glories of his jewels. Thus also king Agrippa was almost regarded as a god, so powerfully did his ornamented dress reflect the morning sunbeams; and it was probably the splendour of Solomon "in all his glory," when seated on the throne, in addition to the magnificence of his establishment, which so struck the queen of Sheba on beholding them, that "there was no more spirit in her." (1 Kings x. 4, 5.)

Further, whenever the oriental sovereigns go abroad, they are uniformly attended by a numerous and splendid retinue : the Hebrew kings and their sons either rode on asses or mules (2 Sam. xiii. 29. 1 Kings i. 33. 38.), or in chariots (1 Kings i. 5. 2 Kings ix. 21. x. 15.), preceded or accompanied by their royal guards (who, in 2 Sam. viii. 18. and xv. 18., are termed Cherethites and Pelethites); as the oriental sovereigns do to this day. For greater state they had footmen to run before them. Thus, the rebel Absalom had fifty men to run before him. (2 Sam. xv. 1.) And in this manner, the prophet Elijah, though he detested the crimes of Ahab, was desirous of paying him all that respect which was due to his exalted station; girded up his loins, and ran before Ahab to the entrance of Jezreel. (1 Kings xviii. 46.) In India, when a person wishes to do honour to an European, he will run before his palanquin for miles.2 Further, the approach of a king was often announced by the sound of trumpets. (1 Kings i. 34. 39.) Hence the presence of God is described in the same manner (Heb. xii. 19. compared with Exod. xix. 13.), and also the final advent of the Messiah. (Matt. xxiv. 31. 1 Cor. xv. 52. 1 Thess. iv. 15.) Whenever the Asiatic monarchs entered upon an expedition, or took a journey through desert and untravelled countries, they sent harbingers before them to prepare all things for their passage, and pioneers to open the passes, level the ways, and remove all impediments. The ancient sovereigns of Hindoostan used to send persons to precede them in their journeys, and command the inhabitants to clear the roads; a very necessary step in a country, where there are scarcely any public roads. To this practice the prophet Isaiah manifestly alludes (Isa. xl. 3. compared with Mal. iii. 1. and Matt. iii. 3.); and we shall obtain a clear notion of the preparation of the way for a royal expedition, and the force and beauty of the prophetic declaration will fully appear, if we attend to the following narrative of the marches of Semiramis in Media, recorded by Diodorus Siculus." "In her march to Ecbatane, she came to the Zarcean mountain, which, extending many furlongs, and being full of craggy precipices and deep hollows, could not be passed without making a long circuit. Being desirous, therefore, of leaving an everlasting memorial of herself, as well as to make a shorter way, she ordered the precipices to be digged down, and the hollow places to be filled up; and at a great expense she made a shorter and more expeditious road, which to this day is called the road of Semiramis. Afterwards she made a progress through Persia, and all her other dominions in Asia; and wherever she came, she commanded the mountains and craggy precipices to be cut down, and, at a vast expense, made the ways level and plain. On the other hand, in low places she raised mounds, on which she erected monuments in honour of her deceased generals, and sometimes whole cities." The writer of the apocryphal book of Baruch (v. 7.) expresses the same subject by the same images, either taking them from Isa. xl. 3. (or perhaps from lxii. 10 -12.), or from the common notions of his countrymen "For God," says he, "hath appointed that every high hill, and banks of long continuance, should be cast down and valleys filled up, to make even the ground, that Israel may go safely in the glory of God." The "Jewish church was that desert country to which John the Baptist was sent (Matt. iii. 1-4.), to announce the coming of the Messiah. It was at that time destitute of all religious cultivation, and of the spirit and practice of piety; and John was sent to prepare the way of the Lord by preaching the doctrine of repentance. The desert is therefore to be considered as a proper emblem of the rude state of the Jewish church, which was the true wilderness meant by the prophet, and in which John was to prepare the way of the promised Messiah."

Acts xii. 21, 22. See p. 79. supra, where Josephus's account of Agrippa's gorgeous array is given in illustration of the sacred historian. 2 Statham's Indian Recollections, pp. 116, 117.

V. With regard to the REVENUES OF THE KINGS OF ISRAEL, as none were appointed by Moses, so he left no ordinances concerning them: we may, however, collect from the Sacred Writings, that they were derived from the following sources: 1. Voluntary offerings, or presents, which were made to them conformably to the oriental custom. (1 Sam. x. 27. xvi. 20.) Michaelis is of opinion that they were confined to Saul only, as no trace of them is to be found after his time.

