consummated.

4. Every newly married man, during the first year after his marriage. The humanity of these exemptions will be the more evident, when it is recollected that, anciently, it was deemed an excessive hardship for a person to be obliged to go to battle (in which there was a probability of his being slain) who had left a new house unfinished, a newly purchased heritage half tilled, or a wife with whom he had just contracted marriage. Homer represents the case of Protesilaus as singularly afflicting, who was obliged to go to the Trojan war, leaving his wife in the deepest distress, and his house unfinished.'

cers (as they are termed in our version), who probably chose the heads of families; but after the monarchy took place, they received their commissions either from the king in the same manner as at present, as appears from 2 Sam. xviii. 1. and 2 Chron. xxv. 5.; or from the commander-in-chief (2 Sam. xviii. 11.): and it should seem that a captain's commission was denoted by giving a military girdle or sash. (2 Sam. xviii. 11.)

Before the regal government was established, the Israelitish army was entirely disbanded at the conclusion of a war. The earliest instance recorded of any military force being 'kept in time of peace, is in the reign of Saul, who retained two thousand for his body guard, and one thousand for his son Jonathan's guard. (1 Sam. xiii. 1, 2.) David had a distinct guard, called Cherethites and Pelethites, concerning the origin of whose name various contradictory opinions have been offered. Josephus, however, expressly says, that they were his guards, and the Chaldee paraphrast terms them archers and slingers. Besides these he had twelve bodies of twenty-four thousand men each, who were on duty for one month, forming an aggregate of two hundred and eighty-eight thousand men. (1 Chron. xxvii. 1-15.) Subsequently, when the art of war was improved, a regular force seems to have been kept up both in peace and war; for, exclusive of the vast army which Jehoshaphat had in the field, we read that he had troops throughout all the fenced cities, which doubtless were garrisoned in time of peace as well as during war. III. The OFFICERS who were placed at the head of the Hebrew forces appear not to have differed materially from those whom we find in ancient and modern armies..

The Division of the army into three bands or companies, mentioned in Gen. xiv. 14, 15. Job i. 17. Judg. vii. 16. 20. 1 Sam. xi. 11. and 2 Sam. xviii. 2., was probably no other than the division into the centre, left, and right wing, which obtains in the modern art of war. The Hebrews, when they departed from Egypt, marched in military order, nos (AL TSEBOTAM) by their armies or hosts (Exod. xii. 51.), and (ve-CHаMUSHIM), which word in our English Bibles (Exod. xiii. 18.) is rendered harnessed, and in the margin, by five in a rank. It is probable, from these expressions, that they followed each other in ranks fifty deep, and that at the head of each rank or file of fifty was the captain of fifty. (1 Sam. viii. 12. 2 Kings i. 9-14.) The other divisions consisted of tens, hundreds, thousands, &c.; and the officers that commanded them are styled captains of thousands, captains of hundreds, captains of fifties, and captains of tens; of these mention is made in 1 Chron. xii. 14. 20. xiii. 1. xxviii. 1. and 2 Kings i. 9. 11. 13. These, probably, were of the same rank with those whom Moses constituted in the wilderness, rulers of thousands, &c. (Exod. xviii. 25.), and who at first acted in a double capacity, being at the same time civil magistrates and military officers. The captains of thousands seem to have been much the same as colonels of regiments with us; and the captains of hundreds might probably answer to those who in our army have the command of troops and companies; the captains of fifties and tens to our subalterns, sergeants, and corporals. During the Mosaic commonwealth, in conformity to the law in Deut. xx. 9., all these

1 Iliad, lib. ii. 700-702.

2 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iii. pp. 34-37.

On this subject the reader may consult the Dissertations of Ikenius, De Crethi et Plethi (Lug. Bat. 1749), and of Lakemacher, Observationes Philologica, part ii. pp. 11-44., and also Michaelis's Commentaries on the

Law of Moses, § 232

It is from this circumstance "that the Divine Being calls himself the LORD OF HOSTS, or armies; because the Israelites were brought out of Egypt under his direction, marshalled and ordered by himself, guided by his wisdom, supported by his providence, and protected by his might. This is the true and simple reason, why God is so frequently styled in Scripture the Lord of Hosts: for the LORD did bring the children of Israel out of Egypt by their armies." Dr. A. Clarke's Commentary, on Exod. xii. 51.

