3. But here we must recollect that the northern districts of Canaan had already learned to look to Jerusalem as their capital more and more during the centuries immediately preceding its destruction. The fall of the kingdom of Samaria had at any rate produced one immediate good result, viz. the removal of an obstacle which had stood in the way of uniting the severed members of the Davidic kingdom to the greatest extent possible. The rulers in Jerusalem were again at liberty to attempt to extend their authority over the northern districts; and all the inhabitants of those parts who desired to worship the true God, were still more ready once more to cling exclusively to the sanctuary at Jerusalem. This had even then been the case to a great extent; the clearest proof of it is furnished by the strong attraction thither of residents in Shechem, Shiloh, and Samaria. These were the very cities which had always before been rivals of Jerusalem; but immediately after the destruction of the Temple numbers of persons in deep mourning made a pilgrimage from them to the ruins of Jerusalem, in order at least to offer their sacrifices of sorrow on the site of the fallen sanctuary. If, then, this sanctuary of Jerusalem rose again, and the beams of this new victorious glory streamed round its august and ancient splendour, it would spontaneously step once more into the position of a holy metropolis for the northern districts of Canaan also; and if henceforth all the worshippers of Jahveh who lived in even the most distant countries of heathendom looked to this concentrated centre with joy and pride, made pilgrimages thither, and found there the place where they were most firmly united, how much more, in the northern half of Canaan, must they all have clung to this sacred rock, how much more must all the descendants of the kingdom of the Ten Tribes also, who had perhaps assembled there in somewhat greater numbers now, have regarded Jerusalem alone as their holy city! There are, in fact, many signs

معبوره

i.e. Maßoplá, Jos. Bell. Jud. iv. 8, 1; Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 15; cf. vol. vii. p. 107 [Ed. Germ.]; (6) Rafidia (as must be read here for Dafidia), west of Shechem, see Seetzen's Reisen, vol. ii. p. 169; (7) Beth-Fûrîk, east of the same; (8) did); (9) Kafar, e, for which it is certainly better to read 'Avertâ, south of the last, Ny in Carmoly's Itinéraires, pp. 186, 212, 386, 445, where, however, it is always incorrectly spelt, as it is also in Seetzen's Reisen, VOL. V.

which enable us to recognise this state of things clearly enough;1 but the jealousy of the Persian government would not permit any closer connection between the southern and northern portions of the country. Thus, all the worshippers of the true God dwelling north of Jerusalem were obliged to content themselves for the present with recognising Jerusalem simply as the spiritual capital of their country. They could not be prevented from voluntarily offering sacrifices there; but no more intimate union of any other description was thought of under the Persians. The sequel of the history will show, however, the infinite importance which the closer connection of Galilee and Judea assumed when the pressure of the times allowed it to put out its strength more boldly.

In this direction, then, everything might henceforth take a form very favourable to Jerusalem as the renovated centre of true religion, although the advantages of the new situation could only disclose themselves fully in the course of the following centuries. If a religion be true, it is good for its own activity that it should have a local centre as widely and generally recognised as possible. At that time no old unexpiated guilt clung to the ancient sanctity of Jerusalem, and it even rose from its ruins in fresh and marvellous life; so that it soon looked for a grand new future favoured by its own fitness for its task and the charm peculiar to it, as well as by the condition of the age, and it might even hope once more to regain its ancient greatness and power, even though in a very different way. But this great advantage was counterbalanced by a disadvantage almost as great. The ancient holy land had been so cruelly and so frequently conquered and desolated by powerful heathens, owing even its restoration, as far as it went, to them, that the strongest and most permanent traces of their action necessarily still remained; and although the Idumeans of the south were gradually pushed back again somewhat further, and the ancient kingdom of Judah was enabled to collect itself round Jerusalem more and more completely, yet many heathen inhabitants had long ago found their way into the northern and central districts, and maintained their footing there far more stubbornly. In the remoter northern district, as its very name of Galilee, i.e. march (shortened for heathen-march),

2

1 From Ps. lxviii. 28 [27] we may conclude that at the consecration of the second Temple envoys at least from the most northern district, or Galilee, were present. Moreover the use of the name Joseph

for Israel in certain songs of the second Temple, lxxvii. 16 [15], lxxx. 2 sq. [1 sq.], lxxxi. 6 [5], cannot have been simply accidental.

2 P. 80 sq.

2

shows, as well as in the eastern district beyond the Jordan,' a powerful heathen element had always lived in the midst of Israel. This separation of the districts inhabited by Israel in this quarter had increased since the Assyrian period, and became more and more marked in each succeeding age, as we shall see more clearly hereafter. Ever since the inroad of the Scythians, indeed, a city, occupied in the first instance by those who remained behind as settlers, had held its ground in this neighbourhood, and it always jealously strove to preserve its independence. But in the centre of the country, in Samaria, the colonists of heathen extraction, who had been settled there by the Assyrians, continued to dwell in much the same condition as that which we have already observed 3 towards the end of the kingdom of Judah. No change of any importance is as yet to be noticed in them, and these foreign settlers, drawn together from very different countries, having now dwelt long on the fruitful soil, had evidently amalgamated more and more, simply from the length of time that had elapsed, into one uniform whole. In this way elements of various heathen nationalities had long been scattered right through the ancient holy land when Jerusalem, and with it a people at once old and new, and a sanctuary of ancient renown and of a character peculiar to itself, endeavoured to rise from its ruins. When this movement had once begun, the violent collision of elements so radically at variance with one another, and yet in such close local contiguity, was inevitable; and its necessary consequence was to reveal more clearly and to shape more firmly the very peculiar genius of the new Jerusalem, as it began with difficulty to rise again.

