extremity of the kingdom to be a fit metropolis for his enlarged dominion. Still there were considerations, especially as connected with the rivalry between the great tribes of Judah and Ephraim, which would dictate to a king belonging to the former tribe, the expediency of placing the metropolis within or close upon its territories, and among the people from whom his dynasty would naturally expect to find the most devoted supporters. Had this consideration been over-looked, situations better suited than that actually chosen to become the metropolis of the whole kingdom might perhaps have been found. Samaria, for example, which eventually became the capital of the separate kingdom of Israel, is alleged by most travellers to be naturally a more eligible site for a general metropolis than Jerusalem besides that it is more central, and therefore more equally open to all the tribes, who were constrained by the law to journey three times in the year to the place of the sanctuary. David overlooked this advantage in the more important one, to him, of establishing the seat of his empire in the quarter where his power was the strongest. The considerations which influenced him may be compared to those which induced the present

royal dynasty of Persia to neglect the great central cities which had formerly been the seats of government, and fix their residence in a comparatively remote and inconvenient situation at Teheran, for no other reason than that, in case of disturbance or rebellion, the king may fall back upon the resources and the certain attachment of his own tribe, whose territory is near and accessible.

Within the tribe of Judah there was certainly no place so suitable as Jerusalem; which also lay as far north, towards the other tribes, as the king could go without quitting the territories of his own tribe.

There is, however, another and very important point of view in which this choice may be regarded. It has simply been stated that David, as king of all Israel, might have possibly found a better place for his metropolis than that which he selected. But it is evident, from the circumstances which afterwards arose, that no better site for the civil and ecclesiastical metropolis could possibly have been chosen. As David could not of himself have foreknown these circumstances, or have acted with reference to them, it appears highly probable that his choice was directed by some Divine intima

tion, and it may very probably have been even then made known to him that this was the place which the Lord God had "chosen, to put his Name there," Deut. xii. 21; xvi. 11.

It is certain that David, at the very commencement of his more extended reign, resolved to make Jerusalem the capital of his empire. But Jerusalem, or at least the upper city, or strong-hold, was still in the possession of the Jebusites: and he had, therefore, first of all, to secure the place by the difficult task of their expulsion. The lower city seems to have occupied that portion of the hilly site which Josephus calls Acra, lying behind, or west of Mount Moriah, and below, or north of Mount Zion. This last was the highest of all the four hills which formed the site of the later Jerusalem, and on it stood the strong fortress which the Jebusites had so long retained against all the power of Judah and Benjamin, and which David now purposed to wrest from them.

This was no common enterprise. The Jebusites were so confident from long security, that, in derision of David's attempt, they exposed the blind and the lame on the walls, as if to intimate that such defenders sufficed to repel the attacks of the assailants. Exasperated at this

insult, and fully alive to the difficulty of the enterprise, David offered the chief command of the whole army to the warrior who should first cross the natural fosse surrounding the hill, and smite the Jebusites. The king's nephew Joab, a daring and able, but unscrupulous, man, had held the command of the army of David's first kingdom of Judah, but it had not yet been determined who was to have the command of the armies of united Israel. Joab might expect it; but, as he had lately given deep offence by the murder of Abner, he was by no means secure of this appointment and it is very possible that David hoped, that the success of some other person in this feat, would afford him an excuse for withholding this high office from one whom he had already found reason to dislike and fear. But the stake was too important, for Joab not to be the foremost in the attempt to win it. He was the first to cross the fosse, the first to surmount the defences of Zion, and by that act became the hero of the siege, and secured the office of "chief and captain," which, except with one slight interruption, he held to the end of David's reign, 2 Sam. v. 6-8; and 1 Chron. xi. 4-8

CHAPTER II

THE SITE-JERUSALEM IN THE TIME OF DAVID.

We have now come to a point at which it is important that the reader should clearly understand the physical characteristics of the site of which David had gained possession, and which, from this time forward, became of the utmost importance in the history of the chosen people of God.

The part of Palestine which lies to the south of the plain of Esdraelon, is traversed through its whole extent by a broad mountain ridge, which may be found laid down with tolerable accuracy in most recent maps. This mountainous tract, or ridge, is nowhere less than from twenty to twenty-five miles broad, and it reaches in length from the plain of Esdraelon to a line drawn from the south end of the Dead Sea to the south-east corner of the Mediterranean-this ridge forms high and precipitous cliffs on the east, towards the valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; but