The first and principal Head of the armies of Israel was the Almighty himself, who is so frequently termed in Scripture the Lord of Hosts. The whole nation marched forth under the superintending guidance of their God. Subordinate to Him, and as his lieutenant-general, was the principal officer, or leader of the whole army, who, in the Scriptures, is termed the CAPTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOST, and who appears to have been of the same rank with him who is now called the comJudges under the primitive constitution of their government as settled by God himself: such was Abner under Saul (2 Sam. ii. 8.), Joab under David (2 Sam. xx. 23.), and Amasa under Absalom, when he was raising a rebellion against his father. (2 Sam. xvii. 25.) The command and authority of this captain of the host appear to have been very great, sometimes indeed, nearly equal to that of the sovereign. David seems to have been afraid of Joab his commander-in-chief; otherwise he would never have suffered him to live after the sanguinary assassinations which he had perpetrated. It is evident that the captain of the host enjoyed great influence in the time of Elisha: for we read, that the prophet having been hospitably entertained by an opulent woman at Shunem, and being desirous of making her some acknowledgment for her kindness, ordered his servant Gehazi to inquire what she would wish to have done for her. Wouldst thou be spoken for to the king, or to the CAPTAIN OF THE HOST? (2 Kings iv. 13.)

After the establishment of the monarchy, the kings went to war in person, and at first fought on foot, like the meanest of their soldiers. Thus David fought, until the danger to which he exposed himself became so great, that his people would no longer allow him to lead them on to battle. (2 Sam. xxi. 17.) It does not appear that there were any horse in the Israelitish army before the time of Solomon. In the time of David there were none; for the rebel Absalom was mounted on a mule in the battle in which he lost his life. (2 Sam. xviii. 9.) Solomon, who had married the daughter of the king of Egypt, procured horses from that country at a great expense (1 Kings x. 28, 29.); and afterwards had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen. (2 Chron. ix. 25.) From Zech. xiv. 20. it should seem, that bells formed a part of the caparison of war-horses. Subsequent kings of Judah and Israel went into the battle in chariots, arrayed in their royal vestments, or sometimes in disguise. They generally had a spare chariot to attend them: thus we read that king Josiah, after he was mortally wounded, was taken out of his war-chariot, and put into another, in which he was carried to Jerusalem. (2 Chron. xxxv. 23, 24. 1 Kings xxii. 34.) Both kings and generals had armourbearers, who were chosen from the bravest of the soldiery, and not only bore the arms of their masters, but were also employed to give his commands to the subordinate captains, and were present at his side in the hour of peril. (i Sam. xiv. 6. xvii. 7.)

Military chariots were much in use among the Egyptians, Canaanites, and other oriental nations. Two sorts are mentioned in the Scriptures; one in which princes and generals rode, the other to break the enemy's battalions by rushing in among them, armed with iron scythes, which caused terrible havoc. The most ancient war-chariots, of which we read, are those of Pharaoh, which were destroyed in the Red Sea (Exod. xiv. 7.): his infantry, cavalry, and war-chariots were so arranged as to form separate divisions of his army. (Exod. xiv. 6, 7.) The Canaanites, whom Joshua engaged at the waters of Merom, had cavalry and a multitude of chariots. (Josh. xi. 4.) Sisera, the general of Jabin, king of Hazor had nine hundred chariots of iron in his army. (Judg. iv. 3.) The tribe of Judah could not obtain possession of part of the lands allotted to them, because the inhabitants of the country were strong in chariots of iron. (Judg. i. 19.) The Philistines, in their war with Saul, had thirty thousand chariots, and six thousand horsemen. (1 Sam. xiii. 5.) David, having taken a thousand war-chariots from Hadadezer, king of Damascus, ham-strung the horses, and burnt nine hundred cha

• They were also used among the ancient Britons.

