portion of the meat. This was the shoulder; and it seems to have been, under Samuel's direction, reserved for this purpose. We apprehend this was the right shoulder, which, as the due of the sacrificer, had been assigned to Samuel; and he had thus directed it to be prepared for his expected guest. We the rather think this, as we are aware of no distinction belonging to the left shoulder; whereas the assignment of the right shoulder, the priestly joint, to the stranger, was a most remarkable distinction and honour, well calculated to draw general attention to him, and, together with his stately figure, and the honourable place assigned him, to lead to the expectation of some remarkable disclosures respecting him.

No disclosures were then, however, made. The time was not come. Samuel took Saul home with him after the feast, which seems to have been held towards the close of the day; and, before retiring to rest, communed with him privately as they walked together upon the flat roof of the house. The subject of this conversation is not stated; but from what took place the next morning, there can be little doubt that the prophet apprized him more fully of the high destinies that awaited him, and tried to impress upon him the true position which he would occupy in a state so peculiarly related to the Divine King as that of Israel. Doubtless that memorable night was a wakeful one to both of them; and in the morning, Samuel called Saul very early to his journey, and walked forth with him some way on his homeward road. When they had got beyond the town, Samuel desired Saul to send his servant onward; and when they were alone, the prophet drew forth a vial of oil, and consecrated him to his future office, by pouring the contents upon his head. We shall have a future occasion of illustrating this old custom of anointing kings; and it suffices to remark here, that the oil could hardly have been the holy anointing oil of the tabernacle, first used in the consecration of Aaron to the high-priesthood; and that the vessel was not a horn, but a vial, which held but a small quantity, and was brittle. The Rabbis point out the analogy between this and

1 Concerning such flat roofs, and their uses, see vol. ii. p. 241.

the anointing of Jehu, and remark, superstitiously, that the reigns of Saul and Jehu, who were anointed from a vial, were (as they say) comparatively short; whereas those of David and Solomon, who were anointed from a horn, were long.

Having anointed Saul, Samuel kissed him. Subjects of rank were wont to kiss a new king in token of homage and subjection, just as among us the HAND of the sovereign is kissed now. There was no doubt something of this in the kiss of Samuel; but, under the peculiar circumstances, there must have been something more. It was also the kiss of congratulation upon the dignity to which he had been raised; and while it indicated the dignified respect of Samuel to the man appointed to reign over the house of Israel, it also testified his cheerful acquiescence in the appointment, and his willingness to hand over the government to him. There is nothing churlish or reserved in the conduct of Samuel under these trying circumstances. It is noble, generous, and open-in all respects worthy of the man asked of God' before his birth as a blessing, and from the womb consecrated to the Lord under the holy sanction of a mother's vow. No man ever resigned the first power of the state into other hands with so much courtesy, tenderness, dignity, and grace. Samuel was truly a great man.

Thirtieth Week-Seventh Day.

A CONSTITUTIONAL KING. I SAMUEL X. 17-25.

It was very important for the fair fame of Samuel that the nomination of a king should not seem to be determined by any partial favouritism on his part. It was necessary that respect should be secured for the new king, by his appointment being manifestly under the divine direction and control. In due time, therefore, the tribes were convened at Mizpeh for the choice of a king by lot. The same process sufficed for the detection of a criminal and for the choice of a king. Achan was convicted and Saul was chosen by precisely the same pro

cess:1 tribes, families, and individuals were successively taken by lot, until the right person was reached. In this case the tribe indicated was that of Benjamin, the family that of Matri, and the individual Saul the son of Kish. That individual, feeling, from his previous conference with Samuel, assured of the result, was yet so little ambitious to undertake this trying though honourable office-so desirous to avoid the responsibilities it involved—so attached to the peaceful rural life he had hitherto led that he withdrew himself from notice, and remained among the baggage away from the place of assemblage. He perhaps hoped that, if he were not forthcoming when inquired for, they would proceed with the lot for the election of some one else. But so solemn a decision was not to be thus trifled with. He was sought and found; and on his being produced to the people, Samuel pointed with pride to his noble stature, towering head and shoulders above all that assembled multitude. See ye him,' cried Samuel, 'whom God hath chosen, that there is none like him among all the people?' The qualification to which Samuel directed attention was physically so evident, that the people responded to it by an enthusiastic shout of recognition, 'Long live the king!'