2. The produce of the royal flocks (1 Sam. xxi. 7. 2Sam. xiii. 23. 2 Chron. xxxii. 28, 29.); and as both king and subjects had a common of pasture in the Arabian deserts, Michaelis thinks that David kept numerous herds there (1 Chron. xxvii. 29-31.), which were partly under the care of Arabian herdsmen.

3. The produce of the royal demesnes, consisting of arable lands, vineyards, olive and sycamore grounds, &c. which had originally been unenclosed and uncultivated, or were the property of state criminals confiscated to the sovereign: these demesnes were cultivated by bondsmen, and, perhaps, also by the people of conquered countries (1 Chron. xxvii. 26-31. 2 Chron. xxvi. 10.); and it appears from 1 Sam. viii. 14. xxii. 7. and Ezek. xlvi. 17. that the kings assigned part of their domains to their servants in lieu of salary. 4. Another source of the royal revenue was the tenth part of all the produce of the fields and vineyards, the collection and management of which seem to have been confided to the officers mentioned in 1 Kings iv. 7. and 1 Chron. xxvii. 25. It is also probable from 1 Kings x. 14. that the Israelites likewise paid a tax in money. These imposts Solomon appears to have increased; and Rehoboam's refusal to lessen them is stated by the sacred historian as the cause of the rebellion of the ten tribes against him. (1 Kings xii. 14. 18.) There is an allusion in Mal. i. 8. and Neh. v. 18. to the custom of paying dues in kind to governors, which obtains to this day in Abyssinia.?

5. Not only did the most precious part of the plunder of the conquered nations flow into the royal treasury (2 Sam. viii.), but the latter also had tributes imposed on them, which were termed MINCHA, or presents, and were paid partly in money, and partly in agricultural produce. (1 Kings iv. 21. Psal. Ixxii. 10. compared with 1 Chron. xxvii. 25-31.) 6. Lastly, the customs paid to Solomon by the foreign merchants who passed through his dominions (1 Kings x. 15.) afforded a considerable revenue to that monarch; who, as the Mosaic laws did not encourage foreign commerce, carried on a very extensive and lucrative trade (1 Kings x. 22.), particularly in Egyptian horses and the byssus or fine linen of Egypt. (1 Kings x. 28, 29.)8

VI. On the introduction of the regal government among the Israelites, the princes of the tribes, heads of families, scribes or genealogists, and judges, retained the authority which they had previously exercised, and constituted a senate or legislative assembly for the cities, in or near which they respectively resided. (1 Kings xii. 1-24. 1 Chron. xxiii. 4. xxvi. 29, 30. xxviii. and xxix. 6.) The judges and scribes or genealogists were appointed by the sovereign, together with other officers, of whom the following were the principal:

1. The most important officer was the PRIME MINISTER, or Second to the King, as he is termed in Scripture. Such was Elkanah, who in our version of 2 Chron. xxviii. 7. is said to have been next (literally second) to the king Ahaz; Joseph was prime minister to Pharaoh, king of Egypt (Gen. xli. 40-43.); and Haman, to Ahasuerus. (Esth. iii. 1.) Jonathan, speaking to David, says,―Thou shalt be king over Israel, and I shall be next unto thee. (1 Sam. xviii. 17.) From 1 Chron. xviii. 17., it should seem that this office was sometimes held by one or more of the king's sons.

2. The ROYAL COUNSELLORS, or Privy Council, as we perhaps should term them. (Isa. iii. 3. xix. 11, 12. Jer. xxvi. recorded by the chaplain to Sir Thomas Roe, ambassador to the Mogul court in the reigns of James I. and Charles I.; who says (p. 128.) that, making a progress with the ambassador and emperor, they came to a wilderness, where (by a very great company sent before us, to make those passages and places fit for us) a wAY WAS CUT OUT AND MADE EVEN, broad enough for our convenient passage. And in the place where we pitched our tents, a great compass of ground was rid and made plain for them by grubbing a number of trees and bushes: yet there we went as readily to our tents, as we did when they were set up in the plains" Fragments supplemental to Calmet's Dictionary, No. 171 See similar instances in Dr. Clarke's Travels, vol. viii. p. 277. 8vo. Mr. Forbes's Oriental Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 450, and Mr. Ward's View of the History, &c. of the Hindoos, vol. iii. p. 132.