A shield-bearer was an office among the Jews as well as he Philistines, for David when he first went to court was made king Saul's armour-bearer (1 Sam. xvi. 21.), and Jonathan had a young man who bore his armour before him. (1 Sam. xiv. 1.) Besides this tsinnah, or great massy shield, Goliath was furnished with a less one (I Sam. xvii. 6. and 45.), which is not expressed by one of the fore-mentioned words, but is called cidon, which we render a target in one place and a shield in another, and was of a different nature from the common shields. He seems not only to have held it in his hand when he had occasion to use it, but could also at other times conveniently hang it about his neck and turn it behind, on which account it is added, that it was between his shoulders. The loss of the shield in fight was excessively resented by the Jewish warriors, as well as lamented by them, for it was a signal ingredient of the public mourning, that the shield of the mighty was vilely cast away. (2 Sam. i. 21.) David, a man of arms, who composed the beautiful elegy on the death of Saul related in 2 Sam. i. 19-27., was sensible how disgraceful a thing it was for soldiers to quit their shields in the field, yet this was the deplorable case of the Jewish soldiers in that unhappy engagement with the Philistines (1 Sam. xxxi. 7.), they fled away and left their shields behind them; this vile and dishonourable casting away of that principal armour is deservedly the subject of the royal poet's lamentation.

But these honourable sentiments were not confined to the Jews. We find them prevailing among most other ancient nations, who considered it infamous to cast away or lose their shield. With the Greeks it was a capital crime, and punished with death. The Lacedemonian women, it is well known, in order to excite the courage of their sons, used to deliver to them their fathers' shields, with this short address: "This shield thy father always preserved; do thou preserve it also, or perish." Alluding to these sentiments, Saint Paul, when exhorting the Hebrew Christians to steadfastness in the faith of the Gospel, urges them not to cast away their confidence, their confession of faith, which hath great recompense of reward, no less than the approbation of God, the peace which passeth all understanding here, and the glories of heaven, as their eternal portion. (Heb. x. 35.)

It may be further observed, that they used to scour and polish their arms, as may be inferred from the prophet's expressions of furbishing the spears and making bright the arrows (Jer. xlvi. 4. and li. 11.), and it should seem that such shields as were covered with leather were oiled in order to keep them clean, and prevent them from becoming too dry. To this custom there is an allusion in 2 Sam. i. 21. and Isa. xxi. 5. When the shields were not in use, they were covered with a case, in order to preserve them from being rusty and soiled; hence we read of uncovering the shield, which signifies preparing for war, and having that weapon especially in readiness. (Isa. xxii. 6.)

4. Another defensive provision in war was the MILITARY GIRDLE, or BELT, which answered a twofold purpose, viz. first, in order to wear the sword, which hung at the soldier's girdle or belt (1 Sam. xvii. 39); secondly, it was necessary to gird their clothes and armour together, and thus David girded his sword upon his armour. To gird and to arm are synonymous words in Scripture; for those who are said to be able to put on armour are, according to the Hebrew and the Septuagint, girt with a girdle, and hence comes the expression of girding to the battle. (1 Kings xx. 11. Isa. viii. 9. 2 Sam. xxii. 40.) The military girdle was the chief ornament of a soldier, and was highly prized among all ancient nations: it was also a rich present from one chieftain to another. Thus, Jonathan gave his girdle to David, as the highest pledge of his esteem and perpetual friendship. (1 Sam. xviii. 4.)1

5. Boors or GREAVES were part of the ancient defensive harness, because it was the custom to cast certain rod, impediments (so called because they entangle their feet, afterwards known by the name of gall-traps, which since, in heraldry, are corruptly called call-trops), in the way before the enemy: the military boot or shoe was, therefore, necessary to guard the legs and feet from the iron stakes placed in the way to gall and wound them; and thus we are enabled to account for Goliath's greaves of brass which were upon his legs.

