and asses, and three millions of sheep and goats. This astonishing account of Chardin, is confirmed by Dr. Shaw, who states, that several Arabian tribes, who can bring no more than three or four hundred horses into the field, are possessed of more than so many thousand camels, and triple the number of sheep and black cattle. Russel, in his history of Aleppo, speaks of vast flocks which pass that city every year, of which many sheep are sold to supply the inhabitants. The flocks and herds which belonged to the Jewish patriarchs, were not more numerous.

The care of such overgrown flocks required the attention of many shepherds. These were of different kinds; the master of the family and his children, with a number of herdsmen, who were hired to assist them, and felt but little interest in the preservation and increase of their charge. In Hebrew, these persons, so different in station and feeling, were not distinguished by appropriate names; the master, the slave, and the hired servant, were all known by the common appellation of shepherds. The distinction, not sufficiently important to require the intervention of a particular term, is expressed among every people by a periphrasis. The only instance in the Old Testament, in which the hired servant is distinguished from the master, or one of his family, occurs in the history of David, where he is said to have left the sheep (y) in the hand of a keeper, while he went down to visit his brethren, and the armies who were fighting against the Philistines, under the banners of Saul.* This word exactly corresponds with the Latin term custos, a keeper, which Virgil uses to denote a hireling shepherd, in his tenth. Eclogue:

"Atque utinam ex vobis unus, vestrique fuissem

Aut custos gregis, aut maturæ vinitor uvæ."

In such extensive pastoral concerns, the vigilance and activity of the master were often insufficient for directing the operations of so many shepherds, that were not unfrequently scattered over a considerable extent of country. An upper servant was therefore appointed

to superintend their labours, and take care that his master suffered no injury. In the house of Abraham, this honourable station was held by Eliezer, a native of Damascus, a servant in every respect worthy of so great and good a master. The numerous flocks of Pharaoh, seem to have required the superintending care of many overseers.* Doeg, an Edomite, was intrusted with the whole pastoral establishment of Saul.† But in the reign of David, the important office of chief herdsman was abolished, and the vast flocks and herds of that monarch, were intrusted to a number of superintendants; animals of the same species forming a separate flock, under its proper overseer. These overseers, in the language of the Hebrews, were called the princes of the flock; they were treated with great distinction, and seem to have been selected in the reign of David from the nobles of his court. The office of chief shepherd, is frequently mentioned by the classic authors of antiquity. Diodorus relates from Ctesias, that Simma was overseer of the royal flocks under Ninus, king of Syria. According to Plutarch, one Samo managed the flocks and herds of Neoptolomus, the king of the Molossians. The office of chief shepherd was also known among the Latins; for, in the tenth Eneid, Tyrrhus is named as governor of the royal flocks:

"Tyrrhus que pater, cui regia parent Armenta, et late custodia credita campi." And Livy informs us, that Faustulus held the same office under Numitor, king of the Latins. But it is needless to multiply quotations; every scholar knows, that the Greek and Roman classics abound with allusions to this office, which in those days was one of great importance and dignity, on the faithful discharge of which, the power and splendour of an eastern potentate greatly depended. The office of chief shepherd, therefore, being in pastoral countries one of great trust, of high responsibility, and of distinguished honour, is with great propriety applied to our Lord, by the apostle Peter: "And when the chief shepherd

shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory which fadeth not away."* The same allusion occurs in these words of Paul: "Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus Christ, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will.Ӡ

use.