But whatever good opinion Samuel himself may by this time have conceived of Saul, he remembered that this was not merely the election of a king, but the foundation of a monarchy, - and that it was his duty to care not only for the present but future generations. He saw that the entire character of the monarchy would be determined by the steps which might now be taken; and that this was the time, or never, to subject the sovereign authority to such conditions, and place it on such a basis, as might prevent it from becoming a mere secular despotism, such as the neighbouring nations exhibited. On the first establishment of the monarchy-on the free election of a sovereign who had no natural claim whatever to the crown— it was possible to make conditions and to impose restrictions, to which any future king, royal by birth, and on whom the crown devolved by hereditary right, would not very willingly

1 See vol. ii. p. 280.

submit. There can be no doubt that the people, under the infatuation which now possessed them, would have put themselves under the monarchy without any conditions whatever ; and it is entirely owing to the wise forethought of Samuel, acting under divine direction, that this great evil was averted, and that the kings of Israel did not become absolute and irresponsible masters of the lives and properties of their subjects. Some of the future kings, indeed, advanced far enough towards making themselves such; but they did so under such evident violation of the principles of the monarchy as established by Samuel, as always gave their subjects the right of protest and complaint, and even of resistance, as against an unlawful exercise of power.

Samuel then addressed the people, explaining to them 'the manner of the kingdom,' setting forth that the king was not to possess unlimited authority, and expounding the royal rights and privileges, and the limitations to which they were to be subject. Although institutions thus promulgated, in the presence of many witnesses, and accepted by all the parties concerned, were binding ordinances in an age before seals and writings were required to give validity to every transaction, Samuel neglected nothing which might give security to the people; and instead of setting up a stone as a witness, as would have been done in a somewhat earlier age, he committed the whole to writing, and laid up the manuscript before the Lord' from which we may suppose that he consigned it to the keeping of the priesthood, to be deposited with the most sacred muniments of the nation. Thus, under divine sanction, and amidst the despotisms of the East, arose the earliest example of a constitutional monarchy.

It may be regretted that we are not acquainted with the precise terms of the limitations and responsibilities under which the crown was accepted by the first Hebrew king. But the real conditions may, without much difficulty, be collected from the subsequent history itself, and from the writings of the prophets. It is also to be borne in mind, that the idea of such limitations did not originate with Samuel, although it devolved

on him to give them practical effect, and probably to enforce them by new conditions. Moses himself had laid down the principles of the Hebrew monarchy, whenever it should be established; and whatever other conditions were added when the time came, there can be no doubt that these essential principles were included.

It had been foreseen that the day would come when the Israelites would insist on having a king. To resist this wish absolutely, might have tempted them into open rebellion against the authority which opposed the attainment of their desires; and having accomplished their object in distinct opposition to the declared will of God, and thrown themselves into rebellion against their Divine King, they would feel that they had cast themselves loose from the theocratical institution, and would no longer recognise their obligations to it, or submit to the restrictions it imposed. This would have been to ruin the entire object for which the nation had been established, preserved, and made a peculiar people. This could not be allowed. It was therefore provided, even from the time of Moses, that their wishes should be so met as to keep the management of the whole operation in the hands of the Lord's servants, and so guided as that the new government should, as far as possible, be interwoven with, and rendered subservient to, the great theocratical institutions.

As a clear view of this matter is essential to the correct understanding of many points in the history of the Hebrew monarchy, we shall devote a day to its consideration.1

The first interview between Samuel and Saul was at a town (probably Ramah) on the southern border of Benjamin, and not far distant from Rachel's sepulchre at Bethlehem. But Saul was elected king at Mizpch. The name signifies a place of look-out,' or a watch-tower.' No less than seven Mizpehs are mentioned in Scripture this, however, was doubtless Mizpeh of Benjamin, now called Neby Samwîl, one of the most commanding spots around Jerusalem. After the capture of the ark by the Philistines, though the tabernacle still remained at Shiloh, it would seem that 1 See Thirty-first Week-Second Day.