VII. The OFFENSIVE ARMS were of two sorts, viz. such as were employed when they came to a close engagement;

In like manner, Ajax gave his girdle to Hector, as a token of the highest respect. (Iliad, vii. 305.) Dr A. Clarke, on 2 Sam. xviii. 11.

and those with which they annoyed the enemy at a distance. Of the former description were the sword and the battle-axe. 1. The SWORD is the most ancient weapon of offence mentioned in the Bible. With it Jacob's sons treacherously assassinated the Shechemites. (Gen. xxxiv. 25.) It was worn on the thigh (Psal. xlv. 3. Exod. xxxii. 27.), and it should seem on the left thigh; though it is particularly mentioned that Ehud, a Benjamite, put a dagger or short sword under his garments on his right thigh. (Judg. iii. 16.) The palanquin, or travelling couch of Solomon (Song iii. 7, 8. where our version terms it a bed), was surrounded by threescore valiant Israelitish soldiers, every one of whom had his sword girt upon his thigh. There appear to have been two kinds of swords in use, a larger one with one edge, which is called in Hebrew the mouth of the sword (Josh. vi. 21.); and a shorter one with two edges, like that of Ehud. The modern Arabs, it is well known, wear a sabre on one side, and a cangiar or dagger in their girdles. 2. Of the BATTLE-AXE we have no description in the Sacred Volume: it seems to have been a most powerful weapon in the hands of cavalry, from the allusion made to it by Jeremiah:-Thou art my battle-axe and weapons of war; for with thee will I break in pieces the nations, and with thee will I destroy kingdoms: and with thee will I break in pieces the horse and his rider, and with thee will I break in pieces the chariot and his rider. (Jer. li. 20, 21.)

The other offensive weapons for annoying the enemy at a distance, were the spear or javelin, the sling, and the bow and arrow.

3. The SPEAR or JAVELIN (as the words (ROMACH), and an (CHANITH), are variously rendered in Num. xxv. 7. 1 Sam. xiii. 19. and Jer. xlvi. 4.) was of different kinds, according to its length or make. Some of them might be thrown or darted (1 Sam. xviii. 11.); and it appears from 2 Sam. ii 23. that some of them were pointed at both ends. When armies were encamped, the spear of the general or commander-in-chief was stuck into the ground at his head.2 4. SLINGS are enumerated among the military stores collected by Uzziah. (2 Chron. xxvi. 14.) In the use of the sling, David eminently excelled, and slew Goliath with a stone from one. The Benjamites were celebrated in battle because they had attained to a great skill and accuracy in handling this weapon; they could sling stones to a hair's breadth, and not miss (Judg. xx. 16.); and where it is said that they were left-handed, it should rather be rendered ambidexters, for we are told, they could use both the right-hand and the left (1 Chron. xii. 2.); that is, they did not constantly use their right hand as others did, when they shot arrows or slung stones, but they were so expert in their military exercises, that they could perform them with their left hand as well as with their right.

5. Bows and ARROWS are of great antiquity: indeed, no weapon is mentioned so early. Thus Isaac said to Esau, Tuke thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow (Gen. xxvii. 3.); though it is true, these are not spoken of as used in war, but in hunting, and so they are supposed and implied before this; where it is said of Ishmael, that he became an archer, and used bows and arrows in shooting of wild beasts. (Gen. xxi. 20.) This afterwards became so useful a weapon, that care was taken to train up the Hebrew youth to it betimes. When David had in a solemn manner lamented the death of king Saul, he gave orders for teaching the young men the use of the bow (2 Sam. i. 18.), that they might be as expert as the Philistines, by whose bows and arrows Saul and his army were slain. These were part of the military ammunition (for in those times bows were used instead of guns, and arrows supplied the place of powder and ball). From Job xx. 24. and from Psal. xviii. 34. it may be collected, that the military bow was made of steel, and, consequently, was very stiff and hard to bend, on which account they used their foot in bending their bows; and therefore when the prophets speak of treading the bow, and of bows trodden, they are to be understood of bows bent, as our translators rightly render it (Jer. 1. 14. Isa. v. 28. xxi. 15.); where the Hebrew word which is used in these places signifies to tread upon. This weapon was thought so necessary in war, that it is called the bow of war, or the battle-bow. (Zech. ix. 10. x. 4.)