Bruce's Travels, vol. i. p. 353. 8vo.

11.) Such were the old men that stood before Solomon while he lived, and whom the headstrong Rehoboam consulted (1 kings xii. 6.); and such also was Jonathan, David's uncle. (1 Chron. xxvii. 32.)

3. The PROPHETS, though holding a divine commission as prophets, may, nevertheless, be noticed among the royal officers; as they were consulted by the pious monarchs of Israel and Judah. Thus Nathan was consulted by David (2 Sam. vii. 2.); Micaiah, by Jehoshaphat (1 Kings xxii. 7, 8.); Isaiah, by Hezekiah (2 Kings xix. 2.); and the prophetess Huldah, by Josiah. (2 Kings xxii. 14-20.) But the lolatrous and profligate kings imitated the heathen monarchs, and summoned to their council soothsayers and false prophets. Ahab, for instance, consulted the pseudo-prophets of Baal (1 Kings xviii. 22. and xxii. 6.); as Pharaoh had before called in the wise men and the sorcerers or magicians (Exod. vii. 11. and viii. 18.); and Nebuchadnezzar afterwards consulted the magicians and astrologers in his realm, (Dan. i. 20.)

4. The D (MaZKIR) or RECORDER (2 Sam. viii. 16.), who in the margin of our larger English Bibles is termed a remembrancer or writer of chronicles. His office was of no mean estimation in the eastern world, where it was customary with kings to keep daily registers of all the transactions of their reigns. Whoever discharged this trust with effect, it was necessary that he should be acquainted with the true springs and secrets of action, and consequently be received into the greatest confidence. Ahilud was David's recorder or historiographer (2 Sam. viii. 16.), and appears to have been succeeded in this office by his son Jehoshaphat (2 Sam. 11. 24.), who was retained by Solomon. (1 Kings iv. 3.) Joah, the son of Asaph, was the recorder of the pious king Hezekiah. (2 Kings xviii. 18. 37. Isa. xxxvi. 3.) In Esther vi. 1. and x. 2. mention is made of the records of the chronidex, written by this officer.

5. The (SOPHER) or Scribe (Sept. Ipaμμar) seems to have been the king's secretary of state, who issued all the roval commands: he also registered all acts and decrees. Seraiah (2 Sam. viii. 17.) and Sheva (2 Sam. xx. 25.) were David's secretaries. This officer is also mentioned in 1 Kings iv. 3. 2 Kings xviii. 18. and Isa. xxxvi. 3.

6. The HIGH-PRIEST, as one would naturally expect in a theocracy, is likewise to be reckoned among the royal counsellors. Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son Abiathar, are particularly mentioned among the principal officers of David. (2 Sam. viii. 17. 1 Chron. xviii. 16.) VII. Mention has already been incidentally made of the merous retinue that attended the oriental monarchs: the principal officers, who thus composed the domestic establishment of the Israelitish and Jewish kings, were as follow:1. The GOVERNOR OF THE PALACE, who was over the household, seems to have answered, as to his employment drank, to the stewards whom the rich men engaged to superintend their affairs. To him was committed the charge of the servants, and indeed of every thing which belonged to the palace. Ahishar held this office under David (1 Kings 17. 6.); Obadiah, under Ahab (1 Kings xviii. 3.); and Eliakim, under Hezekiah. (2 Kings xviii. 18.) From Isa. XX. 22. it appears that this officer wore, as a mark of his ffice, a robe of a peculiar make, bound with a precious girde, and carried on his shoulder a richly ornamented key.

2. The Officers, mentioned in 1 Kings iv. 5.7-19. and 1 Chron. xxvii. 25-31., are in 1 Kings xx. 15. called the PRINCES OF THE PROVINCES. They supplied the royal table, and must not be confounded with those who collected the tabute. In 2 Sam. xx. 24. and 1 Kings iv. 6. Adoram, who is enumerated among David's and Solomon's officers of state, is said to be over the tribute: he was probably what we call Chancellor of the exchequer. He received and brought into the yal treasury all the proceeds of taxes and tributes.