The only other distribution of oriental shepherds, mentioned in the holy Scriptures, is into good and bad. A bad, or foolish shepherd, is thus described by the prophet: "And the Lord said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd. For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that are cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that which is broken, nor feed that which standeth still; but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces. Woe to the idle shepherd, that leaveth the flock." In this passage, the prophet fixes a mark of indelible infamy upon the unfaithful shepherd; he calls him a person of no A man of nought was, among the Hebrews, an expression of utter contempt. The idols which the heathens worshipped, they accordingly stigmatized as things of nought, or of no value: "An idol," says the apostle Paul, is nothing," or of no value in the world. In the same light, the sorrowful patriarch regarded his unkind friends: "Ye are all physicians of no value." Such were the rulers of Israel in the days of Zechariah; they were foolish, or unprofitable shepherds, who neglected every part of their duty; they neither brought back the sheep which had wandered from the fold, and knew not how to return; nor visited that which was ready to perish. They were not careful to bind up the fractured bone, nor restore the dislocated limb; nor to furnish those that were vigorous and healthy with food, to preserve them in good condition; but they rioted on the flesh of the fat; they tore their limbs asunder; and like a company of rapacious wolves, they devoured every thing, not

1 Pet. i. 4, 5. § 1 Cor. viii. 5.

† Heb. xiii. 20.

Job xiii. 4.

Zech. xi. 16.

sparing even the meanest and the least useful parts of the carcase. By this hyperbole, the prophet meant, that the rulers of his people, disregarding the duties of their office, and the plainest dictates of justice and equity, turned every thing to their own advantage.

The prophet Jeremiah pronounces a curse upon the unfaithful shepherds, by whom he means the proud and oppressive rulers of his people: "Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the Lord. Therefore, thus saith the Lord God of Israel, against the pastors that feed my people: Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the Lord."* No shepherd perhaps is so foolish and wicked, as literally to scatter the flock intrusted to his care, and drive them away; this is rather the work of lions and wolves, that prowl about the fold, watching the favourable moment to seize their victim. But they scattered the flock, by suffering them to wander, and neglecting to visit and bring them back to the fold. The hiphil form of the Hebrew verb, often admits of this passive sense; thus, the hiphil of the verb (7) hiah, to live, signifies not to cause, but to permit a person to live; and it is extremely probable, that the prophet uses the verb (173) nadah, in the hiphil form, in the same sense here. This interpretation seems to correspond with a passage in Homer:

Il. b. 16. l. 354.

άι τ' εν ορεστι Ποιμενος αφραδίησι διε μαγε. “Like ravenous wolves, which rush with vehement impetuosity on the lambs or the kids, that by the folly of the shepherd, are scattered on the mountains."

The prophet Ezekiel has imitated, and beautifully amplified, the metaphor of Jeremiah: "Woe to the shepherds of Israel, that do feed themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed ; but ye feed not the flock. The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was

*Jer. xxiii. 1.

sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them. And they be scattered, because there is no shepherd; aud they became meat to all the beasts of the field, when they were scattered. My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and upon every high hill; yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them."* All the care of these foolish, these unfaithful shepherds, was, to enrich and aggrandize themselves. Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? The common sense of mankind finds no difficulty in answering the question; we shall find it in the beautiful lines of Virgil:

66

pastorem, Tytire, pingues Pascere oportet oves."

It becomes a shepherd to feed his lusty flocks; this is the very design of his office, and he betrays his trust, if he do not provide suitable food for them, or conduct them to where it may be found. Instead of this, these shepherds fed themselves; they thought of nothing, but how to indulge their own luxurious appetites, securing the profits of their places, fleecing their unhappy subjects, and even cutting them off by mock trials, in order to get possession of their property. Disregarding the welfare of those committed to their care, they fed not the flock: either they were so ignorant, that they knew not how to feed them; or so lazy and slothful, they could not make the necessary exertions; or so treacherous and unfaithful, they neither desired nor intended to perform their duty. They took no care to vindicate those that had suffered wrong, nor to defend the innocent from the craft or the violence of their enemies. The magistrate suffered the poor to starve for want of the common necessaries of life; the priest allowed them to grow up in ignorance and vice, a burden to themselves, and a nuisance to society; and the statesman, intent only to enrich himself and his connexions, applied no suitable or effectual remedies

* Ezek. xxxiv. 2, &c.