not ro.therenough to believe that he was simply left to himself, to be the sport of his own folly and pride ? His infatuation would still be judicio.l, if we saw in it, not the strange per- versity of o. moment, but the spontaneous outcome of his birth and education. Indeed, in the.t case, it would be still more conspicuously the just o.nd appropria.te retribution for his father's sin. It was beco.use of Solomon's foreign wives, and the idolo.tries which, with his sanction, they practised, that Solomon's empire was to be torn from his son (chap. xi. 88). And now we find that the dismemberment of this empire was brought o.bout by the son of one of these strange women-the child of e.n unregenere.te Ammonitess. It has been said that " every great mo.n is the son of his mother.'' • The same reme.rk might be made of every great fool. It was probably becausa Naamah was what she was that Rehoboe.m was what he wo.s. "The two worst men in my parish," said e. clergyman, "o.re what their mothers have made them." We could not t1xpect much character, not to speak of wisdom, in Solomon's mistresses, who were chosen for their oh1ums, a.nd whose cloistered life, a.mid the intrigues, and follie3, and pettinesses of the harem, did not fit them to be the mothers of kings. What knowledge of the world or of men, who.t honour, what common sense could we hope to find in one brought up under suoh in.fluenoes? The bearing of Rehoboa.m is precisely the bearing we should expect as the result of the training of a.n Eastern harem. It e.ppears, oonsequenily, that we may jueily rege.rd his infatuation as judicial, not so much in the sense of being inspireJ. • "!Ugle gfoerale, ii laquelle du morus Je n'a1 _gu~l'II Vil d'uceptione, les hommea supirieur, I01lt tous lea jils de l,,ur m~r,, "-.Michelle. 1 KIN<ftl, ~  258 THE FIRS'!' BOOK OF KINGS, [cu. xu. 1-24,