3. The KING'S FRIEND, OF COMPANION, was the person with whom the sovereign conversed most familiarly and conSentially. Thus, Hushai was the friend of David (2 Sam. I. 37. xvi. 16.); and Zabud the son of Nathan, of Soloa. (1 Kings iv. 5.) In the time of the Maccabees, this pellation admitted of a broader meaning, and was applied any one who was employed to execute the royal comrds, or who held a high office in the government. See Mare. x. 65. xi. 26, 27.

4. The KING'S LIFE-GUARD, whose commander was termed Captain of the Guard. This office existed in the court the Pharaohs (Gen. xxxvii. 36. xxxix. 1.), as well as in 21 of the Israelitish and Jewish monarchs. The captain the guard appears to have been employed in executing

summary justice on state criminals. See 1 Kings ii. 25.34. In the time of David the royal life-guards were called Cherethites and Pelethites, concerning the origin of whose names commentators and critics are by no means agreed. The Chaldee Targum, on the second book of Samuel, terms them the archers and slingers and as the Hebrews were expert in the use of the bow and the sling, it is not improbable that the royal guards were armed with them.' The life-guards of the Maccabean sovereigns, and subsequently of Herod and his sons, were foreigners: they bore a lance or long spear, whence they were denominated in Greek Tops. Among the other duties of these guards was that of putting to death condemned persons (Mark vi. 27.), in the same manner as the capidgis among the Turks and other Orientals are the bearers of the sovereign's commands for punishing any one, whether by decapitation or otherwise; an office which is very honourable in the East, though considered degrading among us.

VIII. The women of the king's HAREM are to be considered as forming part of the royal equipage; as, generally speaking, they were principally destined to augment the pomp, which was usually attached to his office. Notwithstanding Moses had prohibited the multiplication of women in the character of wives and concubines (Deut. xvi. 17.); yet the Hebrew monarchs, especially Solomon, and his son Rehoboam, paid but little regard to his admonitions, and too readily as well as wickedly exposed themselves to the perils which Moses had anticipated as the result of forming such improper connections. (1 Kings xi. 1-3. 2 Chron. xi. 21. xiii. 21.) The Israelitish and Jewish monarchs spared no expense in decorating the persons of their women, and of the cunuchs who guarded them: and who, as the Mosaic law prohibited castration (Lev. xxii. 24. Deut. xxii. 1.), were procured from foreign countries at a great expense. In proof of the employment of eunuchs in the Hebrew court see 1 Kings xxii. 9. (Heb.) 2 Kings viii. 6. (Heb.) ix. 32, 33. xx. 18. xxiii. 11. (Heb.) xxxix. 16. and xli. 16. Black eunuchs appear to have been preferred, as they still are in the East; at least, we find one in the court of Zedekiah. (Jer. xxxviii. 7.) The maids of the harem, at the king's pleasure, became his concubines; but the successor to the throne, though he came into possession of the harem, was not at liberty to have any intercourse with the inmates of it. Hence Adonijah, who in his zeal to obtain Abishag, a concubine of David's, for his wife, had dropt some intimations of his right to the kingdom, was punished with death, as a seditious person. (1 Kings ii. 13-25.) But though the king had unlimited power over the harem, yet the queen, or wife who was chiefly in favour, and especially the mother of the king, enjoyed great political influence. (1 Kings xi. 3. 2 Chron. xxi. 6. and xxii. 3.) Hence it is that we find the mother of the king so frequently and particularly mentioned in the books of Kings and Chronicles. The similar influence of the reigning sultana, as well as of the mother of the sovereign, in modern oriental courts, is attested by almost every traveller in the East.3

IX. The PROMULGATION OF THE LAWS was variously made at different times. Those of Moses, as well as the commands or temporary edicts of Joshua, were announced to the people by the (SHOTERIM), who in our authorized English version are termed officers. Afterwards, when the regal government was established, the edicts and laws of the kings were publicly proclaimed by criers. (Jer. xxxiv. 8, 9. Jonah iii. 5-7.) But in the distant provinces, towns, and cities, they were made known by messengers or couriers, specially sent for that purpose (1 Sam. xi. 7.), who were afterwards termed posts. (Esth. viii. 10. 14. ́Jer. li. 31.) Cyrus, or, according to Herodotus, Xerxes, was the first who established relays of horses and couriers at certain distances on all the great roads, in order that the royal messages and letters might be transmitted with the greatest possible speed. These Angari, or couriers, had authority to impress into their service men, horses, and ships, or any thing that came in their way, and which might serve to accelerate their journey. From the Persians this custom passed to the Romans (who, it may be inferred from Matt. v. 41., commonly

1 Calmet, Dissertations, tom. ii. pp. 508-512.; Jahn, Archæologia Biblica, $$ 235, 236. Ackermann, Archæologia Biblica, §§ 229, 230.

