assistance, from being the most in danger; for his city of Jerusalem was but six miles from Gibeon, and lay between it and the Hebrew camp at Gilgal.

The four kings brought their forces into the field at the call of the king of Jerusalem, and having joined him, they marched together against Gibeon. On this formidable attack the Gibeonites sought aid from Joshua. This assistance the Israelites could not, by reason of their covenant, refuse; and having obtained the assurance of the Divine aid, Joshua, with his chosen warriors, marched all night, and fell unexpectedly upon the camp of the besieging kings by the morning dawn. Being defeated with great slaughter, they fled in different directions, and were pursued by the conquerors in those directions for ten, twelve, and fourteen miles. This pursuit of the vanquished host was rendered memorable by the great hailstones which fell from heaven and destroyed vast numbers of the fugitives; and still more so by the prolongation of the daylight at the command of Joshua, who, strong in faith, cried, "Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon," and Jehovah wrought a miracle in behalf of his people: for "the sun

stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies,” Josh. x. 12, 13.

Joshua was fully sensible of the great importance of this victory, which, from the remarkable circumstances attending it, was well calculated to depress the spirits of the Canaanites, and to inspire them with dread of the Israelites, and of the God whom they served. To strengthen this impression, Joshua resolved to treat the five kings, who were held captive in a cave at Makkedah wherein they had sought refuge, with a kind of solemn severity, in accordance with the war usages of that and much later times, but adverse to the more humane spirit which Christianity has in our own days introduced even into warfare-which is at the best a very horrid and painful thing. The kings were brought out, and after the chief men among the Israelites had set their feet upon their necks—a well-known sign of military triumph-they were put to death, and their bodies hanged upon trees until the evening. Josh. x. 21-27.

This signal victory over the confederacy headed by the king of Jerusalem, did not, however, put that city into the possession of

the Israelites. The chief towns of the defeated allies had to be taken separately, in subsequent operations, which are described in the sequel of Josh. x.; and it is remarkable that the name of Jerusalem does not occur in the account of these proceedings. When the subjugation of several places of inferior note in that quarter of the land is so particularly mentioned, including the towns of the allies of Adoni-zedec, this silence respecting Jerusalem can imply no less than that it did not fall into the power of Joshua, and probably that not even any attempt to reduce it was made. What prevented it can only be matter of conjecture; but it is not unlikely that the Hebrew soldiers had not sufficient faith to attempt the reduction of a place so strongly situated by nature, and, doubtless, well fortified by art. Indeed, it is not easy to say in what position the Israelites stood with respect to Jerusalem at even a later period, when southern Palestine had been for the most part brought under their sway. It is not even clear to which of the tribes it was allotted in the division of the land, which division included many places not brought under subjection at the time it was made. In one passage it is said, "As for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of

Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah in Jerusalem unto this day," Josh. xv. 63. Precisely the same thing is said of the "children of Benjamin" in Judges i. 21. This may, at the first view, bear the appearance of a contradiction; but the just and usual inference from it is, that Jerusalem, which certainly stood upon the border line between the two tribes, was either common to both of them, or lay partly in the one and partly in the other. The latter case is the more conceivable at a time when the natural hills which compose the site were more distinctly marked than in a later age, and were not so covered with buildings as to form one united town. As the possessions of Judah lay to the south, and those of Benjamin to the north of the site, the northern portion of it is that which must have belonged to the latter tribe. It could not therefore have been Mount Zion as is commonly supposed, for that was the southernmost portion of the site, and in any such division as is suggested could not but have belonged to Judah.

It must not be concealed that there are some difficulties arising out of this divided right of two tribes to the site of Jerusalem; and it is

certainly possible, that it was purposely left open to both the tribes on whose borders it lay, or possibly it was allotted as the reward of the tribe by which it should be first subjugated. And this would have been just, and in accordance with the usual course of God's providence towards the chosen people. Among them, to conquer implied faith-faith to combat against any odds, in the confidence that the Lord of hosts would fight for them, and give them the victory. Therefore, that they were "not able" to drive out the Jebusites from Jerusalem, was entirely owing to their own remissness and unbelief.

Now that we have come to this point—where we first distinctly recognise a city called JERUSALEM existing on this site, we will pause to make some inquiry respecting the remarkable name which it bore. It may, however, be doubted whether, in the portion of its history which has passed before us, the name of Jerusalem is not given to it by anticipation; for it seems to have been called Jebus by the natives, who were Jebusites; and it is on subsequent occasions called by this name. Josh. xv. 8; xviii. 28; Judg. xix. 10. It is, therefore, by no means clear that the name was not given to