VIII. Many of the cities of Palestine, being erected on eminences, were fortified by nature; but most frequently they were surrounded with a lofty wall, either single or double (Deut. xxviii. 52. 2 Chron. xxxiii. 14. Isa. xxii. 11.); O which were erected towers or bulwarks. (2 Chron. xiv. 7

See p. 87. supra, for examples of this custom.

4. Every newly married man, during the first year after his marriage. The humanity of these exemptions will be the more evident, when it is recollected that, anciently, it was deemed an excessive hardship for a person to be obliged to go to battle (in which there was a probability of his being slain) who had left a new house unfinished, a newly purchased heritage half tilled, or a wife with whom he had just contracted marriage. Homer represents the case of Protesilaus as singularly afflicting, who was obliged to go to the Trojan war, leaving his wife in the deepest distress, and his

house unfinished.'

cers (as they are termed in our version), who probably chose the heads of families; but after the monarchy took place, they received their commissions either from the king in the same manner as at present, as appears from 2 Sam. xviii. 1. and 2 Chron. xxv. 5.; or from the commander-in-chief (2 Sam. xviii. 11.): and it should seem that a captain's commission was denoted by giving a military girdle or sash. (2 Sam. xviii. 11.)

Before the regal government was established, the Israelitish army was entirely disbanded at the conclusion of a war. The earliest instance recorded of any military force being kept in time of peace, is in the reign of Saul, who retained two thousand for his body guard, and one thousand for his son Jonathan's guard. (1 Sam. xiii. 1, 2.) David had a distinct guard, called Cherethites and Pelethites, concerning the origin of whose name various contradictory opinions have been offered. Josephus, however, expressly says, that they were his guards, and the Chaldee paraphrast terms them archers and slingers. Besides these he had twelve bodies of twenty-four thousand men each, who were on duty for one month, forming an aggregate of two hundred and eighty-eight thousand men. (1 Chron. xxvii. 1-15.) Subsequently, when the art of war was improved, a regular force seems to have been kept up both in peace and war; for, exclusive of the vast army which Jehoshaphat had in the field, we read that he had troops throughout all the fenced cities, which doubtless were garrisoned in time of peace as well as during war. III. The OFFICERS who were placed at the head of the Hebrew forces appear not to have differed materially from those whom we find in ancient and modern armies..

The Division of the army into three bands or companies, mentioned in Gen. xiv. 14, 15. Job i. 17. Judg. vii. 16. 20. 1 Sam. xi. 11. and 2 Sam. xviii. 2., was probably no other than the division into the centre, left, and right wing, which obtains in the modern art of war. The Hebrews, when they departed from Egypt, marched in military order, ny (AL TSEBOTAM) by their armies or hosts (Exod. xii. 51.), and (Ve-CH@MUSHIM), which word in our English Bibles (Exod. xiii. 18.) is rendered harnessed, and in the margin, by five in a rank. It is probable, from these expressions, that they followed each other in ranks fifty deep, and that at the head of each rank or file of fifty was the captain of fifty. (1 Sam. viii. 12. 2 Kings i. 9-14.) The other divisions consisted of tens, hundreds, thousands, &c.; and the officers that commanded them are styled captains of thousands, captains of hundreds, captains of fifties, and captains of tens; of these mention is made in 1 Chron. xii. 14. 20. xiii. 1. xxviii. 1. and 2 Kings i. 9. 11. 13. These, probably, were of the same rank with those whom Moses constituted in the wilderness, rulers of thousands, &c. (Exod. xviii. 25.), and who at first acted in a double capacity, being at the same time civil magistrates and military officers. The captains of thousands seem to have been much the same as colonels of regiments with us; and the captains of hundreds might probably answer to those who in our army have the command of troops and companies; the captains of fifties and tens to our subalterns, sergeants, and corporals. During the Mosaic commonwealth, in conformity to the law in Deut. xx. 9., all these

1 Iliad, lib. ii. 700-702.

2 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iii. pp. 34-37.

On this subject the reader may consult the Dissertations of Ikenius, De Crethi et Plethi (Lug. Bat. 1749), and of Lakemacher, Observationes Philologicæ, part ii. pp. 11-44., and also Michaelis's Commentaries on the Law of Moses, § 232.

