to that of a plant may serve the double purpose of reminding us that what we read is figurative, and of showing how unsafe it is to tamper with the text on the ground of mere rhetorical punctilios. As to the application of the figures, there are different opinions, but their essential meaning is obvious enough.

30. And the first-born of the poor shall feed, and the needy in security lie down, and I will kill thy root with famine, and thy remnant it shall slay. The future condition of the Jews is here contrasted with that of the Philistines. The figures in the first clause are borrowed from a flock, in the second from a tree, but with obvious allusion to a human subject. The first-born of the poor is a superlative expression for the poorest and most wretched. An allusion to the next generation leaves the promise too remote and the expression first-born unexplained. The figurative part of the last clause is borrowed from a tree, here divided into two parts, the root and the rest or remainder. What is first mentioned as an instrument in God's hand, reappears in the last member of the sentence as an agent.

31. Howl, oh gate! cry, oh city! dissolved, oh Philistia, is the whole of thee; for out of the north a smoke comes, and there is no straggler in his forces. The Philistines are not only forbidden to rejoice, but exhorted to lament. The object of address is a single city representing all the rest. Gate is not here put for the judges or nobles who were wont to sit there, nor is it even mentioned as the chief place of concourse, but rather with allusion to the defences of the city, as a parallel expression to city itself. According to some writers, the smoke here meant is that of conflagrations kindled by the enemy. Some of the older writers understood it simply as an emblem for wrath or trouble. Lowth cites Virgil's fumantes pulvere campos, and supposes an allusion to the clouds of dust raised by an army on the march. Others refer it to the practice of literally carrying fire in front

of caravans to mark the course. It may be doubted, notwithstanding the allusion in the last clause, whether it was intended to refer to an army at all. If not, we may suppose with Calvin that smoke is mentioned merely as a sign of distant and approaching fire, a natural and common metaphor for any powerful destroying agent. The diversity of judgments as to the particular enemy here meant, and the slightness of the grounds on which they severally rest, may suffice to show that the prophecy is really generic, not specific, and includes all the agencies and means by which the Philistines were punished for their constant and inveterate enmity to the chosen people, as well as for idolatry and other crimes.

32. And what shall one answer (what answer shall be given to) the ambassadors of a nation? That Jehovah has founded Zion, and in it the afflicted of his people shall seek refuge. The meaning of the last clause is too clear to be disputed, viz. that God is the protector of his people. This is evidently stated prophecy, and as such is

as the result and sum of the whole sufficiently intelligible. It is also given, however, as an answer to ambassadors or messengers, and this has given rise to a great diversity of explanations, which seems to show that the expression is indefinite, as the very absence of the article implies, and that the whole sense meant to be conveyed is this, that such may be the answer given to the inquiries made from any quarter. Of all the specific applications, the most probable is that which supposes an allusion to Rabshakeh's argument with Hezekiah against trusting in Jehovah. But this seems precluded by the want of any natural connection with Philistia, which is the subject of the previous context.

CHAPTERS XV, XVI.

THESE chapters contain a prediction of the downfall of Moab. Some writers regard the last two verses of ch. xvi as an addition made by Isaiah to an earlier prediction of his own, or an addition made to a prophecy of Isaiah by a later prophet. The simplest view of the passage is that which regards the whole as a continuous composition, and supposes the Prophet at the close to fix the date of the prediction which he had just uttered. The particular event referred to in these chapters has been variously explained to be the invasion of Moab by Jeroboam II. king of Israel, by Tirhaka king of Ethiopia, by Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria, by his successors Shalmaneser, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon, by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon etc. The safest conclusion seems to be, that the prediction is generic and intended to describe the destruction of Moab, without exclusive reference to any one of the events by which it was occasioned or promoted, but with special allusions possibly to all of them. Compare the introduction to ch.

XIII-XIV.

CHAPTER XV.

THIS chapter is occupied with a description of the general grief, occasioned by the conquest of the chief towns and the desolation of the country at large. Its chief peculiarities of form are the numerous names of places introduced, and the

strong personification by which they are represented as grieving for the public calamity. The chapter closes with an intimation of still greater evils.

1. (This is) the burden of Moab, that in a night Ar-Moab is laid waste, is destroyed; that in a night Kir-Moab is laid waste, is destroyed. The English Version understands the first verse as assigning a reason for the second. Because in a night etc. he ascends etc. But so long a sentence is at variance, not only with the general usage of the language, but with the style of this particular prophecy. Ar originally meant a city, and ArMoab the city of Moab, i. e. the capital city, perhaps as the only real city of the Moabites. It was on the south side of the Arnon (Num. 22: 36). The Greeks called it Areopolis or City of Mars, according to their favourite practice of corrupting foreign names so as to give them the appearance of significant Greek words. Ptolemy calls it Rhabmathmom, a corruption of the Hebrew Rabbath-Moab i. e. chief city of Moab. Jerome says that the place was destroyed in one night by an earthquake when he was a boy. The Arabs call it Mab and Errabba. It is now in ruins. In connection with the capital city, the Prophet names the principal or only fortress in the land of Moab. Kir originally means a wall, then a walled town or fortress. The place here meant is a few miles southeast of Ar, on a rocky hill, strongly fortified by nature, and provided with a castle. The Chaldee Paraphrase of this verse calls it Kerakka de Moab, the fortress of Moab, which name it has retained among the orientals, who extend it to the whole of ancient Moab.

2. The destruction of the chief cities causes general grief. They (indefinitely) go up to the house (i. e. the temple), and Dibon (to) the high places for (the purpose of) weeping. On Nebo and on Medeba, Moab howls-on all his heads baldness—

every beard cut off. The ancient heathen built their temples upon heights (ch. 65 : 7). Solomon built one to the Moabitish god Chemosh on the mountain before Jerusalem (1 Kings 11: 7). Dibon, a town north of the Arnon, rebuilt by the tribe of Gad, and thence called Dibon-gad (Num. 33: 45), although it had formerly belonged to Moab, and would seem from this passage to have been recovered by them. The same place is called Dimon in v. 9, in order to assimilate it to the Hebrew word for blood. The modern name is Diban. There is no preposition before it here in Hebrew. Hence it may be either the object or the subject of the verb. The first construction is preferred by the older writers; those of modern date are almost unanimous in favour of the other, which makes Dibon itself go up to the high places. The objection to the first is that Dibon was situated in a plain; to which it may be answered that the phrase go up has reference in many cases not to geographical position but to sacredness and dignity.

3. In its streets they are girded with sackcloth; on its roofs and in its squares (or broad places) all (literally, all of it) howls, coming down with weeping (from the house-tops or the temples). In the Hebrew of this verse there is a singular alternation of masculine and feminine forms, all relating to Moab, sometimes considered as a country and sometimes as a nation. The last clause is explained by most modern writers, to mean melting. into tears, as the eye is elsewhere said to run down tears or water (Jer. 9: 18. Lam. 3: 48). But as the eye is not here mentioned, and the preposition is inserted, making a marked difference between this and the alleged expressions, it is better to adhere to the old construction which supposes an antithesis between this clause and the ascent to the temples or the housetops. Sackcloth is mentioned as the usual mourning dress and a badge of deep humiliation.