2 As, however, in the East, eunuchs often rose to stations of great power and trust, and were even privy counsellors to kings, the term ultimately came to signify a court officer generally. The eunuch mentioned in Acts viii. 27. was an officer of great power and influence at the court of Candace, queen of Ethiopia. Blooinfield's Annotations on the New Testament, vol. iv. p. 294. Pareau, Antiquitas Hebraica, pp. 279, 290. Jahn, Archæologia Biblica.

$237. Ackermann, Archæologia Biblica, § 231.

pressed men into their service), and it is still retained in the East. These proclamations were made at the gates of the cities, and in Jerusalem at the gate of the temple, where there was always a great concourse of people. On this account it was that the prophets frequently delivered their predictions in the temple (and also in the streets and at the gates) of Jerusalem, as being the edicts of Jehovah, the supreme King of Israel. (Jer. vii. 2, 3. xi. 6. xvii. 19, 20. xxxvi. 10.) In later times, both Jesus Christ and his apostles taught in and at the gate of the temple. (Luke ii. 46. Matt. xxvi. 55. Mark xii. 35. Acts iii. 11. v. 12.)2

X. The kingdom which had been founded by Saul, and carried to its highest pitch of grandeur and power by David and Solomon, subsisted entire for the space of 120 years; until Rehoboam, the son and successor of Solomon, refused to mitigate the burthens of his subjects, when a division of the twelve tribes took place: ten of these (of which Ephraim was the principal) adhered to Jeroboam, and formed the kingdom of Israel, while the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, continuing faithful in their allegiance to Rehoboam, constituted the kingdom of Judah. The causes of this revolution in the commencement of Rehoboam's reign, may, as in all similar commotions, be traced to anterior events: the impolicy of that monarch was only the immediate occasion of it; and in the successive periods of the history of the Hebrews, we may discern vestiges of hereditary jealousy, which terminated only in the division of the posterity of Abraham into two distinct nations, one of whom has since disappeared. The limits necessarily assigned to this portion of our work will only allow us to attempt a rapid sketch of this long series of discord and hatred.

From the very beginning of the Israelitish nation, the two tribes of Judah and Ephraim had disputed for the pre-eminency. The former, whose glory had been predicted by the dying patriarch Jacob (Gen. xlix. 10.), flourished in the number of its families, as well as by its power and wealth; being allied to the blood of the Pharaohs during the residence of the Israelites in Egypt, where the two remarkable establishments of Er and of Jokim had been formed, which this tribe carried into Palestine. (1 Chron. v. 2. iv. 18.). Judah also marched first during the sojourning in the desert (Num. x. 14.), and reckoned upon a dominion which had been promised by so many oracles. The latter, or tribe of Ephraim, depending on the great name of Joseph, and on the right of primogeniture which it had acquired in consequence of being adopted by Jacob (1 Chron. v. 2. Gen. xlviii. 5. 19.), confided in that numerous posterity which had been predicted to it; became powerful during the residence in Egypt, as is evident from the buildings erected by Sherah (Chron. vii. 24.); and afterwards rapidly increased in strength and prosperity. (Josh. xvii. 14. Judg. i. 35.) One very remarkable proof, that Ephraim and Judah were the two preponderating tribes, is, that when the land of Canaan was divided (Josh. xviii. 2.), they each received their allotments before the western tribes. As the southern part of the Holy Land, which was apportioned to Judah, proved too large for that tribe, the Simeonites were added to them. (Josh. xix. 1.9.) The Ephraimites, on the contrary, and the half tribe of Manasseh, which were sister and neighbouring tribes, pleaded that their allotment was not sufficiently extensive for them; and enlarged it by force of arms, and by cutting down the forests which abounded in the mountainous districts of the land of Canaan. (Josh. xvii. 14—18.)