It is from this circumstance "that the Divine Being calls himself the LORD OF HOSTS, or armies; because the Israelites were brought out of Egypt under his direction, marshalled and ordered by himself, guided by his wisdom, supported by his providence, and protected by his might. This is the true and simple reason, why God is so frequently styled in Scripture the Lord of Hosts: for the LORD did bring the children of Israel out of Egypt by their armies." Dr. A. Clarke's Commentary, on Exod. xii. 51.

The first and principal Head of the armies of Israel was the Almighty himself, who is so frequently termed in Scripture the Lord of Hosts. The whole nation marched forth under the superintending guidance of their God. Subordinate to Him, and as his lieutenant-general, was the principal officer, or leader of the whole army, who, in the Scriptures, is termed the CAPTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOST, and who appears to have been of the same rank with him who is now called the comJudges under the primitive constitution of their government as settled by God himself: such was Abner under Saul (2 Sam. ii. 8.), Joab under David (2 Sam. xx. 23.), and Amasa under Absalom, when he was raising a rebellion against his father. (2 Sam. xvii. 25.) The command and authority of this captain of the host appear to have been very great, sometimes indeed, nearly equal to that of the sovereign. David seems to have been afraid of Joab his commander-in-chief; otherwise he would never have suffered him to live after the sanguinary assassinations which he had perpetrated. It is evident that the captain of the host enjoyed great influence in the time of Elisha: for we read, that the prophet having been hospitably entertained by an opulent woman at Shunem, and being desirous of making her some acknowledgment for her kindness, ordered his servant Gehazi to inquire what she would wish to have done for her. Wouldst thou be spoken for to the king, or to the CAPTAIN OF THE HOST? (2 Kings iv. 13.)

After the establishment of the monarchy, the kings went to war in person, and at first fought on foot, like the meanest of their soldiers. Thus David fought, until the danger to which he exposed himself became so great, that his people would no longer allow him to lead them on to battle. (2 Sam. xxi. 17.) It does not appear that there were any horse in the Israelitish army before the time of Solomon. In the time of David there were none; for the rebel Absalom was mounted on a mule in the battle in which he lost his life. (2 Sam. xviii. 9.) Solomon, who had married the daughter of the king of Egypt, procured horses from that country at a great expense (1 Kings x. 28, 29.); and afterwards had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen. (2 Chron. ix. 25.) From Zech. xiv. 20. it should seem, that bells formed a part of the caparison of war-horses. Subsequent kings of Judah and Israel went into the battle in chariots, arrayed in their royal vestments, or sometimes in disguise. They generally had a spare chariot to attend them: thus we read that king Josiah, after he was mortally wounded, was taken out of his war-chariot, and put into another, in which he was carried to Jerusalem. (2 Chron. xxxv. 23, 24. 1 Kings xxii. 34.) Both kings and generals had armourbearers, who were chosen from the bravest of the soldiery, and not only bore the arms of their masters, but were also employed to give his commands to the subordinate captains, and were present at his side in the hour of peril. (1 Sam. xiv. 6. xvii. 7.)

Military chariots were much in use among the Egyptians, Canaanites, and other oriental nations. Two sorts are mentioned in the Scriptures; one in which princes and generals rode, the other to break the enemy's battalions by rushing in among them, armed with iron scythes, which caused terrible havoc. The most ancient war-chariots, of which we read, are those of Pharaoh, which were destroyed in the Red Sea (Exod. xiv. 7.): his infantry, cavalry, and war-chariots were so arranged as to form separate divisions of his army. (Exod. xiv. 6, 7.) The Canaanites, whom Joshua engaged at the waters of Merom, had cavalry and a multitude of chariots. (Josh. xi. 4.) Sisera, the general of Jabin, king of Hazor had nine hundred chariots of iron in his army. (Judg. iv. 3.) The tribe of Judah could not obtain possession of part of the lands allotted to them, because the inhabitants of the country were strong in chariots of iron. (Judg. i. 19.) The Philistines, in their war with Saul, had thirty thousand chariots, and six thousand horsemen. (1 Sam. xiii. 5.) David, having taken a thousand war-chariots from Hadadezer, king of Damascus, ham-strung the horses, and burnt nine hundred cha

They were also used among the ancient Britons.