III. THE BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM AND THE SAMARITANS.

1. The general circumstances of the exiles who returned under Zerubbabel supplied them with no object to push forward more earnestly than the building of the Temple: the restoration of the sanctuary was the first task of their holy zeal. It was in vain that the great Unknown, in reference perhaps to a somewhat too glowing ardour, pointed out incidentally at this time that no temple, however splendid, could really correspond to the full sublimity of the true God. His words did but

1 Vol. ii.

2 Vol. iv. p. 231..

Ibid. p. 215 sq.

Is. lxvi. 1, which, however, must be taken in connection with such very different expressions as xliv. 28, lx. 7.

prove that at the right moment that truth of all higher religion would break forth again which had already displayed itself on the same field, when first the idea was conceived of building the former magnificent temple. It was in vain that anything like the previous temple, with its offerings, had already been shown to be far more superfluous now than in David's time; the impulse to restore what had been was too strong.3 Besides this, however, the strong buildings of the holy place of refuge might serve to increase in no small degree the security of the capital, which was still very weak at first. Considerable treasure was at once collected through the voluntary contributions of all who could afford anything from their private Zerubbabel led the way, and his example was followed by the other chiefs of the nation and the common people. The sums thus obtained were employed partly for the building itself, and partly for the most necessary vestments of the priests, who entered again upon the duties of their office for the most part in great poverty. As no great number of new sacrificial utensils was required, no one but Zerubbabel made any considerable gift for this purpose. From the extant statements derived from the original sources, we may well suppose that Zerubbabel, as the grandson of King Jeconiah who had been restored to the position of a prince, was the foremost man of the community in worldly possessions as well as rank.

means.

6

But the difficulty of even removing the ruins from the site of the ancient sanctuary, and clearing the space for the foundations of the Temple, was so great that on the approach of the seventh month or the month of harvest, which they desired to celebrate on account of its pristine sanctity' with full Mosaic ceremonial on the sacred spot, they erected a simple altar provisionally, in order to offer the sacrifices upon it according to

1 Vol. iii. p. 129 sqq.

2 P. 20.

8 P. 32 sqq.

4 P. 78.

They have been preserved complete in Neh. vii. 70-72; they appear in Ezr. ii. 68 sq., on the other hand, worked up by the Chronicler and much shortened. The comparison of the two passages is here easy and very instructive; we see, for instance, how the Chronicler handles the scattered numbers, drawing them together not without some exaggeration, and again reducing them. This same passage, Ezr. ii., is reproduced in his own fashion by the writer of 1 Esdras, v. 44

sq.

P. 18.

See the Alterth. p. 393 sqq. It seems doubtful even at the first glance whether the seventh month mentioned in Ezr. iii. 1 is meant for the one which came in the first year of Cyrus, according to i. 1, for in iii. 8 the arrival of the returning captives at Jerusalem is taken as the point of chronological departure; but besides this Berosus (in Theoph. Ant. ad Autol. iii. 25, cf. cap. 29, ad fin., where, however, we must subsequently read 8 for 38 in cap. 26) has preserved the tradition that the Temple, was founded in the second year of Cyrus; and the same thing follows from 1 Esdras v. 6, cf. supra p. 86 note 1.

primitive usage. From the first day of this month onward the daily sacrifices were again continued, and many individuals who had long had vows to perform were now enabled to redeem them in all solemnity.' Many a fresh and glorious hymn might now ring forth, as for example Ps. cxviii.2-that song of joy and sacrifice which expresses the feeling of the age with such wonderful depth. Even on the part of many heathens, whether near or at a distance, the liveliest sympathy for the new community was at this time displayed. It glowed as yet with the first charm of growth, and the favour of the great king still shone upon it fresh and unclouded. In the many songs, such as Psalms cxv., cxvi., animated with an inspiration so marvellously fresh and a devotion so deep, which rang forth from the community and from individuals about this time, or at any rate not much later, those that fear Jahveh' are readily brought forward by the side of Israel and Aaron, so that all who fear Jahveh even outside Israel are included.'

Meanwhile, the preparations for the building of the Temple were being constantly pushed on with energy. Cedar-wood was ordered from Lebanon, as had been done before for the Temple of Solomon. Workers in wood and other materials were hired for money wages; and Tyrian and Sidonian sailors were employed for the transport of the costly timber to the harbour of Joppa, and received payment in corn, wine, and oil, the produce of the land. Accordingly, in the second month of the following year they were in a position to lay the foundations of the Temple-house, and to appoint the priests and Levites who were to take the work under their special superintendence, and, as far as necessary, give their own personal assistance. These appointments were probably made with special ceremonies."

1 Ezr. ii. 70, iii. 6. In iii. 1, according to 1 Esdras v. 47, the position of the altar was originally stated more precisely: it was erected on the spot where the entrance to the forecourt on the east had formerly been.

2 See the Psalmen, p. 287 sqq., 2nd edition.

In this case the expression is derived from Ex. xv. 16, and must be understood accordingly.

+ P. 27 sq.

The words '?'na ‘?, Ez. iii. 3, as they were already understood by the LXX, pointed to something very different from the necessity of excessive fear of the heathen; but by the very connection in which they stand the words yield no 5 The words in Ezr. iii. 9 also cannot such meaning. We may conclude, however, from 1 Esdras v. 50, that the words have been preserved quite correctly; at of this passage were originally much any rate we must read something like fuller and clearer. They certainly did not instead of, as the name lie quite clearly before even the author of a Levite, according to other passages