in the triumphal hymn of Deborah, in which so many others are mentioned; and (what is particularly deserving of attention) it took no part in the exploits of Gideon, although the enemies whom he was going to fight had made incursions as far as Gaza (Judg. vi. 4.), whither they could not have pene trated without entering on its territory. It was the men of Judah, also, who were desirous of delivering up Samson, a Danite, to the Philistines. (xv. 11.) This old grudge sub sisted in all its force, when the elevation of Sauf, a Benjamite, to the throne of Israel, still further chagrined the proud tribe of Ephraim: it is not improbable that the discontent manifested in the assembly of the Israelites at Mizpeth, which induced Samuel to renew the kingdom at Gilgal (1 Sam. x. 27. xi. 12—14.), was excited by the Ephraimites; and at the very commencement of Saul's reign we observe a census, in which the troops of Judah are reckoned separately from those of Israel. (18.) At length, the elevation of David completed the mortification of the jealous and envious tribe of Ephraim, and of the northern tribes which ordinarily fol lowed the fortune of so powerful a neighbour; while Simeon and Benjamin, from necessity as well as choice, were more disposed in favour of Judah. Hence David, during the whole of his long-continued flight from Saul, never quitted the ter ritory of Judah and Benjamin, but when he took refuge in a foreign country; and he sent presents only to the cities of his own tribe. (1 Sam. xxx. 26.) On the death of Saul, two thrones arose in Israel; which gave rise to a civil war, that lasted seven years; and, had it not been for the defection of Abner, and the timidity of Ishbosheth, the tribes might never have been united under one sceptre. (2 Sam. ii. 10. iii. 1. 9-12. v. 5.) David himself felt the weakness of his power. (iii. 39.) The choice of Jerusalem for his capital and for the centre of worship, to the exclusion of Shiloh, a town of Ephraim, where the tabernacle and ark had formerly been kept (Josh. xviii. 1.), could not but displease the malecontents, whose pride was wounded by hearing that advantage celebrated in one of the sacred hymns. (Psal. Ixxviii. 67, 68.) During David's reign, the dispute at the passage of the river Jordan showed how a small spark kindled a flame (2 Sam. xix. 41.), which Sheba, retiring towards the north, was at hand to excite. (xx. 1.)

Finally, the erection of the temple, the immoveable sanctuary, which secured the supremacy of the tribe of Judah, the taxes levied and personal services required by Solomon, who employed them for the most part in the embellishment of Jerusalem, the little commercial advantage which Ephraim could derive during his reign, in comparison of Judah, which tribe was more commodiously situated for profiting by the transit of commodities between Egypt, Idumæa, and Arabia,-the intrigues of Jeroboam, who had been im prudently nominated to the command of the house of Joseph (2 Kings xi. 26. 28.);-all these circumstances contributed secretly to mature that revolution, which only awaited his death to break forth, and which the folly of Rehoboam rendered inevitable.

The KINGDOM OF ISRAEL subsisted under various sovereigns during a period of 254 years, according to some chronologers; its metropolis Samaria being captured by Shalmaneser king of Assyria, B. c. 721, after a siege of three years. Of the Israelites, whose numbers had been reduced by immense and repeated slaughters, some of the lower sort were suffered to remain in their native country; but the nobles and all the more opulent persons were carried into captivity beyond the Euphrates.3

The KINGDOM OF JUDAH continued 388 years; Jerusalem its capital being taken, the temple burnt, and its sovereign Zedekiah being carried captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar; the rest of his subjects (with the exception of the poorer classes who were left in Judæa) were likewise carried into captivity beyond the Euphrates, where they and their pos

Jahn, Archæologia Biblica, 5233. Ackermann, Archæologia Biblica, § 227.

It was the belief of some of the ancient fathers of the Christian church, neither of these opinions is supported by history. In the New Testament country: and the same notion has obtained anong some modern Jews, but indeed, we find mention of the twelve tribes (Matt. xix. 28. Luke xx Acts xxvi. 7.); and St. James (i. L.) directs his epistle to them; but it cannot be concluded from these passages, that they were at that time gathered together; all that can be inferred from them is, that they were still in being. Perhaps the whole body of the Jewish nation retained the name of the tirelre tribes according to the ancient division; as we find the disciples called the twelve after the death of Judas, and before the election of Matthias. This conjecture becomes the more probable, as it is certain from the testimony of the sacred writers and of Josephus, that there were considerable numbers of Israelites mingled with the Jews, sufficient indeed to authorize the former to speak of the twelve tribes as constituting but one body with the Jewish nation. Beausobre's Introd. to the New Test (Bishop Watson's Tracts, vol. iii. pp. 114-116.)