4. Every newly married man, during the first year after his marriage. The humanity of these exemptions will be the more evident, when it is recollected that, anciently, it was deemed an excessive hardship for a person to be obliged to go to battle (in which there was a probability of his being slain) who had left a new house unfinished, a newly purchased heritage half tilled, or a wife with whom he had just contracted marriage. Homer represents the case of Protesilaus as singularly afflicting, who was obliged to go to the Trojan war, leaving his wife in the deepest distress, and his

house unfinished.'

officers were appointed by the Snoterim, genealogists or officers (as they are termed in our version), who probably chose the heads of families; but after the monarchy took place, they received their commissions either from the king in the same manner as at present, as appears from 2 Sam. xviii. 1. and 2 Chron. xxv. 5.; or from the commander-in-chief (2 Sam. xviii. 11.): and it should seem that a captain's commission was denoted by giving a military girdle or sash. (2 Sam. xviii. 11.)

3

Before the regal government was established, the Israelitish army was entirely disbanded at the conclusion of a war. The earliest instance recorded of any military force being kept in time of peace, is in the reign of Saul, who retained two thousand for his body guard, and one thousand for his son Jonathan's guard. (1 Sam. xiii. 1, 2.) David had a distinct guard, called Cherethites and Pelethites, concerning the origin of whose name various contradictory opinions have been offered. Josephus, however, expressly says, that they were his guards, and the Chaldee paraphrast terms them archers and slingers. Besides these he had twelve bodies of twenty-four thousand men each, who were on duty for one month, forming an aggregate of two hundred and eighty-eight thousand men. (1 Chron. xxvii. 1-15.) Subsequently, when the art of war was improved, a regular force seems to have been kept up both in peace and war; for, exclusive of the vast army which Jehoshaphat had in the field, we read that he had troops throughout all the fenced cities, which doubtless were garrisoned in time of peace as well as during war. III. The OFFICERS who were placed at the head of the Hebrew forces appear not to have differed materially from those whom we find in ancient and modern armies.

The Division of the army into three bands or companies, mentioned in Gen. xiv. 14, 15. Job i. 17. Judg. vii. 16. 20. 1 Sam. xi. 11. and 2 Sam. xviii. 2., was probably no other than the division into the centre, left, and right wing, which obtains in the modern art of war. The Hebrews, when they departed from Egypt, marched in military order, on (AL TSEBOTAM) by their armies or hosts (Exod. xii. 51.), and (Ve-CHUMUSHIM), which word in our English Bibles (Exod. xiii. 18.) is rendered harnessed, and in the margin, by five in a rank. It is probable, from these expressions, that they followed each other in ranks fifty deep, and that at the head of each rank or file of fifty was the captain of fifty. (1 Sam. viii. 12. 2 Kings i. 9-14.) The other divisions consisted of tens, hundreds, thousands, &c.; and the officers that commanded them are styled captains of thousands, captains of hundreds, captains of fifties, and captains of tens; of these mention is made in 1 Chron. xii. 14. 20. xiii. 1. xxviii. 1. and 2 Kings i. 9. 11. 13. These, probably, were of the same rank with those whom Moses constituted in the wilderness, rulers of thousands, &c. (Exod. xviii. 25.), and who at first acted in a double capacity, being at the same time civil magistrates and military officers. The captains of thousands seem to have been much the same as colonels of regiments with us; and the captains of hundreds might probably answer to those who in our army have the command of troops and companies; the captains of fifties and tens to our subalterns, sergeants, and corporals. During the Mosaic commonwealth, in conformity to the law in Deut. xx. 9., all these

1 Iliad, lib. ii. 700-702.

2 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iii. pp. 34-37.

3 On this subject the reader may consult the Dissertations of Ikenius, De Crethi et Plethi (Lug. Bat. 1749), and of Lakemacher, Observationes Philologica, part ii. pp. 11-44., and also Michaelis's Commentaries on the

Law of Moses, § 232.

It is from this circumstance "that the Divine Being calls himself the LORD OF HOSTS, or armies; because the Israelites were brought out of Egypt under his direction, marshalled and ordered by himself, guided by his wisdom, supported by his providence, and protected by his might. This is the true and simple reason, why God is so frequently styled in Scripture the Lord of Hosts: for the LORD did bring the children of Israel out of Egypt by their armies." Dr. A. Clarke's Commentary, on Exod. xii. 51.

The first and principal Head of the armies of Israel was the Almighty himself, who is so frequently termed in Scripture the Lord of Hosts. The whole nation marched forth under the superintending guidance of their God. Subordinate to Him, and as his lieutenant-general, was the principal officer, or leader of the whole army, who, in the Scriptures, is termed the CAPTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOST, and who appears to have been of the same rank with him who is now called the comJudges under the primitive constitution of their government as settled by God himself: such was Abner under Saul (2 Sam. ii. 8.), Joab under David (2 Sam. xx. 23.), and Amasa under Absalom, when he was raising a rebellion against his father. (2 Sam. xvii. 25.) The command and authority of this captain of the host appear to have been very great, sometimes indeed, nearly equal to that of the sovereign. David seems to have been afraid of Joab his commander-in-chief; otherwise he would never have suffered him to live after the sanguinary assassinations which he had perpetrated. It is evident that the captain of the host enjoyed great influence in the time of Elisha: for we read, that the prophet having been hospitably entertained by an opulent woman at Shunem, and being desirous of making her some acknowledgment for her kindness, ordered his servant Gehazi to inquire what she would wish to have done for her. Wouldst thou be spoken for to the king, or to the CAPTAIN OF THE HOST? (2 Kings iv. 13.)

After the establishment of the monarchy, the kings went to war in person, and at first fought on foot, like the meanest of their soldiers. Thus David fought, until the danger to which he exposed himself became so great, that his people would no longer allow him to lead them on to battle. (2 Sam. xxi. 17.) It does not appear that there were any horse in the Israelitish army before the time of Solomon. In the time of David there were none; for the rebel Absalom was mounted on a mule in the battle in which he lost his life. (2 Sam. xviii. 9.) Solomon, who had married the daughter of the king of Egypt, procured horses from that country at a great expense (1 Kings x. 28, 29.); and afterwards had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen. (2 Chron. ix. 25.) From Zech. xiv. 20. it should seem, that bells formed a part of the caparison of war-horses. Subsequent kings of Judah and Israel went into the battle in chariots, arrayed in their royal vestments, or sometimes in disguise. They generally had a spare chariot to attend them: thus we read that king Josiah, after he was mortally wounded, was taken out of his war-chariot, and put into another, in which he was carried to Jerusalem. (2 Chron. xxxv. 23, 24. 1 Kings xxii. 34.) Both kings and generals had armourbearers, who were chosen from the bravest of the soldiery, and not only bore the arms of their masters, but were also employed to give his commands to the subordinate captains, and were present at his side in the hour of peril. (1 Sam. xiv. 6. xvii. 7.)

Military chariots were much in use among the Egyptians, Canaanites, and other oriental nations.5 Two sorts are mentioned in the Scriptures; one in which princes and generals rode, the other to break the enemy's battalions by rushing in among them, armed with iron scythes, which caused terrible havoc. The most ancient war-chariots, of which we read, are those of Pharaoh, which were destroyed in the Red Sea (Exod. xiv. 7.): his infantry, cavalry, and war-chariots were so arranged as to form separate divisions of his army. (Exod. xiv. 6, 7.) The Canaanites, whom Joshua engaged at the waters of Merom, had cavalry and a multitude of chariots. (Josh. xi. 4.) Sisera, the general of Jabin, king of Hazor had nine hundred chariots of iron in his army. (Judg. iv. 3.) The tribe of Judah could not obtain possession of part of the lands allotted to them, because the inhabitants of the country were strong in chariots of iron. (Judg. i. 19.) The Philistines, in their war with Saul, had thirty thousand chariots, and six thousand horsemen. (1 Sam. xiii. 5.) David, having taken a thousand war-chariots from Hadadezer, king of Damascus, ham-strung the horses, and burnt nine hundred cha

They were also used among the ancient Britons.